Does English rugby have its head in the sand?

Ian, I'm very impressed with what Richards has done, it's a shame to see Jarvis go but I suppose that Evans is a more than capable replacement. The back low is looking a bit light in terms of experience, with the retirement of volley, hopefully Robshaw and Skinner can stay injury free. I'm a massive fan of the Quins back row and I just cannot fathom how Skinner did not even make the Saxons squad. I'm pleased Guest did, super player, as is Monye - underrated as a defender. It will be interesting to see how Quins cope without Brain though. Regarding Andrew I simply cannot moan enough about the man. He himself moaned for years about how English teams should develop young English talent as he was doing at Newcastle and then as soon as trouble set in he bought Mark Andrews and Britz to stave off relegation. He hid behind silly hyperbole and never managed anything with Newcastle and always propped up the table. Woodward recently said that around 2002/3 his coaching staff took a vote and voted Andrew to be the worst Director of Rugby around. I agree. He then decided to leave the coaching side for an admin based role. Fair enough, however he basically said that Ashton was safe in his job, lo and behold a few months later... I'm also flummoxed by how he managed to ignore Edwards. Edwards has publicly stated the way Andrew approached him, and the job he offered him, was shambolically amateur. Fair enough he didn't want to be in New Zealand but the man is a top ex player, an educated man too, and did not manage to work out that when in New Zealand basically just be quiet. Everyday he trotted out these silly press bytes that just aggravated the press and public. Also, according to Mike Tindall the backs only practised moves for half an hour in four weeks. Flabbergasting. The least Andrew could have done was stick with a team for two tests, i.e not dropping Brown. How can a bright fellow think that five changed will increase backline confidence and defensive continuity. He's a fool in a suit. I will say well done for the agreement though. I agree with you about Ashton, the young guns loved him and it's a shame that he would have to take the job in such circumstances. I hope he does.

Benjamin Being a Harlequins fan I am looking forward to Evans linking up with Care, Strettle, Jordan-Hall et al in the backs as these young guys will learn alot playing and training with him. The playing surface at the Stoop is excellent and encourages fast, open play. On Rob Andrew it was quite clear he did not enjoy being in charge in NZ and am sure he is only too happy to concentrate on the Elite programme which is big task. He was reponsible for the club/country agreement and the creation of the new Professional Game Board. I am prepared to give him more time as he has made two good recent appointments in Stuart Lancaster and Nigel Redman, and I only hope in spite of his treatment by the RFU that Ashton does take overall control of the game from U20's to the academy . He has proven that he has skills in bringing on younger players and changing their mindset; Cipriani, Haskell et al being prime examples.

Sluggy, I don't agree with limiting foreign imports. I think the majority of foreign players have been excellen acquisitions. I would actively encourage foreign imports, but obviously within reason. Lewis Moody notes that Josh Kronfield really sped up his game. I am sure there are examples of that in every club. Nick Evans for example seems an excellent buy, like Ibanez, David Lemi, even Joe Ward which all Kiwis seem to have missed in their poaching banter. Also I don't believe that every club should spend less time on conservative play. The coaches are not rejecting traditional English wares but developing a plan B. Frankly I'm all for both, but look at where conservatism got England in the World Cup Final. I don't think coaches are necessarily spending more time on the liberal arts either, I think the first proper crop of professional babies, if you will, are entering the professional arena more highly skilled than their predecessors, thus the coaches are having their hands forced. 3/4 Is highly optimistic on your part especialyl given that elite structure is the crucial point and it is amazing that you still have not rescinded your claim that it has been top stuff for Wales. Ian, Barry was a bizarre buy from Richards. Turner-Hall did play in the u20 World Cup though. Whilst you say the amateur days of administration are over in the UK, there is still a lot of amateur politicking. I imagine that is how Rob Andrew get and kept his new job.

Benjamin S Barry I am sorry to say is a classic case of where a SH import has not been a success. He is under pressure not only from Tosh Masson but Jordan-Hall, the U20 international, who would have played more games but for a serious injury mid season. Stuff happens I have no problem with Pommie bashing and alot of it is deserved, but sport in the UK generally is better run than even 5 years ago. The days of the happy amateur are numbered in administration and the direction of UK sport.

Ian Noble your last few posts are excellent & I hope Spiro & co read them . However in Australia pommy bashing as a sport is alive and well and I have to say there's a similar mentality in England about Australia in some ways - all in good fun of course - well most of it!

