Template talk:Sports leagues of Australia

Untitled

Hi, I am relatively new to wikipedia, so tell me if I have done anything wrong. I changed the template slightly which you can view on its history page. I thought the old setting was a litle bit POV, well massivey POV in fact, so I changed it to make it easier for people looking up their sport. --Sociallydeviant 12:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Incorrect sport names

I just want to clear up a few misconceptions. I would have just changed the template directly but some people would get upset and try to get me kicked off.

Here are the correct titles:
"Australian rules football" should be "Australian Football"
"Football (soccer)" should be "Football"
"Rugby league football" should be "Rugby League"
"Rugby union football" should be "Rugby"

If anyone agrees or disagrees please post here. --Dlh1989 07:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

We simply use the names that the wiki articles have decided upon. Hence Association football, Australian rules football, Rugby league and Rugby union. If you disagree with that I suggest you discuss it on the talk pages for the respective sports. Bongomanrae (talk) 06:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Sports leagues

Anyone else think V8 Supercars is not a sports league?--Jeff79 (talk) 19:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

It is a motorsport and has multiple teams competing for points in many rounds over a season --sss333 (talk) 03:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Rugby

Shouldn't Super 14 be included in this list ? I know it is an intercontinental competition, but it still has several clubs from Australia. --Rulesfan (talk) 02:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

It says on the template ' Rugby, (Defunct)' How ever the link is to the Super 14 page which is far from defunct. It seems it is referring to the now defunct Australian Rugby Championship. One of two changes must be made: Either remove the words defunct or change the link to this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Rugby_Championship —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.154.143.26 (talk) 23:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

re-adding

Simply, Super Rugby is not an Australian Sports league. Less than one third of the teams in the competition are Australian. It's played on four continents between teams of five countries. Just 28% of teams are Australian. The Sunwolves are from the northern hemisphere! May as well add the Olympics. --Falcadore (talk) 06:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Rugby Union

For years Rugby Union was represented by the Super Rugby competition. Recently it was amended to recite the National Rugby Championship. Seems to me the point of this template is to list the highest level of competition. That would be Super Rugby. However, I can understand why someone would want what is considered the highest "domestic-only" competition. That would be the NRC. I have amended it to show both - that way someone looking for either would find it with relative ease and whoever's interpretation is used they have their thought included.

Worth note that a number of the top leagues are technically transnational as the A-League, NRL, and NBL have teams from NZ (and Supercars have a race in NZ). Yes, they have far fewer non-Australian teams than Super Rugby, but no bright line number test is provided. All these leagues are in the franchise system - the vast majority of the same teams compete year after year. This differs from say the UEFA Champions League where teams qualify, it is not assured that virtually any team will play year-after-year, and it can be seen more as an opportunity (e.g., one Scottish team will compete, but which one - and to be very technical, they need to make it out of the qualifying rounds to be considered competing)?

There seems to be some dispute on what course of action to go with (list both, just list Super Rugby, or just the NRC). To me, it would seem silly to not list what is considered the top competition for Australian teams. Feel free to chime in on thoughts and if there is consensus on one outcome. RonSigPi (talk) 11:43, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Firstly; Pukekohe is a venue. No teams from NZ. State of Origin Rugby League does not become multi-national because they hold a game in Losa Angeles.

Secondly; One or two vs most is not vague or arbitrary. Most is more than half, hardly ambiguous or vague. 28% of teams are Australia, barely more than a quarter. It plainly does not qualify as an Australian league.

Thirdly; Super Rugby has NEVER been an Australian competition. Run by SANZAR, it's right there in the name, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia. It has always been an international competition, by name, by design.

Forthly; It says Sports Leagues of Australia. That is the name and the definition. Highest level of competition is your assumption. Sports Leagues of Australia. Super Rugby is not OF Australia. It includes Australia, but by your logic, so does the FIFA World Cup. Asian Champions League. How about the Formula One World Drivers Championship? Some internation 20-20 tournaments? Rugby League World Club Challenge?

I feel the need to state it again for the sake of being obvious.

Sports Leagues OF Australia. Let me know when it sinks in. --Falcadore (talk) 13:38, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

"Let me know when it sinks in." That does not seem like a proper tone to clearly articulate your point, make someone receptive to your ideas, or fall in line with WP:CIV. For about 5 years (Sept 2009 to May 2014) Super Rugby was listed. Then in May 2014 you decided to make this change (changed from basically what I have proposed). I can see your point about State of Origin, but when a league hold events outside of the nation every year it is a different story. This is not a clear situation. Titled "Sports Leagues of Australia" - you interpret that to mean "Sports Leagues of Australia with some teams, but not a lot, in other countries." A fair interpretation, but not a clear-cut one and not the only reasonable one. I think we need consensus and I am fine with whatever that turns out to be. Until that is reached, an inclusive solution that has both leagues, including the one that was properly listed in this box for 5 years, is the best course of action. RonSigPi (talk) 15:12, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

With some teams?

The simple truth is that Super Rugby is not an Australian sports league, it never has been and over time it has moved further away from the concept.

You can argue tone all you like, but tone has no place in this debate. Super Rugby is not based in or run by Australia and is better compared to competitions like AFC Champions League than the A-League. --Falcadore (talk) 03:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

"you interpret that to mean "Sports Leagues of Australia with some teams, but not a lot, in other countries."

Thank you for telling me what I said and coming to an incorrect incolusion.

The point was that the title of the template Sports leagues of Australia makes it plain this template is for Australian leagues. Super Rugby is not an Australian league. It is an International League, and always has been and is becoming more so by in the last few years adding a team from Asia and South America. --Falcadore (talk) 03:51, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

OK, so I am edit warring because I'm removing an international league from a template titled "Of Australia"? It plainly does not meet the criteria.

So if I leave in a league which does not belong I am not edit warring, but if I remove it I am? So basically the only grounds I have is to agree with you? --Falcadore (talk) 02:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello! User:RonSigPi are you in there? --Falcadore (talk) 18:01, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I am still monitoring. However, at this point I have little interest in commenting further since this seems to just escalate. To answer your question since you appear to me interested in an answer, you do not have to agree with me. I believe that the you have made it very clear that you do not agree with me. Super Rugby was included with no problem for five years and a short debate above (that you commented on about seven years later) suggests it should be included. You think the Australia-only competition should be included. Until consensus is reached, both leagues are included. Its the most reasonable and compromised position. You don't have to agree, but by continuously undoing edits, you are edit warring by definition. I RonSigPi (talk) 19:57, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Being included for five years only means it has escaped scrutiny.

I don't think Australia-only should be included. The name of the template does. Leagues of Australia clearly states that. I merely aligned with the name of the template.

Stating Super Rugby has been included for five years for no problem ingores it was taken out of the template two years ago. It also wasn't included in the first two years of the template. It's not been included just as much as it has been included. It's hardly a valid arguement. --Falcadore (talk) 07:10, 23 October 2016 (UTC)