CAMPO: More of the same from the Australian sides
Columnist By David Campese, 7 Mar 2012 David Campese is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- David Campese, New Zealand rugby, Rebels, Reds, Rod McQueen, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, wallabies, Waratahs
114 Have your say
3,385 reads
Tom Carter in action for the NSW Waratahs. AAP Image/David Crosling
Related coverage
Another week down and it was essentially more of the same from the Australian sides: more kicking, not enough passing, too much emphasis on structured, defensive play, and a lack of teamwork crippling any attacking instincts.
The Waratahs were a bit better in their match against the Rebels than they had been versus the Reds, but it needs to put into context.
The Rebels are a very ordinary team; they just can’t compete against the Big Boys.
They need some starch.
They’re relying on James O’Connor at inside centre, but the ball doesn’t go out to him, let alone reach the wingers. Mark Gerard is a great player, but he’s very safe. He’s not going to set the world on fire.
They really need to get some coaches down to Melbourne to teach them how to play running rugby.
They are missing the way the game should be played, but unfortunately the Rebels still haven’t secured a team that plays as a unit. They show promise in the backs, but need a forward pack to deliver good ball.
A proper gauge of how well the Waratahs are going will come against the better sides, with the first test this weekend against the Highlanders.
The Waratahs have some good players, but as I’ve been saying in this column for a couple of weeks now, the centres don’t create enough space for their outside backs.
I don’t think Adam Ashley-Cooper passed the ball once on the weekend?
They have to learn to play as a team. It’s so important. The first Super Rugby side to do that consistently will win this tournament.
Like the rest of the New Zealand teams, the Highlanders are playing adventurous rugby. They’re taking some risks and throwing the ball around. It makes their games, along with those of the Hurricanes and Crusaders, much more interesting to watch.
Their basic skills are fantastic. Australian teams need to get out of the gym and practice their basic skills.
The Australian sides are still too afraid to make mistakes. I’ve been saying that for ten years now.
Funnily enough, over the weekend, Michael O’Connor came out and said the same thing. Where has he been for the past decade?
Even though the players are ‘professional’, rugby in Australia is nowhere near ‘professional’, in the same way that rugby league is in this country.
I was in the park with my son a little back back and overheard a couple of guys talking about how they switched the television the night before from rugby to league.
This is the danger we’re facing. And it doesn’t look like much is being done about it.
Unfortunately, the coaching in Australia focuses on defence (the Force are a prime example), and as a result, people are switching over.
The frustrating thing is that the top brass don’t seem to care. They know that the private schools will always play rugby.
But that’s not the point: Rugby needs to be entertaining to maintain and then grow its support base.
- Explore:
- David Campese, New Zealand rugby, Rebels, Reds, Rod McQueen, Rugby Union, Super Rugby, wallabies, Waratahs
March 7th 2012 @ 5:48am
Darwin Stubbie said | March 7th 2012 @ 5:48am | Report comment
Not really too much in this to disagree with – the std line that seems to pop up is it is only the 1st/2nd week and we shouldn’t expect too much – the rust is getting ironed out …. The problem is 1 of the competitors has started and the games are 1st rate from week one …. AFL will soon be providing high class entertainment also – rugby in the Aust conference isn’t going to attract the new or casual viewer with what is currently being produced .. The only talking point seems to be the kicking % of Harris
March 7th 2012 @ 6:24am
Moaman said | March 7th 2012 @ 6:24am | Report comment
DS….Could it be that players are themselves to blame rather than the coaching?> I’m just throwing this out there……too much rugby/training for the modern professional player leaving them devoid of flair….taking the fun out of playing.Maybe the coaches should just tell the team to “go out and enjoy yourselves”!!
March 7th 2012 @ 7:55am
Blinky Bill of Bellingen said | March 7th 2012 @ 7:55am | Report comment
Moaman, I think you are onto something there.
‘Go out and enjoy yourselves’ is great in theory but I think the players fear doing that will result in a loss. Which means the only time they feel like doing it is when they are up my a massive score or else staring defeat in the face with just minutes to go.
