There's room for structure in the ELVs, if teams want it that way

"...the 4 Welsh regions have been created and financed by WRU" INCORRECT. Two of the Welsh regions are standalone clubs - Cardiff and Llanelli - rebranded. Shareholding, company names, indeed players and coaches remained the same. The Ospreys were created following an amalgamation of Neath and Swansea. The less said about the Dragons, the better. The clubs are NOT financed by the Union. They earn their own revenue through prize money, gate receipts, sponsorship etc.

I couldn't agree more with Ian. If we have something we love dearly, that is in every respect except the English national squad, doing better than ever and attracting new players and retaining old players, filling stadiums and entertaining millions on TV, that is well finaced and getting richer all the time, and you want us to radically alter it, you can't force it, you can't bully it through, and you can't slide it under the radar. The days of us accepting that the SH is right and on track, are over, you have to construct a very good case, and sell it to us as a benefit not just for viewers or people in non-rugby nations to easier grasp, but as a format that will benefit our pro players, our amateurs and our kids who are only now starting out and dreaming... and that genuinely includes teh big and the small... all we hear is how the IRB want to make sure rugby stays valid for all shapes and sizes, and what we hear from the SH is "if teh fatties can't keep up, tough" or "it's for the more athletic player"... union is for athletes, and beanpoles, and heavyweights, and thinkers, and hitters and kickers... anything that takes away that truth, will not gain an inch of interest here. So if you really want it to happen, if you really believe it's better on all levels, shut O'Neill up, and tell Sean Fitzpatrick, or Oz Durant, or someone else from a traditional rugby background, preferably a forward, and definately not anyone involved in the IRB or southern unions, to make the case to us. I still think they'll fail, buecause the case isn't that good from where I stand, but we will listen. But they have to men of great integrity, and preferably front row or tight 5 players.

Paulmc No if the ELV's were introduced it would not cause a problem to English rugby as the new players would cope admirably and immediately. The question is whether the ELV's are really necessary, as Bob and I have tried to explain there is a strong lobby against ELV's coming from some very influential people not just the media. If it ain't broke don't mend it, and it isn't helped by O'Neill loss of creditability in some quarters. I would suggest that O'Neill is taken out of the frame and somebody with a more diplomatic approach, preferably from NZ or SA, should head the presentation and improve the PR It would take the perception of the ELV's being an OZ initiative and allow a more rational assessment otherthan always going on about the NH being reactionary, which just puts peoples backs up.

Bob & Ian Given what has been said about the slow uptake of professional development in the English structure and the statements that they are about to unleash a load of new talent that is all skilled & built for the new era and as was quoted some where the English are about 5 years behind do you think it will logically follow that your players (at the pro level -not club) will want ELV type changes in that time frame

I know it's quite healthy DT, and skillful and full of talent, and as I've said before, even the front row boys are not that bad! The aussies can't scrummage thing goes back to the test against england where Dunning changed sides, and got slaughtered, as would most props changing sides at that level... it was too much to ask. The only prop I ever considered capable of changing sides (from tight to loose, or loose to tight) was the great Jason Leonard. But you have to be a prop to know how crazy dunning was, or loyal to a coach who asked the imposible, who knows... After that it was O'Neills taunts and jibes and massive, unfounded claims for the front row! I do have concerns that the new aussie props are all so young, if I read correctly they are all 21 and 22 years old, which is too young to be thrown into internationals. And I do have concerns that most of the ailments in Aussie and Kiwi rugby are down to the administrators. Actually, most of the ailments of rugby union in most countries is probably down to the administrators! My opinion is simply that rugby up here is evolving into a fast, varied, powerful and skillful game, and the ELV's aren't wanted, at all. I also think they have been sold to the SH fans with such gusto because the union bosses down there have really messed up and are looking for a quick fix. The ELV's wont provide them, and can you seriously say this seasons s14 is better than last seasons (allowing for Henry's vandalism of it with his withdrawn ab's)? That you think we're looking after our own short term interests however, indicates that we will never get past this issue. we always have, and always will have the integrity of union at the forefront of everything we do. We will not adjust for the marketing men, the IRB or the sponsors. Rugby is too important for that. This argument will run on, I'm sure, but not for much longer... You can argue and accuse and point the finger to your hearts content, You will however, not be playing any kind of radilcal ELV's next season, because in the NH we will not accept them. we might agree to moving the flags a bit.... and we should educate the refs more.... and the new fan base everyone down there talks about, but no way will we buy into the ELV's.

It's not a matter of helping anyone out, it's a matter of some putting their own short terms interests aside for the good of the whole, to return the game to the balanced, nuanced contest it was for most of the previous century. BTW, we mightn't be rolling in the money like 5 years ago, but rugby is still pretty healthy here. We had a full Sydney Football Stadium for the Tah's v Brumbies game the other night, despite the fact that it was bucketing down with rain.

