For the vast majority of athletes who go to the Olympics, it is a matter of participation. I don’t know the details, but I assume Australia will have to qualify for the Sevens. As far as I can make out, under this proposed scenario the regular Sevens side would do all the dirty work and lose their spots to the glamour boys. Who wants to bust their ass on the Sevens circuit year in year out only to miss out on the Olympics because of some showponies?

Let the Sevens boys have the opportunity to represent their country at the highest level. Try making some new rugby stars in Australia. If Australia can only win a gold medal because they have NRL/AFL talent available to them, it’s not going to look good when the regular Sevens side can’t win and the Wallabies lose. It’ll only fuel the idea that the NRL and AFL have better footballers than rugby.

I don’t see the benefits. Australia wins a gold medal? So what?

Where did I talk about a team of League players “running roughshod” over everyone? where did I even say it would be a team of League players?

For the third time, this is what I said.

Put your top Wallabies, 7s stars and League players together for a one week training camp, ideally early in the season so it doesn’t clash with other responsibilities. Split them into say 4 squads, with 4 separate coaches, but the head coach overseeing all four groups. At the end of the week, play a mini-tournament against each other, and pick the best players to represent Australia. Whoever does the best gets picked, on form alone. Simple. If that’s all the regular 7s players fine, if it’s all the Wallabies fine. Most likely it would be a bit of all 3.

The next point is that you have a philosophical problem with Australia picking its best team, because you aren’t convinced it will help the 7s circuit. What it will do is generate a lot of additional interest in 7s (as a rugby nut I currently have little interest) and show top players what 7s is like. I can’t see any negatives in any of that. The local crowd at the Adelaide 7s might want to watch 3 of the Aussies who won a bronze medal for us at the Olympics, rather than a bunch of kids no one’s ever heard of.

Four years later, you do the training camp again, only inviting those who are fully committed. If only the 7s kids turn up, fine, pick them. If top Leaguies want to be considered, invite them, selectively.

You then go on to criticise Aussies for wanting to win Olympic medals. I didn’t realise that all the other countries went there only to participate.

And you claim it is somehow against the Olympic spirit – sending your best team, I mean. Sending your strongest team is a cheap marketing ploy. Go figure.

Honestly, I think you’ve lost the plot on this issue. I don’t think a single argument you’ve put forward holds water.

If in fact you HAVE read what I’ve said, then it has been your assumption that the League players WOULD make the team, ahead of the 7s regulars and Wallabies.

Someone mentioned how Josh Blackie wasn’t a specialist, but Blackie was a guy who was meant to play Test match rugby at the highest level and ended up being an honest toiler in the 15 man game. As a sevens player, he was more than useful. Stack your side with stars, and the Blackies will never get a shot at the Olympics.

What I’m saying is that if you send a team full of stars, how is that going to help when the Adelaide Sevens roll around? You’re back to the regular Australian Sevens side and there’s no interest there. I just think it’s typical shortsightedness. Plus it’s cheap and unsportsmanlike.

It basically satisfies the Australian desire to see Aussies win gold on the world stage and see a bunch of stars running around scoring tries. It’s a marketing idea and against the ethos of the what the Olympics are about. From a money standpoint, it makes sense, but it’s like the Dream Team in Barcelona. Great the first time and awful thereafter.

You’re saying there would be something wrong with Australia sending its strongest possible team to an Olympics? It wouldn’t help the 7s circuit enough?

As I said – not mindlessly picking Wallaby stars, League stars and 7s stars, but having training camps and a tournament to determine who the best are. That’s wrong because maybe in a couple of Olympics not all the stars will want to go?

I can’t agree with that. It’s the Olympics and you pick your best. It’s simple.

Australia don’t become America! or is it too late?

Besides, you fall into the whole trap where you send a Dream Team the first time, maybe the second time and then it gets old and star players start pulling out and skipping the Olympics. Then no-one’s interested because the names aren’t there. And if star players are only there at the Olympics, it doesn’t help the circuit. Personally, I’d rather see regular players go, though I realise NZ has stacked its sevens teams in the past.

The idea ought to be to provide a stage for rugby nations who can’t compete at the top level of the 15 man game while creating stars out of players on the sevens circuit. A gold medal won’t mean much if you send an All-Star team.

2. But there will be the sort of focus on Sevens that has never existed before in terms of a serious national selection policy. We start with a fairly blank sheet.

3. This is not just an opportuntiy to market Rugby. It’s an opportunity to win a gold medal. Win that – and the marketing looks after itself. First and foremost, the objective is to put together a shit hot team – whatever that might entail.

What’s the problem with that, OJ?

Fact is, assuming the Olympics would be in August, they’d be unlikely to get leave from their club sides.

