Offensive Team Names

[TRF_Olyy]

I think part of it was that the pro clubs spawned from existing amateur ones, and in some cases the amateur side continued on after
Sale FC were awarded a pro contract, so created Sale Sharks while leaving Sale FC to continue on as an amateur side - I think Worcester RFC is still going too

 

[ncurd]

I think most traditional rugby fans were already over the franchise names in 1996 when they started happening (here).

But we weren't going to leave the sport anyway, so they're not for us. They're to attract new, younger viewers to help create a tribal affiliation.

This why being fans of teams located in Somerset is a good thing, the cricket team tried to call themselves the "Sabres" but then they gave up and are just Somerset again.

I don't think Bath have ever tried it.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

 

[Which Tyler]

I don't think Bath have ever tried it.

When the pro club split off from the amateur, the amateurs kept the name "Bath Football Club"; and the pro.s took the franchise name of "Bath Rugby"
I believe we flirted with the idea of "Bath Romans" for about 2 minutes before being shot down in flames at the first meeting it was aired.

 

[ncurd]

When the pro club split off from the amateur, the amateurs kept the name "Bath Football Club"; and the pro.s took the franchise name of "Bath Rugby"
I believe we flirted with the idea of "Bath Romans" for about 2 minutes before being shot down in flames at the first meeting it was aired.

Surely you'd go for Centurion's?

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

What about Bath Chiefs? Based on Roman chiefs?

Clearly a great idea

 

[ncurd]

What about Bath Chiefs? Based on Roman chiefs?

Clearly a great idea

The Roman's not really having chiefs or anything referred to as such might be the greatest stumbling block there. Wiped out quite a few mind.

 

[Which Tyler]

Surely you'd go for Centurion's?

I wouldn't go for anything; I mourn the loss of "FC" as it is!

I suspect the suggestion was "Bath Romans" to ride the coat-tails of the "Roman Baths" - but it seems that it never evolved into an actual conversation at the club

The Roman's not really having chiefs or anything referred to as such might be the greatest stumbling block there. Wiped out quite a few mind.

Seems appropriate at the moment

 

[Robert2289]

I think most traditional rugby fans were already over the franchise names in 1996 when they started happening (here).

But we weren't going to leave the sport anyway, so they're not for us. They're to attract new, younger viewers to help create a tribal affiliation.

I for one don't like these tacky add on names…. Pointless and unnecessary….

 

[Kiwiwomble]

i mentioned this at the time of the Crusaders drama, im not sure why teams just dont stick to animals, elements or colours (bears, hurricanes, sharks, blues etc), just so much safer. I was kind of hoping we'd ditch the Highlanders as the long we use it the more outcry when someone finally does get offended by it

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

....is anyone else kind of sick of the franchise names in general? it was one thing when these nicknames were unofficial or just the mascot...but to make it the official name just sets them up to become dated...as we're seeing

whats wrong with Exeter RFC etc

I look at the highlanders logo that hasn;t changed since 1996 and its a bit cringeworthy and very 90's

i obviously follow wimbledon in the football, one of our nicknames is the dons, when MK moved up the road they were a bit of a laughing stock for including Dons in their official name

Funny that you say that. It's been a year since the Washington team changed their name and theirs a growing sentiment that they should just remain the Washington football team.

 

[Shimano]

Bath Tubs
Bath Salts
Bath Towels
Bath Plugs

Meh!

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

i mentioned this at the time of the Crusaders drama, im not sure why teams just dont stick to animals, elements or colours (bears, hurricanes, sharks, blues etc), just so much safer. I was kind of hoping we'd ditch the Highlanders as the long we use it the more outcry when someone finally does get offended by it

Not sure. I think that is a bit unfair. Anachronistic. Do you think many people would have considered exeter chiefs to be offensive back in 1999? Was there any intent whatsoever to offend or negatively discriminate with that choice of name? Is there now?

And regarding the alternatives, people will find a way to see some offense in anything you come up with. Shark attack victims, hurricane survivors, people who suffer from a particular type of colour blindness...
If the current state of affairs has taught us anything is that where there is a statement, any statement, there is someone claiming that statement to be offensive.

I dont believe all names are equally offensive, granted, but if you open that door there is no coming back.

 

[ncurd]

Not sure. I think that is a bit unfair. Anachronistic. Do you think many people would have considered exeter chiefs to be offensive back in 1999? Was there any intent whatsoever to offend or negatively discriminate with that choice of name? Is there now?