I’ve just reasoned that it’s the price we have paid when the game turned professional. But maybe I’m wrong there.
March 7th 2012 @ 8:40am
sheek said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:40am | Report comment
Moaman,
Obviously the leagueies & Aussie rules players don’t spend as much time training & playing, allowing them more time for flair & enjoyment………………..?????!
March 7th 2012 @ 1:11pm
Nath said | March 7th 2012 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
it’s the fear of losing, the fear of stuffing up.
if i can use a tennis analogy here. you see it whenever players are trying to close out a set and they stop going for their shot, they invariably stuff it up. the good players are those that have a crack all the way through, regardless of the match situation. geez watch Djokovic in tie-breakers, he never dies wondering, winner after winner.
in a rugby context, why the hell wouldn’t you have a crack? the only way you’re going to get better playing an expansive game is to actually do that- then by practising and doing it over and over in tough situations you get better. it’s not as if you can flick a switch half way thru the season and say “right let’s chuck the ball around more”. you need to be doing it from round 1.
March 7th 2012 @ 12:40pm
Die hard said | March 7th 2012 @ 12:40pm | Report comment
I think it comes down to the amount of Rugby these guys get to play. Without starting a second tier arguement the Australian players only really get to play the super games and test matches once they have been selected into a squad. There is not a lot of diversity of development after that. Given the very narrow success/comparison criteria they have from that point it is not surprising that they spend a lot of time in the gym. Compare say Blyandaal, Cruden, Slade and Barret to Cooper and O’Connor. They are similar ages but their experiences are vastly different. Cooper and O’Connor are seasoned internationals wheras the others are still starting out. But why O’Connor is currently trying to “learn” the five eight position now is because he has not had those years to develop the instincts that give time and space and options. Instead these kids are polishing their skills at these levels. Competition and variety breed flair and there is not enough the way the game is played here now.
March 7th 2012 @ 6:06am
matthew said | March 7th 2012 @ 6:06am | Report comment
I just want to see a bit of fire and intensity in the Aus derbies. There’s no oomph. The crowd is so quiet. The players lack the execution of the NZ teams and the physicality of the South African teams. If you ask me everyone is subconsciously worrying about rugby league and scared they cant offer the same kind of “sports entertainment” and end up only trying half heartedly anyway. That’s the impression I get when I glance at the bland faces of the players on the park and hear the shallow whispers in the stands.
March 7th 2012 @ 6:45am
kingplaymaker said | March 7th 2012 @ 6:45am | Report comment
The TV figures in the NRL and AFL are frightening and rugby should be terrified not because it’s failling in its own limited, small-scale terms, but more than anything else because of its feeble position in comparison to those two giants. Not only that, but both giants will get richer and richer with more and more teams and will soon start to try and destroy rugby.
The top brass certainly don’t care and the point about complaceny because the game will always be played in the public schools is correct. And the point is also true that league, from its administrators to its methods is thoroughly professional, whereas rugby is still culturally amateur.
The likes of John O’Neill and Steve Tew are not amateur products themselves, but are crippled in their ambitions to spread and develop the game by the amateur bodies that appoint and control them.
The game is still run by coteries from the amateur era and the whole thing is amateur in conception: that means what specators may want is irrelevant, because the game isn’t being played for a market, and why expand the market anyway? The game is a past time for fun, not competitive entertainment in a competitive market place.
If Super rugby had been conceived and executed in a professional way from the beginning then the NRL might not exist by now.
Desperate and bold acts will be necessary to rescue it.
March 7th 2012 @ 7:13am
Darwin Stubbie said | March 7th 2012 @ 7:13am | Report comment
God you write some rubbish – that you believe the NRL would have shut down if SR had spread and expanded is delusional
March 7th 2012 @ 2:14pm
The Great G Nepia said | March 7th 2012 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
Not sure if I would include Steve Tew in the ‘ambitious’ category. The NZRU haven’t got a clue about running a professional sport, and it’s only the great All Black brand which they milk each year in the ‘same old same old way’ (ie test match after test match – surely there’s other ways you can make money from one of the world’s top sports brands) that props up the balance sheet. each year.
