Talk:The Rugby Forum

Union with a side of league?

The article has recently been reworded to change most mentions of "rugby" to "rugby union." Is it fair to say the site focuses on union with only a small assortment of league forums? Or does it cover both flavours equally? —C.Fred (talk) 20:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Every single article, side panel and symbol on the front page is about rugby union with the exception of an article on liking both codes which is written from the perspective of a rugby union fan. League only has a token presence.GordyB (talk) 21:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

More fairer is to say it's completely non-notable, just like thousands of other forums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.52.75 (talk) 08:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like someone is editing with a bias. The forum is for both Union and League. It's open to fans of both codes and presents an open discussion on both codes. You're editing is biased. I am reverting back. Rowlan (talk) 06:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The forum is open to discussion of all sports, should we add it to the tennis category? Just because there is the odd mention of league does not make it a league forum. You won't find a single union forum where you can't discuss league somewhere (and vice versa).GordyB (talk) 17:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

That argument is ridiculous. The forum is set up for both codes with no intentional leanings towards either. Just because there is more union discussiond does not change the intent or directive of the actual forum. It's like saying the internet is only for porn because there is more of that than useful information. You sound biased and should get that in check. Rowlan (talk) 02:59, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Union & League

It is inaccurate to say that there are "rugby blogs" and "rugby games" - there are rugby union games and blogs but no league - User:GordyB

• Rugby League Live Online
• HES announces Rugby League Live for PS3 and 360
• Is Rugby League 2 on PC any good?
• Blogs:Rugby League Review

Those links should dismantle your argument a bit, GordyB. I can agree with you that there is more content for union. Fair enough. However the forum isn't just a forum for rugby union. It is a forum for both codes. However content and discussion is created by users. The objective of the actual forum (not the users) is an inclusive forum. This article is on the actual forum, not the users themselves. I think if you will look, there is plenty of league discussion. Rowlan (talk) 03:55, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I cannot access the first three links as I do not have an account and the fourth is written about league but entirely from a union perspective. To say that the site is leaning towards union is putting it extremely mildly as for example the Challenge Cup final was last week; 70,000+ people attended and the game was broadcast live on BBC1 (the law actually requires this game to be broadcast on network TV as it is deemed to be one of the most important sporting events in the UK) - and yet no mention of this on the front page. The NRL and Super League are nearing their climax and again no mention. Instead these are tucked away on a rugby league only page. The "I don't mind rugby league" article is the only mention of league accessible to me on the entire site aside from a sub-forum.GordyB (talk) 19:38, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Maybe you should join so you have access to all the league you feel deprived of enjoying? Rowlan (talk) 01:03, 4 September 2010 (UTC)