DT... it's coming clearer all the time... I was under the impression you were arguing that the ELV's were needed to shake up NH rugby, that we were lagging somehow... but that you selectively read my comments and come up with "Bob said “we really do have the game exactly as we want it” and you added, "Finally, we get some truth, although I think the end of that sentence is missing. You know, the part that says “bugger everyone else.” " So by implication, we have to change our entire ethos, the very laws of our game, a thriving and much loved and understood game, because although we are thriving, you feel we are taking a "bugger everyone else" attitiude... this implies you are asking us to change our ways in order to help you out of a tight spot. You are feeling hurt and unloved, unrespected, isolated. your game is in trouble and you don't know how to fix it so you do what you always do, you blame everyone else, you lash out, you abuse and bully. Then when it doesn't work, you ask for pity! It's classic behaviour patterns DT. But we can help you without the ELV's, we can show you a plan that will bring back your supporters, rejuvinate your clubs, and make the whole sport more vibrant. You only have to see how the AB's played under the existing laws, and the BarBars, the SA, and the GP and HK, and the NPC, to see how well the game can play! It's really only the administration of the union in NZ, and the lack of depth and forward power in Aus, that is the issue. it is ironic though, that the pro-elv's are accusing others of having a selfish attitude! It looks from here, that aussies are driving this so hard because they think they need it and they don't care what the rest of the world wants! I also think the SA teams can adapt well, and will come through in the S14, but they clearly don't want to be playing the ELV's. I also like reading Ian's point of view... and I agree with so much of what he says, even if he is a tad more open minded on the issue than I am. I even enjoy reading what you have to say DT, although unlike Ian, you're not well informed or open minded, but he's a quinns man, and they're known for being gentlemen! Incedentally, which club do you pay to watch, or play for, or help in some way?

Bob said Quote "we really do have the game exactly as we want it" unquote Finally, we get some truth, although I think the end of that sentence is missing. You know, the part that says "bugger everyone else." Why would you want to return to the bad old days, where opposition teams attempted to score in lots of five and seven, while your mob was concentrating on accumulating threes? No wonder you reckon nobody can sell you the ELVs. I'm prepared to see some of the ELVs fail and not be adopted for the overall good of the game, after what will hopefully be a fair, unemotional debate. The argument that "everything is fine, nothing is different now" is the one I strongly object to. I'd also like to say that I've enjoyed reading Ian's points of view, which seem open minded and well informed. Interesting that the South African teams did better in week 3. Maybe they’re adapting better than we were giving them credit for.

Again Ian makes valid points. We all want England to be a force to be reckoned with, and the English want England to win, but amongst the rugby community there is a sense of distance between the rank and file players and fans, and the national powers that be. Although the work mentioned by Ian will go a long way to mend bridges and the future looks very bright. In the next 5 years I suspect the face of the game will change and improve even more here, and we really don't need distractions like the bulk of the ELV's to get in the way. But it is difficult for SH rugby folk to grasp just how far apart the club scene and the national scene is in England... and that the power rests in the clubs, not just pro, but amateur too.

Paulmc Over the years there has been a major problem between the professional clubs and the RFU. To the extent that clubs have refused to release players for Internationals, hence understrength teams being sent down under. Really the fault lies with the RFU, they were totally unprepared for the professional era and the clubs took the initative. The early days for many clubs was very difficult and a number of well known clubs who had been strong during the amateur era fell by the wayside, Richmond, London Scottish, Orrel, Coventry, Bedford and others failed as professional clubs. Those that survived formed the Premier League and created their own management structure to run the professional game. They negotiated the deals with Mr Murdoch and set up with other European Leagues, the Heineken Cup, EDF cup etc.The clubs were the heartbeat of the professional game. Eventually the RFU woke up to the reality of the professional game, and the need for the England national team to be a meaningful force in World rugby. They reorganised their structures and created the Elite programme from academy level up to full international level. They got closer to the clubs who controlled the players and the appointment of Rob Andrew who had been CEO of Newcastle was crtical in achieving the new agreement between club and country. He understood the financial structure of the professional clubs and was instrumental in setting the framework for the eventual agreement. Now the clubs are to be compensated for players selected for International squads. I understand there will two squads selected for the full internationals and the Saxons, effectively England A. The players selected will come together as squads for the entire period of tournament and they will not be available to the clubs. It is also agreed that the top players will be restricted to a certain number of games throughout the season. This agreement will be in force I think until 2012. By chance it has been the cheaper option for the RFU as they do not have to finance the entire professional structure as in OZ and NZ. It has also meant that wealthy individuals could finance the professional game through the clubs. It has therefore released monies available to the RFU for community and grassroots rugby, where the real grow of the game is being seen. Slick marketing and interest free loans to amateur clubs to improve facilities has boosted the drive to persuade more people to "Goplayrugby". Of course, we all want to England to play well and win, but in the main there is a feeling of enormous frustration and everyone is hopeful that this agreement will be the forerunner of better things. Initial signs are encouraging as co-operation between the professional clubs and the RFU have improved as typified by the members of RFU elite team spending time at the clubs, identifying talent' looking at the coaching set ups etc generally improving communication. This is particularly seen at U20, U18, nad U16 levels where players with PL experience are made available for their respective tournaments. There still is a problem with the IRB 7's as the clubs seem to have drawn a line with that particular competition, and the squads are made up of fringe players and classified as a developmental squad, which is an excuse for being c**p. Hope that is helpful.