I have read this thread from the start and here we have the old claim that some how Pacific Islanders playing for NZ are in some way not bonafide NZers because they might adhere to various cultural traditions. This claim is at best insulting and at its worst overtly racist. It is frequently used by those in the nrothern hemisphere (where I live) to undemine NZ and Australian rugby and at the heart of this assertion is blinding ignorance. Benjamin your continued attempt to argue along these lines is disappointing and in the face of Jerry's reasoned discussion simply patonising. Moreover their seems to be some underlying assumption that in some way Samoans and Tongans who play for NZ have little option but to do so whilts the Mike Catts and Matt Stevens of this world are merely exercising free will. Oh and isn't it funny that those who are short even on knowledge of those who they claim have been usurped into playing for the ABs FEEL ABLE TO COMMENT! Oh and just a point of correction Michael Jones was born in Auckland to a Samoan mother and a Pakeha father from the South Island. So I read that as being both of European and Samoan decent: somehting he is very proud of. And if you have any doubts about his love of NZ then please read the following http://www.anewnz.org.nz/vision.asp?id=251 Nuf said

Benjamin, the answer to your question is you 3/4 agree with me. My original 4 line comment was: "‘When the RFU establishes control of the calendar, puts elite rugby on a provincial footing such as Ireland and now Wales have done, limits the number of foreign imports, and coaches at all levels emphasise the full range of skills instead of just mauling, setpieces and kicking, then after a few years the benefits will flow through to the England team who will be consistently good again.’" The calendar is happening, and you have told us (multiple times) that the last two (coaching skills and replacing imports) are happening. The only one you are actively disagreeing with is having an elite competition. Thats the problem with delivering an unstructured joycean stream of consciousness.

Hi Ian - yeah Tom Walkinshaw has actually done alot for Australian Touring Car racing over the years too... mind you, he's had very little credit in the mass media. Pretty sure he owns a large chunk of HSV.

... I would use Tosh Masson and Richard Thopre as the best examples because both have nondescript youth honours and yet managed to displace De Wet Barry and Haldane Luscombe in Masson's case, and Leguizamon and Phil Murphy in Thorpe's case. At Worcester, who were season-long relegation candidates, the u20 England player Miles Benjamin displaced Rico Gear and at Bristol Rob Higgit displaced Neil Brew and Ed Barnes was chosen over David Hill. That is not to negate the influence of certain imports; Blowers, Lam, Tuigimala, Pagel etc have all been super club players. Perhaps the youth crops in England are getting progressively better? From this point onward, with their increased finances, the clubs have the options of further investing into youth talent or purchasing South Africans who do not count as a non-EU player. One only has to look at Stade Francaise and how they have got progressively worse to see that this is not a long-term option. John O'Neill has long been prone to stirring, I can't see the reason for his outburst. That the professional chain is developing in England is reflected by the meetings Sanzar have been undertaking, looking to alter the Super 14 and Tri-Nations. O'Neill said that all details should be made public by the end of September. Plans are to include the US in the new Super competition.

Spot on from Ian. The majority of Guinness clubs are vesting more time and effort into young English players. I would use Tosh Masson and R

Looking back over some of the postings I would like to make one or two observations. My father in law was born in Western Samoa because his father was a doctor practising in the Samoan islands, he holds a NZ passport. All my Australian cousins in Melbourne and NSW have dual nationality, retaining their British passports, although the younger ones have been born in Aus. It is very handy for them as travelling through Europe they can use the EU channels. The point I am making is how important is nationality in the modern era, globalisation has blurred the boundaries and freedom of movement has allowed easy access throughout the world. Provided players meet the current rules and regulations they can choose who they play for at international level. The attraction of financial rewards playing in the NH will continue the migration of players from all parts of the world. Frankly I believe it has been a good thing not only because many of the imported players have filled a gap in English rugby (many English players would not take the risk of playing professional rugby because of poor financial rewards preferring to stay amateur and pursue a career away from rugby) but also they have added variety and interest to the English club game, which has not only sold the game to wider audience but has also raised standards. However, I don’t believe the import of playerts will continue to same extent because in England as the elite development programme gains momentum, the case for English clubs to employ imports reduces as more English professional players are produced through the academies and scouting structures, aided of course by the better financial rewards. Some clubs such as Harlequins have started the transition with 70% of their first XV squad during last season being English qualified, average age of 23/24. People tend to forget that again England was slow off the mark, Rob Andrew was the first appointee as Head of Elite Rugby and he has been in the post for just 18/24 months. The embryonic academy structure was put in place probably 5/6 years ago, when Brian Ashton was appointed and he had players such as Cipriani, Haskell, and Rees under his tutelage in Bath from the age of 15/16. It is not surprising, in the meantime that the clubs who are the backbone of the professional game had to survive and compete, and imports have helped that transition as they could not wait for the English registered players to come through I know there has been comment about the NH clubs refusing to release PI players for SH internationals, but the problem is that the players have taken the “silver shilling” and are contracted to those clubs. Unless the PI islands can guarantee a reasonable living for the professional player or they are in a position to compensate the clubs then I can not see how the situation will change. The clubs are not the villains, ask the players, it is a competitive world and if they choose to take a decent financial package they can not expect to be a free agent. Looking forward, rugby is being sold very aggressively in England. Finding role models who are prepared to promote the game can play an important part. So last week Cipriani with broken ankle and on crutches opened the London Youth Games, 3000 primary schools kids taking part, TV and wider media coverage, great PR for rugby. Increasing number of females playing the game, again great PR as it overcomes the notion that rugby is a dangerous sport, which again has been a problem in the past with some parents, particularly those who have been brought up with no rugby background; IRB stat just under 60K registered female rugby players in England. I believe the future is looking brighter for English rugby, professional club rugby is flourishing, more English players are prepared to become professional as the financial rewards improve, the new structures should allow the England national squads more time together with more consistency of selection, the game is growing at grassroots, there is increasing pressure for more coverage on FTA (BBC at present only televise the 6N’s and the EDF Anglo Welsh cup). It will take time and perhaps RWC2011 may be too early, as that seems to be the yardstick used to judge the success of rugby in any country. To say that English rugby has its head in the sand is nonsense and I am sure O’Neill and Trew are looking on enviously at the changes in English rugby across the board and the growth of the game, regardless of indifferent international performances.

