Talk:Football/Archive 7

message: Victorian RUles is a relatively minor and small variation of football. I suggest that another image should be used for people trying to understand the bigger international variations like Rugby(both codes), soccer and American football.
06:02, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The picture is a generic/iconic one, it could be almost any kind of football being shown and that is why it is there.Grant65 | Talk 06:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I believe that a picture of a world cup final(either code of Rugby or soccer), a champion's league final or a super bowl would be a better image than an Australian's Rules image. Aussie Rules is a relatively minor regional code of football and would be unintelligible for non-Australians. It is also a suggestion that football began in Australia. I am sure there are better images that could be used.
13:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I feel the montage is a superlative idea. Maybe NRL/Super League grand-final or state of Origin, AFL grand final, Union world cup final, NFL superbowl, Soccer world cup, FA cup, champion's league final, South American champion's league, futsol world cup, Gaelic all-Irish champions or whatever it is, Canadien football cup,
I think that that would be a good round-up.
04:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Victorian Rules picture 

message: Australian Rules very obviously comes from Victoria. The variation is a Vicotrian variation. I am not questioning that its name is Aussie Rules, just that it is a game whose rules variation originated from Victoria like the two rugby codes originated from Rugby school, and soccer originated from its annagram association football. All the best.
06:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What is your point? Rugby league started in Yorkshire, but we don't call it "Yorkshire rugby" or "Yorkshire football". Australian rules football is the common name worldwide. Grant65 | Talk 06:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  But wasn't RL for a time quite commonly in the England as "the Northern game" or "the Nothern Union"? Albatross2147 04:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The above two comments are irrelevant since nobody is trying to name rugby league after a country that didn't exist at the time of its.  The idea of it being a 'victorian' game and not an 'Australian' game becuase the 'country' of Australia didn't exist during the creation of the game is flawed too.  Australia was still the name given to the continent of Australia.  The british colony of Victoria was located on that continent.  He name 'Australia' wasn't invented in 1901, just the self governing country.Factoid Killer 10:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Minor aside - ironically the name 'rugby league' was coined in Australia.GordyB 21:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Victorian rules descent 

message: Does anyone apart from  Licinius/60.225.202.61 think that the current picture is not the best one available? I have searched, but haven't found anything better in illustrating football games in general, than the current one. As I have said before, a better solution is that we get someone with the technical ability to do a collage like the one at the top of (e.g.) World War II. But until (and if) we have a better pic, I think the  current one should stand. Grant65 | Talk 18:26, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well actually, it may not be better than nothing at all. I think it should be removed, I mean people will say why that sport and not this sport, having a picture of one code in the lead will just piss people off. Forever young 15:34, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead picture

message: I want to chip in with my opinion on the use of the term football.
English has become an international language, and millions of people, regardless of their mother tongue, speak it for a variety of uses, such as surfing the 'net. In most languages other than english, I assume, football is that sport which is played with the feet. Usually this word is not translated, but rather, adapted phonetically to the speakers' native language; for example, in spanish: futbol. I think that the correct terminology for this sport should be football. However, in my opinion, it should always be qualified with the soccer term in parenthesis to avoid confusion.
:Interesting concept, but that's why we have disambiguation pages. The underlying link should indeed point to Football (soccer), but the title should reflect the correct word (ie: "football" in Manchester United, but "soccer" in Los Angeles Galaxy). This particular page, Football, discusses all types of football (including Australian Rules and American), the one that belongs to what is known as "soccer" in the US is located, as you said, in football (soccer). Sebastian Kessel Talk 21:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What if someone from the US who isn't aware of british use of the word is reading the article?  We already had this problem in the London article where soccer was referred to only as 'football'.  If caused some confusion to at least one reader.  The reader in question wasn't aware that any sport other than american football was referred to as football and was asking about football in Lodon. Factoid Killer 09:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Football ( Soccer ) 

message: That's a good start JPD. I would like to see a bigger/clearer portion representing American/Canadian football. And given the different colour balances, maybe the whole thing would look better in black and white? Grant65 | Talk 00:08, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to mention the representation of Australian rules football in that montage is pretty poor - wait till the season comes around (ie, this weekend) and we'll get together some more relevant photographs. Rogerthat Talk 11:24, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not the best person for making iamges like this. I just wanted to get the balling rolling using the iamges that were already available. The Aussie rules part could definitely do with a better quality image. The American pic is already the second biggest in the montage - does anyone have a clearer image? I'm not that keen on black and white, but I could change my mind if somenoe does a better job of converting it than I just did. I guess the other thing is that it shoudl probably be saved at a lower resolution - that file is quite big. JPD (talk) 12:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: JPD's montage