March 7th 2012 @ 6:41pm
ohtani's jacket said | March 7th 2012 @ 6:41pm | Report comment
The All Blacks make most of their money from their huge Adidas contract.
March 7th 2012 @ 7:12pm
allblackfan said | March 7th 2012 @ 7:12pm | Report comment
bit harsh there, TGGN.
The NZRU savings are kept in a hedge fund using US currency which can increase, or descrease, depending on currency fluctuations. In addition, there are different levels of sponsorships for different levels of competitions (ie players). There is merchandising (which Adidas helps with) although I think they can do a lot more in that regard (ie DVDs, player dolls etc).
The problem the NZRU has is that NZ is a small economy; everyone’s scrapping for a piece of the small pie not to mention idiot outside parties like the NRL and AFL wanting a piece of that pie as well (ie outside NZ).
Don’t even get me started on natural disasters!!! …
OJ, I’m sure Iveco’s deal is also noteworthy
March 8th 2012 @ 9:19am
The Great G Nepia said | March 8th 2012 @ 9:19am | Report comment
Thanks Allbackfan. The problem I have with the NZRU is that they seem pretty one or two dimensional in the way the make money. Revenues have stayed fairly steady over the years, and there does not appear to be any growth in revenues. The only strategy the NZRU seem to have in growing revenue is putting on an extra test against the Welsh each year. I reckon there’s millions of ways you can increase global revenue from one of the world’s great sporting brands, but they all seem to pass the NZRU by because I don’t think they think outside of the square enough.
March 7th 2012 @ 7:17am
Emric said | March 7th 2012 @ 7:17am | Report comment
David.
I’ve always believed that the ARU should have a internal competition more like the NPC of course the problem is money. Perhaps there is a simple solution to the problem.
Using the Ranfurly Shield at home as base model instead of having a week in week out competition the Australian clubs create a shield given to a winner of a single one off competition between the top club sides in the super rugby states (5 states 5 top club teams) the competition can be finished within a few weeks and the winner recieveing the new award – cup, shield whatever gets put up.
From then on the holding club accepts 5 challenges per year from any club in Australia who wants to have a go at winning it they must accept challenges from 3 top teams and up to 2 minor teams – payment for the players can come directly from the tickets sold to the game.
lets assume a club has access to a stadium of 10,000 and manages to sell 5000 tickets to the game (I’m attempting to be realistic) at 10 dollars general access and 25 dollars grandstand access 5 dollars for all kids and makes a profit of 60,000 they could offer the about 1000 dollars to each person who played. I know its not a lot of cash but it would leave the union with 25000 dollars to pay for the stadium and make a small profit the games could be played in smaller stadiums to avoid massive fee’s.
The benefits of this type of competition – The ranfurly shield, and general attitude of New Zealand Rugby in regards to the ranfurly shield is it encourages teams to attack because to win the shield
It wouldn’t be as good as a week in and week out competition but with more contact between the different states and the fans of those teams getting used to exploring their new competitoin perhaps something could evolve naturally?
Anyway its just an idea
March 7th 2012 @ 1:30pm
joe blackswan said | March 7th 2012 @ 1:30pm | Report comment
that seems a pretty good idea…although coming from perth it seems it will be quite a long wait before we see a game played out west.
March 8th 2012 @ 1:27pm
soapit said | March 8th 2012 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
except you wouldnt necessarily have the best players playing in it. a lot of good players play for teams that dont win the comp.
March 7th 2012 @ 7:36am
Darwin Stubbie said | March 7th 2012 @ 7:36am | Report comment
Generally the Aust derby games are dull slogfests – sure the odd decent game gets thrown up but overall they’re not great viewing …. The reds last year were worth a watch in their own conference – but without Cooper all Harris needs to do is start potting drop goals and they are basically the Bulls of old (without the monster pack) ….
