I understand what you mean. I used to be dead set against a name change until I started noticing the confusion it presents in other countries (and even in this one).
I think we either need to run off the coat tails of "Rugby" and use it to our advantage in other countries, or change the name to something identifiably ours.

Definitely not.

Retain our Rugby League name. As reflected in the Australian National Rugby League ("NRL"icon_wink.gif and our RFL. We can call the game whatever we like colloquially; 'League', 'Footie' or whatever.

We have the same origins as Union from before the 1895 split and have equal right to use the word Rugby in the name of our sport. It was the word 'Union' that we dropped in 1923.

The French fought hard to be able to call the game "Rugby a 13"; not long ago the Unionists over there forced Rugby League to use the term "Jeu (game) a 13".

If Union gets more kids nationally and globally playing rugby at a young age instead of soccer, that's no bad thing. Most casually interested or newly interested people and kids just see the word rugby and don't really know or care about the difference. When they start playing Union it's actually more like RL as they play touch and tag and learn basic running, passing and tackling skills. There is then a bigger pool of young players that might enjoy Rugby League more (like Sam) as we continue to grow at grass roots level as a Summer game both here and overseas. This will apply especially to young kids who learn basic rugby skills at a Union club at very young ages, but who start to dislike it when they are forced to specialise over time eg as a fat boy scrum pusher or beanpole line jumper etc and all that nonsense.

No. We are Rugby League.

No.

Good points.

I fully understand our right to use 'Rugby' in our title, I'm just thinking in terms of building an awareness and identity for our sport. Are we effectively being overshadowed by the larger code through their dropping of the word 'Union', and forever be seen as a smaller version of the 'real thing'?

Grassroots/amateur numbers are getting better as you say. I'm not sure how much is riding off the back of kids brought up playing RU as you mentioned, but they're getting better. But as I said, it's more to do with awareness, brand and identity I feel, everything else can work off that back of that.

I speak about RL to pretty much every new person I meet (I'm a complete bore with it, I love the game), but speak to someone outside of the heartlands about RL and the image RL portrays is that of an old fashioned, insular, northern minority sport that's on TV once a year. Then there's the ones who haven't heard of it, and assume it's Rugby Union.

I'm not saying it definitely needs changing by any means, just wanted to throw the question out there to discuss (putting aside any sentimental attachment if possible) whether it's a hindrance in our sports development.



Thanks for that. A cracking point well made.

Yes I agree it should be changed and it should have been changed years ago I now live down south and the times I say to some one I have a game to watch on TV, they always say they did not Know a rugby union game was on Some say when i put them right, they have never heard of league

We should probably just call it what it is, the greatest game of all!

The point with this is, what would we change it to ?
I don't think that you can take "rugby" out of RL.

Of course we should change our name, we broke away from a sport, and created a different sport, but kept calling it the same name!

Gridiron have come up with a different name, and we can't call it Football. We might reduce to 12 a side, so not Thirteen for me. The Welsh word for 13 is tri-ar-ddeg, we could use that phonetically, and call it treearthehg.

How does Treearthehg sound, and it looks unique

I agree, I'd maybe be more tempted to drop the "League" part and replace it with something else.

And replace it with what? Football? Rugby Football? Nah, there's already a sport named that.

Treearthehg

Well all I can say is thank God you lot arnt in charge of the sport.

Just a debate on an internet message board pal, thanks for contributing

Many of the English teams are from "Rugby" before the split, so from that point of view the answer is simple, ensure that the Media etc use the correct usage, if they are covering a Union game then call it Rugby Union, if the are covering League then call it Rugby League.

Most folks outside of 'Rugby' won't understand the difference anyway, I work in Liverpool and few understand even that the games have different amount of players on the pitch.

I'd agree with that if I thought it was possible. But as Rugby Union seem keen on dropping the word "Union" from many parts of its game then I don't think we'd make any inroads in that respect.

I think that whilst Union is/has become known as Rugby in large parts pf this country and most of the rest world, people are often confused by us coming along calling ourselves the Rugby League. Many people assume we are part of "Rugby"(Union).

I don't know what the answer is, and if there's no good solution I wouldn't change the name, just if there were a good alternative I think it would help us identify ourselves.

Rugby is where our game came from & I think we should always keep rugby in our name. What we should have done was stop the other code droping union from its world cup by copywriting the name. A few years ago I answered a question on local radio (Who is the England rugby captain) they tried to say I was wrong when I answered Andy Farrel, It was only to win a coffee mug but I demanded they cough up.