message: It's interesting how Licinius, "Man from Oz" and "J is me" all make the very same mistake with their signature. If these "individuals" all try to vote in a poll, I will report it to administrators as a suspected case of sockpuppets. Along with any others I suspect of abusing user registration.
Pippu, you're right, I'm from Perth. 
I bet the kids in Bomber or Lions jumpers in strongholds of the game like Hobart, Alice Springs, the Tiwi Islands, Papua New Guinea and Nauru couldn't give a fat rat's clacker where their game originated. And they certainly don't call it "AFL", "Victorian rules", "Melbourne rules" or any such name. Australian rules football is the full name recogised by both those who follow it (who outnumber the followers of any other sport in Australia) and by non-followers in other countries. If the detractors of Australian rules have a coherent argument against the international historical significance of Australian rules, I have yet to hear it. I will argue with them when they come with something other than the fact the game originated in Victoria. Grant65 | Talk-
I have read through your transcripts and you seem to often try to accuse those that disagree with you of acting in bad faith. I suggest you stop it. Yes I know the man from oz and Licinius and I in fact sometimes even share a computer with them, so report me all you like. Your argument seems to lack any substance so I suggest you stop basely insulting me. 
07:47, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if the cap fits... Should I get my missus on here to agree with me? How about my cat? I know couples who share one Wikipedia identity, the reverse of what you are doing. Whether you share the same computer, bed or the same body is irrelevant; you technically constitute sockpuppets of Licinius, and if you try to vote, or abuse registration in any other way, I will report you. Grant65 | Talk 09:44, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia policy is clear on this Grant. I suggest you stop it please. I do not technically constitute anything with Licinius, in fact he protudes a bad smell which I want to entirely disassociate with. Too much protein powder. But seriously stop it. It is silly. Argue the points, and the point is that Aussie Rules is no more an Australian variation of football than either code of rugby but particuarly Rugby League.
05:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Conduct of the anti-Australian rules fraternity

message: For those who doubt that Australian rules football does not deserve a decent mention in this article, allow me to quote from the renowned Australian historian, Geoffrey Blainey:  Of the main codes of football played in the world, Australian Rules is one of the oldest.  By the normal definition of age, it is older than American football or Gridiron, older than Rugby League, older than the modern version of Gaelic Football from which it is widely said to have been descended, a little older than Association Football or Soccer, but younger than Rugby.  Few of the world's famous football clubs, irrespective of the specific code they play, are as old s the senior Australian football clubs such as Melbourne, Geelong and Carlton.  Even young clubs in the Victorian Football League such as Fitzroy and Footscray are older than any football club in such celebrated sporting nations as Italy and Germany and Argentina.
I know from personal experience that rugby diehards from either rugby code have trouble with this notion:  they have trouble believing that Aussie rules was codified in 1859 and that Melbourne Football Club, formed in the same year, is older than virtually every other football club of any code on Earth.  So for an article that is about the origins of the modern football codes, and their early inter-connectedness, Aussie rules has an important place in that.  Also, remembering that the initial tension of the early forms of football was between running with the ball and kicking it, Australian and Gaelic football occupy an interesting middle road between these two early footballing philosophies, and thus a discussion on football generally is not complete without them.  But don't take my word for it, I encourage you to do your own research.  ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 09:43, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me get this straight...an article about the origins and relationship between the different football codes should be rewritten to reflect the following of those games? Well, when Aussie rules was invented the number of fans of soccer and American football fans was...exactly zero, because those codes didn't exist in 1859. Grant65 | Talk 09:53, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Factoid - I'm just a simple NESBer, could you please run that past me again - who precisely are you having a go at, and if it is me, I at least have had the decency to quote well known history texts and significant recognised events that stand out in any history of football -  so either give reasons for dismissing such claims (if that is what you think) or point to where the article is giving undue prominence to aussie rules (if that is what you think) or say something in support of the status quo (if that is what you think).  ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 10:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not aimed at anybody in particular.  It's mostly a suggestion that the Australian world view has too much representation in this article.  It can't be healthy for the article. Factoid Killer 13:33, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I've been working on this article on and off for more than two years, so you'll have to forgive me if I'm a little biased. But the major contributor was Mintguy, a soccer fan from the UK. Many other people from various nationalities, supporting various codes, have also contributed, without complaining about the Australian content. And how ironic is that these (belated and strange) criticisms about the article come only from other Australians!! "Victorians" have been alleged here to have an inferiority complex. Well, on the evidence presented here, and as a proud non-Victorian myself, I'd have to say it appears to be people from points further north who have the personality problems.   Grant65 | Talk 13:59, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't agree more Grant (speaking as a proud Canberran).  As an aside, I've only recently noticed this article: Sports attendances.  It simply states the most recent attendance statistics of all the major sports in the world.  AFL is in 9th position of all leagues in all the footall codes in the world, just a fraction below the Brazilian soccer comp.  Where are the rugby codes - don't bother looking them up, it's simply too embarassing.  Which reminds me of Factoid's boast on his user page, that he quashed the notion that Aussie rules is the most widely supported of the footy codes in Australia.  Of course we all know that he did no such thing, didn't come close.  Once he realised that aussie rules attendance is double that of league's (and nothing else comes remotely close) - he gave the lame excuse that that was to do with culture, and therefore we should look at other things like TV ratings.  But with the latest bid for TV rights by 7 and 10 making everything else look like the takings from a school fete, I'm not sure if there is much joy to be found there either.  Rather than big noting himself, he should correct that statement as soon as possible.  ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 04:57, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A Game of Our Own