But I’m willing to wait until either the tahs or reds start cross conference games to make the real judgements (the other 3 are poor to average and aren’t worth switching on for unless they’re playing your team) …. t
March 7th 2012 @ 8:26am
p.Tah said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:26am | Report comment
Who is you’re team DS? I’ve always wondered.
March 7th 2012 @ 8:44am
Darwin Stubbie said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Manawatu …. So I follow where their players – so this year I’m interested in the chiefs and highlanders
March 7th 2012 @ 8:56am
p.Tah said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:56am | Report comment
So deep down you love the Highlanders green jersey
March 7th 2012 @ 6:58pm
Darwin Stubbie said | March 7th 2012 @ 6:58pm | Report comment
Indeed I did – but I actually also thought the thought process behind it was correct …
March 7th 2012 @ 6:58pm
Darwin Stubbie said | March 7th 2012 @ 6:58pm | Report comment
I..
March 7th 2012 @ 8:58am
sheek said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:58am | Report comment
DS – The Green Machine….. The Turbos.
I think that’s a critical problem with super rugby – not enough green uniforms…..!
Errrr, make that not a single green to be seen……….
I remember watching the 1998 Shute Shield grand final at SFS (the last premier rugby GF I attended).
A veteran David Campese & rookie Chris Latham helped Randwick run riot over Warringah.
I overheard an English woman behind me remark to her husband (presumedly) early in the game – “Oh, that’s interesting. Both teams have green uniforms. You don’t see that too often, do you”.
March 8th 2012 @ 2:53pm
soapit said | March 8th 2012 @ 2:53pm | Report comment
what a coincidence, last one i attended as well. was kind of the peak of the sydney comp imo when wallabies still regularly turned out for their clubs
March 7th 2012 @ 8:17am
Atawhai Drive said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:17am | Report comment
The conference strategy has its true believers but this Waratahs supporter is not one of them.
I would happily watch the Waratahs play the Reds three times a season.
On current form, one match against the Brumbies would be enough.
That leaves the Rebels and the Force. Ho hum.
I much preferred the former system, when each team played every other team once.
I’m with Moaman and Blinky Bill: enjoyment went out the window when the game turned pro. And Darwin Stubbie is right on the money in saying the NRL hits the ground running every year, as does the AFL. Excuses that Super Rugby teams need time to settle are unconvincing.
Roll on the Shute Shield!
March 7th 2012 @ 10:59am
Harry said | March 7th 2012 @ 10:59am | Report comment
You see the same players for the Rebels, Force and Brumbies in the Shute Shield playing their rugby with far less inhibitions, and generally far more skill, than you do in SuperRugby, where they have all the flair programmed out of them, and in a less forgiving environment.
March 7th 2012 @ 8:31am
hog said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:31am | Report comment
I agree about that the excuse about teams being rusty for the first couple of rounds is just not on, in Aus this is the only time the game is really in the spotlight without afl/nrl competition and what do we put up Force v Brumbies.
Just a thought is thier anyway the currie cup and npc cannot start in early March along with an aus club comp and then a form of super rugby start around June.
Would the SA and Kiwis go along with that, don,t you think that would start to solve some of the issues.
March 7th 2012 @ 8:40am
p.Tah said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:40am | Report comment
One point to note is that the Reds won last year playing entertaining rugby. The Crusaders have always played entertaining rugby and they are the most successful side. This year the Highlanders are playing entertaining rugby and they have been sensational this year. Anyone see a common theme here?
for the most part, the teams that do well in Super rugby play a brand of rugby that is great to watch.
The highlanders are not however playing reckless rugby and their plan is simple. They are competing at the breakdown, counter rucking, providing fast ball to their outside backs. It is working and it’s great to watch.
March 7th 2012 @ 8:45am
mania said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:45am | Report comment
except when the bulls won their championship on kick and pressure, and defend in your face
March 7th 2012 @ 8:55am
p.Tah said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:55am | Report comment
That’s why I said for the most part
. Even though the Bulls did win, the Reds and NZ teams show that it’s not the only way to win… And that is very important for rugby.