I think you pick say 4 squads, train them each for a week, then have a tournament. Let the League players in – do you want an Olympic gold medal or do you want to punish League? If they aren’t up to scratch, they don’t make the cut. Ditto for the Wallaby incumbents. That would be only a week off from their club sides, then if they make the team, another week for a training camp and 2 weeks at the Olympics. 1 week, then 3 later. You could possibly have the one week trials in Feb before the NRL and S15 start, which makes it only a 3 week break, about a month before the finals start.

The NRL mightn’t mind, as it would be getting some publicity. And it’d only be a few of their players.

For one, I can’t see how Hayne wouldn’t be good at 7s. Inglis and Slater are two others mentioned. Hayne and Inglis are huge, quick, quick off the mark and light on their feet. Hayne especially would be a phenomenon – beating the first tackle is imperative in 7s. Who are the quickest league players off the mark?

Forwards wise, who are our quickest? Vanderglas, Kimlin and Mumm are 3. Dave Dennis is quick.

Who are the outright speedsters? Turner? Fainifo?

If it was happening I could see a squad like:

FORWARDS
Kimlin
Mumm
Vanderglas
Nick Cummins
Possibly Wycliffe Palu – who would want to see him running at them when they’re tired? He might be too unfit though
One or two more forwards

BACKS
Josh Holmes
James O’Connor
Jarryd Hayne
Digby Ioane
Greg Inglis
Lachlan Turner or Ratu Nasiganyavi
Francis Fainifo

Be assured that I am not saying it’s easy or a walk in the park for anyone – at elite levels – nothing is easy.

But I am saying that there are different emphases in Sevens compared to XV-a-side, and that there might be opportunities to recruit such people at a youngish age who may have an aptitude for the game.

In fact, in both your posts, you are expressly pointing to such differences.

I’ve seen others make the comment and I think they are right that most Wallabies would not make it into the best 7′s team due to their different training regime namely fitness requirements. The short halves and open spaces require specialist training – for the same reason most other code’s stars wouldn’t make it either.

You’re right. If you put the blokes who play from 1-7 they would be rubbish. But 7s isn’t a forward oriented form of the game. A few loosies would be capable but it is more for the guys from 9-15. Sorry but your first point provides very little wieght as I suspect you already knew that. You may be ‘uneducated’ but from your posts you are reasonably familar with the game.

To be successful at Sevens you need experience not only in that format but in the 15 man game aswell. It’s not as easy as it looks. Believe me. I was a rather athletic prop. I could run, kick and step off both feet and pass equally as strong with both sides of my body. Would carve up both in Rugby and League. But put me in a 7s game and I was competent thanks to my experience but never outstanding. And I have seen many League boys try their hands only to realise that it is a very skillful game and Rugby Union experience is a must.

Don’t get me wrong. I welcome young League and AFL player’s into Rugby with the goal of making it to the Olympics. But to think they will be able to do it with first gaining the necessary experience in the 15 man format. And it has to start in their development years. 15-18.

It’s fair enough that you seek an explanation – I’ve got no problem with that.

Let’s put it this way – how good would a Sevens team be if I plonked numbers 1 to 7 from the 15-a-side team in it?

I suspect it wouldn’t be much chop. Why?

Because the field is wide open and the game requires great athleticism – certainly greater athleticism than you will normally get from 1 to 7.

Anyway – that’s my uneducated observation.

But let’s see what Wayne Smith says:

“Aside from touch football, sevens rugby is the game most young rugby league players would find easiest to adapt to. The catch, pass and tackle skills are exactly the same, sevens’ three-man scrums an uncomfortably close resemblance to league’s farcical set-pieces and much of the time it’s not height that wins lineouts in sevens but the height of deception. ”

“Indeed, it could even be argued that ball-fetchers like Carlton captain Chris Judd or new St Kilda recruit Andrew Lovett would make the switch to sevens more easily and more successfully than, say, muscular Wallabies captain Rocky Elsom or his predecessor Stirling Mortlock. ”

Now – I’m not going that far – but I am saying it’s not necessarily about “conversions” – it’s about finding people already familiar with rugby who can bring that greater athleticism that Sevens demands.

Please explain how 7s is different from Rugby. I’ve watched quite alot of this particular format and it is Rugby. And frankly I’m getting a little vexed at people trying to differentiate it from ‘traditional’ Rugby. It has rucks, competitve scrum and lineouts. The only thing it doesn’t have is mauls and thats only because it is impractical. It has been around since 1882. It is Rugby, just in a shorter format. I am sorry for this whinge but this is getting very tiresome.

I think outsider’s or at least the unfamilar greatly underestimate the skill and overall abilities of not only Rugby player’s as a whole but especially those who play 7s. Fielding a team full of RL and AFL player’s would be disasterous. You need experience in Rugby and all its aspects to succeed. Not a bunch of mercanaries from other sports. It would be fair to say a SA, Fiji or even the USA would tear them apart.

As for either Tuliagi or Nalaga running head on into an AFL player. Well, not to be cocky but I wouldn’t want to be that particular AFL player.