Ian Does the short preparation imply that "management" considers clubs are more important than country - or club management is more powerful than national? I was at the RWC and there was an expediency for England to win - it was reflected in the many England fans that paid (and were prepared to pay) a lot of money to see that and were expressly dissapointed at the final result. At that point many I am sure put country before club

Paulmc As illustrated in RWC2007, for the first time in four years the team had more than 5 days together before a game. Ok they started off badly but they were able to change tack devise a game plan and would have won by more v OZ if JW had kicked his goals. There was still some frustration in that the game plan was an expediency to win matches and did not reflect the changes in the style of week on week club rugby. We shall see what happens next year. By common consensus there are some very talented players in the English club game and they will have every opportunity to perform on the International stage, whether they take it is a another matter.

Scuub: There is no denying that internationals are a wonderful spectacle and great revenue builder, and I never said otherwise, but I do maintain that tests against SH opposition generate no more than home tests... you say yourself "NH touring sides have hardly set the ticket booths ablaze in recent seasons", and I think you need to understand that just as with soccer, the clubs are where the money is... actually, the players and fans is where the money is, and therefore if you are asking ths fans to attend games played to laws they dislike, they wont do it and the game will go into the kind of fall that you have in the SH. I am all for anything that generates capital for grass roots investment, but we have over 4000 clubs, 750,000 players, and millions of fans, all perfectly happy with the game as it is... why would we change? Would Aussie rules change to suit a UK market? We admire the SH rugby, it sets the bar, it is excellent, but it is not all there is to rugby, and we need to understand that the SH is pretty ignorant of the real situation in the NH. We admire your coaches, from SA as well as aussie and NZ, but you always overstate your own importance. That isn't an insult, just a fact... and it's a real strange mind set you have... I recall aussies and kiwis being flaberghasted because I knew nothing about the Holden/Ford competition... and you can't get that the NH is ok without you, just as no-one into the V8's world gets how nobody up here cares who wins their races. Furthermore, the SH have been stating for weeks that the ELV's are needed due to the need to break the boring style of game the NH and mostly England have developed over the years, but now you say, perhaps more accurately: "But down here, players are so big and fast, and the structures are so well designed, that 15 big men on each side have begun to hinder the spectacle." I think scuub, we have a situation with SH rugby, of Physician heal thyself!

Ian "The problem is that Club England does not exist" - that is the same for every country & not really a reason for boring football. It may be the reason to pick your best club side the represent your country but it does not really reflect well on the skill of the players picked.

Paulmc The problem is that Club England does not exist, hopefully when the new agreement kicks in after the NZ tour and the squad actually has more time together they will perform better as a team. Gatland was right to pick 13 Ospreys in the test v Eng as he recognised the need to play as a team and that has been his philosophy throughout the 6N's, helped by the fact that the 4 Welsh regions have been created and financed by WRU. To bring players together from different clubs for such a short period, all with different calls, different defensive set ups et al is a nightmare for the coach. Hence there is a tendency to go for the obvious common demoninator. Many players in the England team and the coaches are frustrated and can't wait to have more time together in an effort to replicate the club form. We shall see what happens next year, there will be no excuses. Twickenham, owned by the RFU, is a multi purpose stadium and in addition to rugby, there are major pop concerts, religious festivals etc., which bring substantial additional revenue.

