Talk:Players who have converted from one football code to another

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some of these players played many years ago others more recently. Perhaps a "Year of Retirement" on the tables would give a better indication on what era they are from. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Biatch (talk • contribs) 10 May 2006.

I agree, some sort of identification of dates would be more relevant than the use of bold text for current players, and easier to maintain.

[edit] Notability

I don't think there is much value in listing each and every player who has switched codes, particularly for league and union where code switching is so common. I suggest the list (at least for league and union) should only include those who have played at the top level in both codes. Mako 05:11, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to remove the Schoolboy code switchers from league, as they were never really bound by contract (generally, they might have introduced something recently, but I dont know). So what I mean is, just because a schoolboy attended a high school that played union, or played league, and they went onto to play in the Super 14/NRL, its not really news-worthy/notable. Who knows, the schoolboy could have been league through and through and his school just happened to play union, thus its no big deal if they play schoolboys then leave. Also the list could be potentially huge. I havent checked the other lists, but I think it should be a general rule that the switch has to be from a large competition to another. Cvene64 13:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Cvene, I dont think that if someone played only as a schoolboy they should immediately be ruled out. Yes maybe if they only played for their school but i think that if a guy played for their national schoolboy side they should possibly be listed. I think we should limit the list to say 10-15 players and of those list the ones who either had the most impact on the game (i.e. Wally Lewis) or are generally acknowledged as being greats. Maybe we can have a spinoff article where ppl can list everyone they want to. Someone like Ryan Cross who played Aussie schoolboys, then NRL and then went back to union is a good example of someone who should be on both lists (at the time he was a big prospect for union and his signing to the Roosters was a reasonably big deal). Soundabuser 01:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah but you have to consider that most of these converts from the schoolboys sides are just people on sports scholarships to schools which just play rugby union, so its no real suprise they go to the nrl after. I just don't see the notability in a schoolboy playing a different code to his junior years. Its hardly controversial to say the least. Maybe some might be notable ie. Cross, but just listing name after name of highschool rugby players is not encyclepedic, as in mst cases its simply not that notable really. Cvene64 02:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RU to RL

These pages are missing a horrifying number of Welshmen who "went North" between 1950 and 1990. -- GWO

The nature of Wikipedia is that it is biased towards the present. A lot of these players don't even have articles even though a lot of them are a hundred (or more) times more significant than minor squad players that do have articles.GordyB 14:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Soccer versus Association football

'Soccer' is a slang term derived from the official name 'Association football'. IMO the latter is more appropriate for use in the article, after all we don't refer to the other sports as 'gah', 'aerial pingpong', 'rugger', 'league', 'gridiron' or 'chavball' just because these labels are fairly common.GordyB 14:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. :D

It's not slang in Australia, it's the name of the game (despite the very recent and mystifying efforts to change it). Association football would surely come a very poor third, usage wise, out of the three choices --Angry mob mulls options 17:53, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Usage yes but the word 'shit' is much more common than 'excreta' but which is more appropriate for use in an article on the digestive system? I don't know whether 'Soccer' is the official term in Australia or not, it may be how they are marketed in Aus but marketing terms and official names are two different things. The organisation FIFA is the governing body for the sport wordwide and the 'A' stands for 'Association'.GordyB 21:37, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Get cracking changing the name of the soccer article then, it's even got your "shit" the title, gasp!. And oh noes, thousands of soccer clubs round the world use football or soccer only in the their names, start writing letters pointing out their errors. You might have a look at WP common names policy too, while you're at it. --Angry mob mulls options 11:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Shall we calm it down a bit? Maybe my use of 'shit' unneccessarily inflamed things but I'm not that upset to start a flamewar over what is a fairly minor issue. I don't have a problem with the word 'soccer' per se and can tolerate its presence in the main body of the text, it is not a very 'encyclopaedic' word and I don't think it should be used in headings.GordyB 14:03, 13 August 2006 (UTC)