|
We did so for two reasons; 1) we saw a void that we thought needed to be filled in terms of a lack of coverage of the 13-man code by the US rugby media, and 2) we wanted to test the waters to see how you, our readers/listeners, would react. It would appear that our editorial decision paid off because we’ve had next to no complaints, indeed, feedback from you in the main has been positive.
Granted, there was a bit of soul searching during the decision-making process, and yes, there were also some initial objections as we weighed the pros and cons, but in the end we felt it was a gamble worth taking largely because no one else was doing it. We also figured it would be another way of setting us apart from the others.
I’m sharing this with you now because it has been suggested to me that rugby league in America is divisive, and that persevering with it is counter productive. The main argument is that because rugby football isn’t even a blip on the mainstream sporting radar in this country, and because our national teams the Eagles and Tomahawks aren’t competitive internationally, it would be more advantageous in the long run to combine both codes and channel their respective resources and energies in one direction, that being rugby union.
While that suggestion may please some, union folks more so than league people obviously, I disagree. There’s no reason to do that and here’s why.
Fortunately, America doesn’t have the social or cultural baggage that other rugby playing countries do when it comes to the union versus league debate, therefore there is no stigma attached to rugby league in the US. In England, Australia, New Zealand, and to a lesser extent South Africa, league has more or less been frowned upon by rugby people because a) historically it’s a blue collar sport, and b) leaguies had the temerity to split from union in the late 1800s/early 1900s because they wanted to be paid to play and the establishment would have nothing to with it.
Funny how things change.
Another reason that I favor persevering with league is because it could be the best option we have for getting rugby football in front of American sports fans. It’s much easier for the uninitiated to understand.
For example, the six tackle concept is not dissimilar to football’s four downs, it’s fast and there are no tedious resets of scrums and lineouts, and it’s a great collision sport that features big hits. In short, today it’s a better TV product than union. Why do you suppose the IRB has been trialing its Experimental Law Valuations?
Dublin realizes that in order to achieve true global appeal the game needs to be fixed. And if you’re one of those people who thinks sevens is the way to go then, to borrow a line from Canadian coach Ric Suggitt, you’re probably on crack. There is no way that the average US sports fan is going to plonk himself/herself down in front of the TV for an entire weekend to watch 44 games before an eventual winner is determined. It ain’t going to happen, not even if one is watching on a new plasma or LCD flat screen TV.
And as for the theory that the Eagles might be more competitive with a combined player pool to pick from, maybe or maybe not. The same might be said of the Tomahawks if the situation was reversed.
Surely it’s more productive to continue with both codes and let players decide which game they’d rather play. Plus there’s always the possibility of crossover. This past summer there were some instances of college guys who opted for league rather than sevens.
On top of that, both union and league offer the opportunity to represent your country if you’re good enough, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
As always, we invite you to have your say on this or any other topic. If you'd like to give us your take, email your letter to the editor to editor@americanrugbynews.com sign off on it and we’ll post it.