Old Brother Bob, you must have allready died and past on to heaven, because you're living in a dream world. How is it that English rugby doesn't need Internationals for their game to stay alive? Did you not read my earlier post, or Ian's earlier post, which gave factual numbers for the amount of investment the RFU puts into growing and sustaining the grass roots of the game? Where on earth do you think the money comes from? The recent RFU funded recruitment drive (worth millions of pounds) is the latest example of why Rugby is growing in England. Marketing works, and marketing costs money. If you were to take away International rugby you would be taking away by far the best revenue source in the English game. And the global game for that matter! Do you think the Clubs could sustain the game on their own? The same clubs that are each losing hundreds of thousands of pounds each year whilst demanding a greater share of the revenues made by the RFU? You believe that "like it or not, the revenue generated by SH tests is not the main sourse of income for our game". The RFU (WHO DO FUND AND SUSTAIN THE ENGLISH GAME) make their money from hosting test matches in Twickenham do they not? In 2008 they will host only 2 Six Nations fixtures (Wales & Ireland). They will then host the Pacific Islands, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand during the end of year tours in November. These 4 fixtures are no acts of generousity. These games will make the RFU millions, which can then be injected into the game in England. So don't go burning your Southern Hemisphere bridges too quickly! The weakened and humbled NH touring sides have hardly set the ticket booths ablaze in recent seasons, and the SH unions could realistically wonder what they are doing scratching NH backs only to be stabbed in return? But all of this has little to do with the merits of the ELV's as improving the game of Rugby. Sure, NH players and coaching structures are growing and evolving. The SH embraced professionalism from the get go and have been producing the most quality athletic players over the past 10 years, with the NH now gaining fast and (whó knows) maybe soon to surpass? But the point is that the game has evolved in the SH to a point where the growth that the game has seen due to moving from amateur to pro status has hit a snag. All the players and coaches heading your way are attempting to transform your game and your players into what ours was 6 years ago (half way through professionalism). But down here, players are so big and fast, and the structures are so well designed, that 15 big men on each side have begun to hinder the spectacle. What you seem to be suggesting is that just because the NH is yet to reach this climax under the old laws, that those places which have hit the wall should just suffer and wait for you to reach the same inevitable fate? I agree with Ian that the laws need more time under experimentation before we can pass ultimate judgement on thier success, or failure. But the idea of evolution is a correct one, and the ambition if the IRB is a just cause. The game needs to remain a spectacle and a better balance needs to be found. The attitude that we're fine and don't care about others and that any who wish to change the game can go play with themselves. What you don't understand is that these proposed changes have been envisioned, invented, refined, tested and promoted by die hard Rugby Union players, referees, stakeholders and Board Members from all nations. People who know a lot more about the game then we do. They are not the creation of money hungry businessmen or Australian RU CEO's. So the heresy claims need to be drowned in a bucket of water brother Bob, there's no witches here, just well informed intentions.

Oh dear, Gruff... you really are bitter aren't you? And to suggest that the result is irrelevent is perhaps indicative of where the problems in Aussie rugby lay... in fact you've opened my eyes to the whole issue of where australian rugby is falling down... You say "Because in the lower echelons of rugby, the result is irrelevant" but you need to get rid of that idea mate, commendable as it is. Winning matters, and even lowly club games are fought out with blood and guts. To think otherwise really does show your lack of understanding, your ignorance, (forgiven) of the club game and the game, nay, as paulmc rightly states, RELIGION of rugby union. You have to want to win gruff... don't just give up because it's been so long. Don't let go of the aussie digger spirit. Dig deep son, aim to win. You need to get your mind right. All you base your arguments on is the international game, which is so narrow a field to examine, and to suggest the ELV's are designed to help the English game is laughable... if you aussies could scrummage you wouldn't want to change a thing. And union is expanding so rapidly, with so many nations wanting to be involved, under current laws... and they understand it, it's only australians that struggle with it... but gruff, go to your local amateur club, if you can find one there, and watch the real thing, or get yourself a guide to the game and watch a GP or HK (that's Heiniken Cup, not Hong Kong) game on the old valve set... and I'm you will see the light.

Paulmc... that's not quite my intention, my reference was to ELV's... there is much evolution going on here, and a real desire to open up the game. We have coaches and players from the SH, as well as league converts (blessings on all their houses), and great and ambitious home grown union talent, but it is evolving within the current laws, and doesn't need altered laws to let it happen. As Ian states, "... Gatland said last week NZ rugby doesn’t appreciate the enormous changes made to NH rugby in the last three years". Things really are opening up, and it really is very exciting, interesting and inclusive. Blessings.

Bob Because in the lower echelons of rugby, the result is irrelevant. At international level, the English are so anal about winning that they distorted the whole essence of rugby to win regardless of damage to the game. The worm has turned. English rugby (penalty-shootout grind and boredom) is not winning games. The Welsh are all over you like a rash. English rugby has become inept and - unsuccessful. Yet, when an international attempt is made via the ELVs to bring some spark back, the English protest "conspiracy" and claim the Australians are driving this - with no basis but paranoia and the long-held envy of the natural sporting prowess of the Antipodes. This is a world game. The world cares about how rugby union is travelling. You are more than welcome to shiver out at your bleak suburban grounds watching B-Grade park football in the wet, but this argument goes beyond English navel-gazing.

Bob You are asking me to keep an open mind but you yourself in your last para have shut the door - no evolution - your rugby world was created in its seven days and it appears that there it will stay. Brother - let us pray ...