RL1908 - Rugby League Football History

Football Is Soccer...and Rugby League, Australian Rules, American Football, Rugby Union.

Sean Fagan of RL1908.com

At the risk of doing exactly what John O'Neill wants us all to do - talk about soccer to help with his publicity drive for the rebranded sport - the attempt to claim soccer as the only sport that can use the description 'football' cannot be allowed to pass.

Across the globe the dominant winter code has come to be known by the locals in each city or country as 'football'. In Sydney and Brisbane it is Rugby League, in Melbourne it is Australian Rules, in Auckland it is Rugby Union, in New York it is American Football.

Practically everywhere else, it is Soccer that is the preferred code. However, this doesn't mean that soccer can claim the sole use of the word football.

The words 'soccer' and 'rugger' were in common use in England a hundred years ago. The words emanate from where the rules of their version of football originated. In soccer's case, it was the formation of the Football Association. Rugger is a variation of Rugby School football rules, and later the Rugby Football Union.

The formation of the F.A. and the R.F.U. were each brought about by like-minded football clubs wanting to codify their playing rules. English and Australian newspaper sports pages in the late 1800s and early 1900s all listed 'Football' as the column heading, then under it they listed the various forms.

The frontispiece to the Rugby Football Union's
"Laws of the Game of Football"
issued in 1872.

There is no argument against Soccer Australia rebranding itself as ''The Football Federation of Australia' if it desires. In real terms, they have chosen a non-descript name comparable to the Australian Football League - their names tell us nothing about the form of football they are playing. Twenty years ago Rugby League in Sydney was under the NSW Rugby Football League. Similarly, the NSWRU was the NSWRFU.

The real problem is with the Football Federation of Australia's pronouncement that they alone are entitled to the use of the word 'football'. Football played to the rules originated by the F.A. has come to be the dominant football code across the world, but that does not mean it has sole right to the name football.

If 80% of the world drove Ford cars, would that mean Holden or Toyota couldn't use the word 'car' in its advertising?

Some will suggest that soccer is the only true form of football as it does not allow handling of the ball. Of course, any passing observation of a soccer match reveals there are ample times that the ball is handled. In the 1860s handling of the ball was allowed under the F.A. rules, before eventually being cut back to only the goal keeper and restarting play from the sidelines. All football codes vary the balance between kicking and handling - from soccer at one end of the spectrum, to American Football at the other.

The word 'football' is not the sole property of soccer.

Of course, the nonsense of the Football Federation of Australia's argument is apparent in their national team's name. Hey John (O'Neill) and Frank (Lowy) - when you get around to dumping the name 'Socceroos' - which you now must do if 'soccer' is such a bad word - make sure you dump the 'roos part as well. The Australian Rugby League team have been the Kangaroos since 1908 - therefore soccer has no right to use the word/emblem 'kangaroo'.

All a bit ridiculous, isn't it?

I'm off to kick around a footy for a while - and it ain't a soccer ball!