March 7th 2012 @ 11:02am
Harry said | March 7th 2012 @ 11:02am | Report comment
Bit of a myth that one … the Bulls played some superb running rugby at times, and had/have some really talented backs … du Preez, Habana, etc. A quality 15 man team
March 7th 2012 @ 12:01pm
Justin said | March 7th 2012 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
The Crusaders actually did a heap of kicking during their glory years. Carter would belt the ball down field as far as possible and they had a brilliant kick-chase, would win turnovers in the right area and profit from there.
March 7th 2012 @ 4:36pm
Markus said | March 7th 2012 @ 4:36pm | Report comment
And it was always great to watch, even if as a Brumbies supporter I was reluctant to acknowledge it at the time.
The only times I find kicking tactics unbearable to watch are when they are negative kicking tactics, that being either aimless box kicks due to lack of other ideas, or constant forward pick-and-drives that do not aim to actually make ground but just play for penalty shots.
Watching a fullback get lined up by four defenders as he goes up to catch a precision Garryowen is hardly boring stuff.
March 7th 2012 @ 8:55am
sheek said | March 7th 2012 @ 8:55am | Report comment
As much as I love rugby union, it is currently a rubbish product, played by ordinary talent. Certainly in Australia & South Africa. Although the Saffies wouldn’t know any different when you’re a monopoly sport.
Heard an interesting conversation between Andrew Demetriou & Alan Jones on 2GB this morning. Demetriou referred to AF as a “show”. Both the AFL & NRL cleverly understand that their sport is entertainment, & in order to attract more players, fans, sponsors, media exposure & wealth to their sport, they need to put on a show. To entertain.
Meanwhile, over in rugby union land, they still have this quaint idea that the referee is the most important person on the field. And his whistle blowing technique & arm movements should be the most important skills on display.
A key problem with Australian rugby is that it is getting the tail-end of the litter in quality talent. The majority of Australian professional rugby players simply aren’t good enough to produce a higher quality game. Which then affects everything else. In better bygone days, the quality players could overcome the “built-in drawbacks” of the game. But not at present.
Back in 1984, or 1992, or 2000, there were “built-in drawbacks” to the game, just like today. But the superior quality of the players on display were able to overcome this, & often provide an engrossing spectacle.
Of course the diehards will disagree with me.
March 7th 2012 @ 9:20am
King of the Gorgonites said | March 7th 2012 @ 9:20am | Report comment
So Sheek you did not enjoy the Waratahs v rebels game or the Highlanders v Crusaders? IMO both those games were of the highest order.
If you have what i like to call the Nick Farr-Jones disease – you think something in the past was a lot more then it actaully was. Whenever i hear NFJ speak it makes me sick. the guy distorts the past and the present. HAve you ever tried watching afull test match from the 1980s recently? its absurd in its stoppage and dour play. Condense it down to a 30 mintue package like foxtel does and it looks great. watch the whole thing and its ordinary.
Rugby has its problems but you are way off the mark.
March 7th 2012 @ 9:30am
sheek said | March 7th 2012 @ 9:30am | Report comment
King,
Read my article again. I said the “built-in drawbacks” were there in the past, but overcome by better quality players.
Yours is a time-honoured reposte – those who disagree must have some built-in fault themselves.
No, I didn’t particularly enjoy the Tahs-Reds game, & I haven’t seen the Highlanders-Crusaders game. Any game with Kiwis is usually worth watching because they have the talent to overcome the “built-in drawbacks” of rugby.
King, feel free to remain delusional. AF & RL are so far in front of rugby, on so many different levels, it’s not funny. But if you’re comfortable with all that, then that’s okay too.
March 7th 2012 @ 9:44am
Rough Conduct said | March 7th 2012 @ 9:44am | Report comment
Sheek, why don’t you just stop watching Rugby and become a full blown RL supporter? You have been on this site for years saying how you are a Rugby supporter but actually think it is rubbish and RL is far better, why not put us all out of our misery and stop watching the game.