And regarding the alternatives, people will find a way to see some offense in anything you come up with. Shark attack victims, hurricane survivors, people who suffer from a particular type of colour blindness...
If the current state of affairs has taught us anything is that where there is a statement, any statement, there is someone claiming that statement to be offensive.

I dont believe all names are equally offensive, granted, but if you open that door there is no coming back.

If you can learn to read for once, its got nothing to do with the Chiefs name its the Native American imagery that has been used historically and even currently to racially discriminate against them. Those people have specifically asked for sports teams to stop using it.

And yes it was a problem in 1999 not the name but the imagery in fact indigenous groups have been complaining since the 1960's

Washington Redskins name controversy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ah yes but have to worry about shark attack victims....

 

[ncurd]

Look its simple all the Chiefs have to do is pay for the rights and change the logo to this guy

And don't use any of images of the PoC in the comics.

 

[Which Tyler]

Do you think many people would have considered exeter chiefs to be offensive back in 1999? Was there any intent whatsoever to offend or negatively discriminate with that choice of name? Is there now?

Yes, people found the Exeter Chiefs imagery offensive in 1999 - but it was generally felt (amongst people who weren't from the marginalised community) that a minor sport on the other side of an ocean from the victims, where they'd pretty much never heard of rugby was "no harm, no foul". Crass, but okay at the time.
Since then though, the world has evolved, and our understanding of racism, victimisation etc has evolved; whilst rugby has become properly professional, and is becoming a much bigger sport in the USA, with MLR, Olympic7s, and RWC bids. It's now right in the face of the victims, rather than hidden half-a-world away.

I'm sure there wasn't, and still isn't intend to be offensive - but guess what - intent would only aggravate the seriousness, lack of intent doesn't absolve.

And regarding the alternatives, people will find a way to see some offense in anything you come up with. Shark attack victims, hurricane survivors, people who suffer from a particular type of colour blindness...
If the current state of affairs has taught us anything is that where there is a statement, any statement, there is someone claiming that statement to be offensive.

Now you're just being silly (or "Reductio Ad Absurdum" as it's otherwise known)

I dont believe all names are equally offensive, granted, but if you open that door there is no coming back.

And the "slippery slope" (absent any actual logical rationale) is a well known and acknowledged logical fallacy

 

[ncurd]

Yes, people found the Exeter Chiefs imagery offensive in 1999 - but it was generally felt (amongst people who weren't from the marginalised community) that a minor sport on the other side of an ocean from the victims, where they'd pretty much never heard of rugby was "no harm, no foul". Crass, but okay at the time.
Since then though, the world has evolved, and our understanding of racism, victimisation etc has evolved; whilst rugby has become properly professional, and is becoming a much bigger sport in the USA, with MLR, Olympic7s, and RWC bids. It's now right in the face of the victims, rather than hidden half-a-world away.

We should also note the fact the world has literally changed since 1999 in terms of globality of a brand or group and awareness of issues. In 1999 its fair to say most people did not have regular internet access hell home computing was still in its infancy but about rapidly expanding. We studied the American West at school at the very time Exeter were adopting it and we did a fair amount of time on the systematic destruction of the native American people what we didn't study is how those stereotypes still existed then (1999-2001) and now continue almost two decades later.

Now with internet access and huge population carrying phones in their pockets we can see in real time that these issues are not just a 'then' problem but also a 'now' problem. Many people think we should actually act on that instead of shurgging our shoulders and go 'ah well it always been like that'.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Not sure. I think that is a bit unfair. Anachronistic. Do you think many people would have considered exeter chiefs to be offensive back in 1999? Was there any intent whatsoever to offend or negatively discriminate with that choice of name? Is there now?

Yes…and I'm pretty sure it's been talked about in this very thread, that there was controversy around the Native American imagery, just like there was in 96 when the crusaders was chosen…they just decided it wasn't a big deal and are now all annoyed when they realise it is a big deal to lots of people

 

[Kiwiwomble]

And regarding the alternatives, people will find a way to see some offense in anything you come up with. Shark attack victims, hurricane survivors, people who suffer from a particular type of colour blindness...

But there are teams called the sharks and hurricanes and there isn't the call for them to change their names by those groups…so the point kind of falls over

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

Ending the Era of Harmful Native “Themed” Mascots | NCAI

It's been going on since 1968