If you honestly think New Zealand hypes anything to the degree that Australia does then you truly are living in that bubble you’ve created for yourself.

Yes there will be tense games that are decided by penalties – no problems there. Yet I noticed one post suggesting that Australians should stop thinking every game should be played like the 2000 Bledisloe. That is utterly stupid! Every time I watch a Bledisloe I wish to see a repeat of that match. Australia lost, but do you think anybody cared about that??? No. It was rugby at its best. No sporting fixture in the world could compare with that.

We know that rugby CAN be played like that, but coaches and players choose NOT to play in that spirit. If rugby wants to grow in Australia, then thats what we need to produce. We live in a country blessed with many high quality sporting options, and a climate that does not keep people stuck in doors all day and night. We need a product that can catch attention.

All rugby supporters know that rugby is the best sport in the world. The trouble is convincing non rugby people to watch. How can we do that when we are served the negative, boring matches that are standard at S14 and test level nowdays?

For this grandslam, we need to see images of a new Ben Tune on the news. Thats how we will get interest (by the way, I think Digby is capable of such play)

The pass going forward should be allowed provided the person was onside just as when a player kicks the ball. A kick can go forward so why not a pass. the fundamental is not the direction of the ball but the being onside or offside.

It is not a knock-on if the ball is caught before it hits the ground so what is the difference if it is fumbled on the ground.

Already the law is in place to prevent throwing the ball forward over a defender and catching it. Theoretically, it is niot aknock-on as he caught it before it hit the ground but, of course, it cannot be deliberate. Also, a knock-on is given if the ball is hit out of a plyer’s grasp. The player did not throw it forward but is ruled as a knock-on.

Once again, everything is about interpretation. I don’t believe my suggestions change the fabric of the game. They are ways to allow the game to flow and prevent the endless and needless stoppages.

No its not ‘devil’s advocate time “you’re indulging in “stirring time”

Is it any coincidence that the nation where RU is struggling is the nation where RL is a legitimate choice?

The rucking should be allowed. A shot at goal should be only allowed for dirtyl play and professional fouls, not for offside or other law infringements.

My big one is, what is wrong with a knock-on, the player has to scramble to retrieve it and allows the defence time to tackle him. What is wrong with a forward pass if the player was onside when the ball was passed, he has to run further and faster to catch it. In both these situations, then play-on.

With these, most of the stoppages would be eliminated and a better flow achieved. Od do players need or want stoppages so they can regather their breath?

Rugby union can perhaps live happily in relative isloation in most of the countries where it swims along a clear second behind football. And because it’s not deemed a threat to football, it’s left alone.

Not so Australia – 4 codes fighting each other for players, fans, sponsors & exposure. RU is at the rear of the pack, & in danger of falling off.

So without further ado, I’m going to let loose the bull into a china shop.

How sacrosant is the edict, “continous contest for possession” underpinning the reason why RU exists?

I’m beginning to think this should be changed to “continuous contest for penalty kicks”. If RU can’t make the game a better spectacle under the current laws, then it will have to eventually consider alternatives. Or perish…..

Anyway, with all due respect, I don’t really care for the answers, except that I’ll read them with amusement. I know some answers will be despatched with great indignation (how dare I……, etc).

A ‘ship of fools’ heading for rocks, blithely unaware of the impending disaster.

There is a snobbery that is ingrained in Union that assumes technical superiority above all other codes amongst other things. I feel that the technical needs to be balanced with accessibility because quite frankly, if this were your overidding criteria to promoting your preferred code then why not just follow summo wrestlers playing chess.

I must say I have lost interset in Union over the years for many reasons, but the main one is to do with it’s culture. I am far more at home surrounded by a mob of Australian Footy punters on any given day than at any Union fixture. All codes have their distinctive culture, so each to their own in this respect.

Cheers

The problem is the diehard rugby types read the game very well and understand it technicially, however they cant possibly expect the average person to know the game that intimately.

Many rugby coaches would get a huge shock if they stepped into an AFLcoaches box on match day and watched for example Mick Malthouse set up 18 man on man match ups and adjusted them constantly and tacticially throughout the ebb and flow of the game. Most AFL fans dont realise what is going on half the time, except the diehards and that is the point.

Redb

Netball also have embarked on a truncated and dumbed down version of their game to try and attract the attention of a potential pleb audience.

I do agree in essence with the sentiments expressed here, regards the lack of appreciation of subtlety in audiences the world over these days. The instant grat syndrome that sees quantity win over quality is certainly changing the face of the sporting landscape.

This is an evolution that I find extremely difficult to take including when watching my beloved code of Aust Footy, which is a victim of this scourge also. I just dont believe Union, Cricket or for that matter any sport these days is ammuned from this – sadly.

chess is an engrossing game.

Thats a fairly predictable Kiwi response and quite arrogant especially considering that the Super 14 is the epitome of hype.

All elite sport feeds off the ‘American’ style hard sell in order to promote the product for want of a better word, to the lowest common denominator, which in turn helps broaden any respective code patronage, as fickle as that may often be.

Union is NO exception in this respect and NZ are extremely opportunistic in embracing this formula to their advantage. I see the All Blacks relationship with the HAKA as a marketing tool in enhancing the popular ‘brand’ to this end. I would not be too pious in your crit of other codes and countries OJ since NZ and Union are well and truely integral to this culture.

The game of Australian Footy which is steeped in tradition, is valued as much for that as Union is.

Cheers

As for the game elsewhere. Well, I could provide you witrh alot of info regarding the growth of the game internationally but I’ll leave you with this. LAst weekend Malaysia won the 3rd leg of the Asian 7s series. Which was no mean feat. Along with the A5N concept the game in Asia is moving forward at a great pace.

We are becoming an increasingly McDonald’s and Reality TV society. It got to be flashy and as basic as possible to appreciate. Which is rather unsettling. Read and article recently that predicted the fall of mankind in a frighteningly short time period due to the decrease in intelligence ( or at least the decrease in intelligent people having children) within society. According to the writer, worst case scenario it could happen within 3 generations. I dismissed it as alarmist drivel at first but just look how we approach things like sport these days.

Anyway, the biggest eye opener I had this year was watching the NRL Grand Final and comparing it to the Brisbane Wallabies/Springboks Test, which had an appalling first half and a tough second half, and realising that rugby is just so much more engrossing. The average Aussie would watch it if it were more like league, but if it were more like league it wouldn’t be rugby.

I read an interesting blog on BBC rugby on scrums – it seems rugby followers around the world are concerned about the demise of the scrum. A couple of suggestions include letting the scrums engage first, then start the scrum. This could avoid collapse while still allowing a contest.

My suggestion is to reduce the numbers in the scrum. The union scrum is not a fair contest for the ball, and is mechanically a poorly constructed system which not even the best players can manage. It is also dangerous, with even seasoned professionals suffering scrum related injuries. The league scrum doesn’t work either. The only scrum that currently works is the 3 man 7s scrum. I would prefer a 3 man scrum to no scrum at all and if the 3 man scrum works, does the 5 man scrum work too? Worth a try.

Why should world rugby change itself just to give Australia a 2nd form of rugby lite/league?

Union will survive without Australia’scollective seal of approval and we will survive without having to embrace Union.

This debate has gone on ad nauseaum in this country and I believe it’s time for the supporters of the code to accept that Union will only ever derive a boutique market here, rather than ever boasting a profile as broad as Aust Footy, League or even Soccer.