March 7th 2012 @ 10:02am
kingplaymaker said | March 7th 2012 @ 10:02am | Report comment
RC and KOG Sheek’s point of view is slightly different from the way it may seem. He’s not saying rugby or all the Super XV matches are terrible, but that given an even playing field, the NRL and AFL have managed to take the lion’s share of the talent available and that means there is far less of it left for rugby, resulting in some lesser quality matches and boring styles of play. This was not inevitable and is a result of the hopeless attitude of rugby’s bosses, who don’t recognise that they are running a professional sport in a very competitive market-place, but instead seem to think they are organising a social past-time.
This is why the Waratahs are allowed to play kicking rugby, why five teams are supposed to compete against 15, why without more teams and millionaire backers most of the talent goes to the NRL.
Sure there are some great running teams and some great matches, but frankly there could easily be many more teams full of outstanding players throughout with every game a running spectacle. This is because of the misguided idea that a professional sport doesn’t need to be a entertaining or maximise its markets.
Certainly when you look at the viewing figures for the NRL and AFL there is much room for worry:
http://www.talkingfooty.com/tv_ratings_2012.php
If rugby had aimed to be entertainment all along and maximised its markets things could have been very different.
March 7th 2012 @ 12:09pm
King of the Gorgonites said | March 7th 2012 @ 12:09pm | Report comment
I said the Waraths v Rebels. did you watch that? theTahs were excellent for a 2nd round.
If you dont watch rugby then how can you judge? how many SR games have you actually watched this year?
AFL and NRL have always been miles ahead. nothing new there.
March 7th 2012 @ 11:02am
WQ said | March 7th 2012 @ 11:02am | Report comment
KOG, what an excellent point you make.
I have access to plenty of 80′s and 90′s Rugby footage and you are 100% accurate, watching some of it is like having your teeth pulled!
The quality of the Ref’s was atrocious, the skill and fitness level of the players was not much better.
Don’t bag modern day Rugby, it is in fact a much better spectacle than it has ever been. It is faster, more accurate, more skilful and played by much superior athletes than it was in the good old days!
It is not Rugby League, nor is it bloody AFL!
If you think those sports are a better spectacle then go and watch them I say.
March 7th 2012 @ 11:09am
kingplaymaker said | March 7th 2012 @ 11:09am | Report comment
WQ it’s surely true that rugby is far better now than in the amateur era, and indeed much better since the law interpretations were changed two years ago. However, the question is not how good it is, but how much better it could have been.
At the beginning of the century rugby was in a postition where it could have gone anywhere, especially with the turmoil of its main rival league, but the insane decisions to field under five teams and not allow the millions that single private owners offer allowed league to rip it to shreds. It was a paranoid conservatism that led to this, and that’s why instead of 10 strong teams now we see 2 strong ones and 3 average ones.
League decided to have a large number of teams and single private ownership, while rugby didn’t. That’s where the battle was lost and won. League took the vast majority of the talent in NSW and QLD as a result.
March 7th 2012 @ 11:27am
thurl said | March 7th 2012 @ 11:27am | Report comment
Are you sure that wouldn’t be 8 average teams…
March 7th 2012 @ 11:46am
kingplaymaker said | March 7th 2012 @ 11:46am | Report comment
No thurl, because all the millions of players who go to league as teenagers would now form many of these teams, firstly because they would exist to offer the professional contracts that now cannot, and secondly the millionaire owners would make them rich enough to bid for these teenagers and pay them competitively as adults.
March 7th 2012 @ 11:50am
WQ said | March 7th 2012 @ 11:50am | Report comment
KPM I don’t disagree with the point you make about Rugby making mistakes during the process of becoming a Professional sport. It was a messy transition that has caused some long term pain in the game.
We can’t forget though that our rival codes had years on us when it comes to developing the game professionally.
I think that regardless of where we are at presently, and I have no data to prove this, I will almost bet you that we have more players playing the game and more spectators watching the game than we did in the 80′s and 90′s.
I would also like to suggest that Rugby in NZ right now is abuzz. On the back of a World Cup win there will be kids there right now dreaming about becoming a future Rugby star. As there was in South Africa, England and Australia after they won World Cups.