message: Personnel insults are superfluous Grant. The term "Rugby League" and most of the modern rule changes to it originated in Australia. Australian Rules did not originate in Australia, but was a combination of different English games including Rugby and was made by foreigners. It is a distinctly Southern game with most of its top League teams being originally Victorian. It is a third rate game in the most populated state and the third most populated states of Australia, played by virtually noone in Sydney. It is hardly an Australian variety, definitely no more than Rugby League.
:Yeah, yeah, whatever. Australian rules is a combination of British, Irish and Aboriginal games, not just English games.  By your logic Australians of British descent are not Australian at all, we are British. (*Quickly recovers from choking on coffee.*) By your logic Aboriginal Australians with any British ancestry would also be British. You may be surprised to learn that Sydney, great city that it is, is not representative of Australia. Nevertheless 991,000 people in Sydney watched the TV broadcast of the Sydney Swans winning the AFL Grand Final last year.
:Let's have a poll on this. It's long overdue. Grant65 | Talk 03:33, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What? 

message: There have been two articles that have appeared in the sports section of The Age newspaper over the last two days that are of great interest to us.  In yesterday's edition, I read that Australia Post is about to release a series of stamps to celebrate the Socceroos' attempt to embark on the impossible dream (not meaning to be disrespectful, simply an honest assessment).  This new series of stamps is entitled "Soccer in Australia".  When the General Manager of Australia Post was asked why use the term "soccer", he simply said that it was Australia Post's view that that is the name used by the majority of Australians, and that the word football is saved for  the more dominant code of a particular area, i.e. aussie rules or league.
In today's edition, there was a great article about the proposal to heritage list the Melbourne Football Club, the oldest football club in Australia (in any code) and the third oldest in the world (in any code).  It was formed in 1858, the year in which we have the first recorded game of aussie rules, the game being codified in the following year, making the game older than Association Football.  Interestingly, it was once thought that the Geelong Football Club was the second oldest club in Australia (formed in July 1859), but there is now new evidence indicating that the Castlemaine Football Club was in fact formed in June 1859.  That makes it the 5th oldest club in the world, and Geelong the 6th oldest club in the world.  
I can't recall where we list the oldest football clubs in the world, but this is what The Age says:
#Guy's Hospital Rugby Club, London, 1843
#Sheffield Football Club, Sheffield, 1857
#Melbourne Football Club, Melbourne, Australia, 1858
#Blackheath Rugby, London, 1858
#Castlemaine Football Club, Castlemaine, Australia, June 1859
#Geelong Football Club, Geelong, Australia, July 1859
#Hallam Football Club, Sheffield, 1860
#Notts County, Nottingham, 1862
(although I would have thought that Carlton Football Club was pre 1862).  ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 04:37, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Age of reason