I suspect there is a little post RWC syndrome happening in Australia at the present.
March 7th 2012 @ 12:23pm
kingplaymaker said | March 7th 2012 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
WQ the cases of Australia and New Zealand now are different though related. In New Zealand rugby is on top as the major code, but faces significant problems. Because of the small number of teams, fewer fans identify with Super rugby teams and the competition as a whole than might do, which leaves the New Zealand in desperate financial straits with plumetting reserves. What’s more with only a population of 4.5 million, should a rich talent vulture such as a cashed up NRL or AFL pounce, they might not have the financial muscle to defend themselves.
The solution is very easy. You’re right that there is a buzz now and fan interest and they should use it to fill stadiums with more teams, as suggested last week by Taranaki. These should be privately owned, which would make New Zealand rugby financially stable by pouring in millions and protect it against vulture codes. An 8 or 10 team assembly would create far more fan interest and the millions from owners would protect the game.
Ditto Australia, though it’s in a far weaker position internally.
The syndrome is Australia is simple and not to do with the RWC: being thrashed by the huge NRL and AFL, in a state of existential weakness where any day it could be crushed should the other codes choose.
March 7th 2012 @ 11:20am
Red Kev said | March 7th 2012 @ 11:20am | Report comment
That may be so, but the scrums were a hell of a lot better. The scrums in the 1999 RWC highlights last year were telling in my opinion, no crouch-long silence-touch-long silence-pause-long silence-engage nonsense, just the two packs sinking and then engaging (and the shirts were not sprayed on quasi-lycra crap meaning the props could bind) and lo-and-behold the scrums stayed up instead of needing a mountain of resets and penalties.
And it comes back to the point someone else made up above – less involvement from the referee not more.
March 7th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Justin said | March 7th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
Agreed re the scrums RK – they had a 1996 match on Fox last night between the Brumbies and Wellington. It was scrum called, the packs got together and wammo, collision time. Barely a re-set outside of wheeling through the 90.
They have stuffed the scrum now. Its ALL about the hit and less about scrummaging.
March 7th 2012 @ 11:51am
sheek said | March 7th 2012 @ 11:51am | Report comment
Well indeed,
A few cages rattled this morning, eh?
This is an opinion site, & I am expressing my opinion. Feel free to disagree. But sensibly.
Well, what do you know – watching rugby from the 90s & 80s, it looks so outdated. Funny about that since it was 20 or 30 years ago.
We think the game is cutting edge today, as does each era. But guess what, the folks in 2040 will be saying how dated rugby was back in 2012. And the folks in 2070 will be saying the same about 2040.
Assuming rugby union is still around……….
March 7th 2012 @ 1:52pm
kovana said | March 7th 2012 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
A regular ray of sunshine.
If Rugby was such a rubbish sport it would have died out ages ago. It hasnt. In fact its grown.
Compare where Rugby was at 24 years ago.. to where it is now.. That right there is your comparison.
Even in Australia.. Compare the Rugby scene now to when it was 30 years ago, i think you will its profile has increased in Oz overall.
Yes.. Rugby was declining for the past few years in Oz.. But now.. 2-3 years in a row, the game seems to be on a upward slant there.
March 7th 2012 @ 2:26pm
King of the Gorgonites said | March 7th 2012 @ 2:26pm | Report comment
Well said Kovana.
March 7th 2012 @ 7:43pm
Jiggles said | March 7th 2012 @ 7:43pm | Report comment
I have been watching rugby since the early 80s in this country Kovana, and the product today is the best it has ever been. I sat through some crap matches at Ballymore in the 80s and 90s where the players and the game were rubbish.
Rugby has its issues, like anything really, But it at its strongest today then at any other point in history.
March 7th 2012 @ 9:04am
johnny-boy said | March 7th 2012 @ 9:04am | Report comment
Good footage Campo – you were better and faster than I remember. Such fun to see the Wallabies running and passing at speed. Pity the current coaching regime doesnt see fit.