Sluggy, true, my error. Typo. I do realise that. However you still haven't explained why provincialism has been beneficial for Wales or the other Celtic nations? How peculiar. I'm going to continue on my earlier post because your ravings about Moffet and provincialism irks me like pants laced with deep heat. Moffet helped Wales, belatedly, to acclimatise to proffesionalism. That much is true. Beyond that having provinces does not suit a country like Wales. Firstly I don't think you understand Northern Hemisphere culture. The provinces have separated communities and in the case of the Newport Gwent Dragons moulded together two areas, which as we have seen in South Africa is not that beneficial. That is why attendances are down in Wales. The Celtic league, as I have already said has no main TV contract and has a small fanbase. Compare that to the Guinness Premiership and the Super and Top 14. Furthermore the players cannot be drafted like in New Zealand, they have to be transferred and due to the financial imbalances the Dragons are laggind badly behind the others. However despite this lagging the others have not even achieved anything despite the player imbalances. Leinster won the last Celtic league at a canter. The other problem for Wales is also a problem for Australia, having a small player base is good if the players are but conversely bad if they are not. Thus Wales had to resort to playing two blindside flankers at no.7 on the trip to South Africa. Wales also lack good hookers, tighthead props and inside centres. There is little player development occurring because the Celtic league is so weak and the coaches have ressorted to bringing in various foreign players. That they won the Grand Slam is irrelevant and has nothing to do with provincialism. Wales used the same players under the Jenkins regime and came 5th or 6th (I forget) in the Six Nations - only scoring a last game victory over England in Cardiff, and did not even make the Quarter Finals of the World Cup. Is that a coincidence? No, it is down to coaching. If we were to talk of the two Scottish teams what success have they had? None. If we were to talk of Irish teams we would talk of Munster whose backline contains Mafi, Tipoki and Howlett. How will that help the national team? I still am confused why you would mention Ulster who have been mediocre for a decade. They are hardly a shining example of provinces. Equally what success has the national team experienced despite having players of the quality of; O'Gara, O'Driscoll, D'Arcy, Murphy, O'Connell, O'Callaghan and Leamy? You also glossed over relegation as a red herring which is absolutely absurd because it is what separates provinces from teams. That the Guinness Premiership went down to the final weekend to confirm league placings illustrates what an exciting league it is. It put pressure on the players and the coaches, something that is absent in the Celtic league. That develops test players and that is why English teams dominated the European knock out rounds. Forgive me for being glib but it is also why England acclimatised during the last World Cup and other teams... ahem... did not. Also I imagine that the English team looked unfit because the majority of the players have been involved in tremendously long seasons. The World Cup revealed that ther was no gulf in fitness and I doubt in 9 months that all of a sudden the English team have lost their fitness. Out of interest does anybody else agree with Sluggy?

Benjamin, you don't know your facts, it was the English clubs that withdrew in 1998/9, and Ulster defeated Toulouse (twice), Stade Francais and Colomeirs on their way to the trophy.

Sluggy, that is an oafish response. I do not even mention Ulster because it highlights that they do not function within an elite game. Thus that Celtic elite structure does not work. Also when Ulster won the Heineken there were no French teams in it. The Celtic League has 10 teams in it and the only success is from Munster. What does that reflect? Regarding player fitness the Welsh fitness was noted as being very poor by Gatland and was only improved in the weeks prior to the South African tour during a trip to Poland. Also where is the squad depth? Provincialism is the red herring. Look at the problems Australia rare having with their powder puff pack. Also bearing in mind that Cardiff and the Ospreys have the Welsh team divided basically, you explain why they haven't been successful. You explain to me why Wales were so bad under Jenkins and so bad after Ruddock lost. Explain that to me. You haven't because you can't. I doubt it's coincidence given how Gatland turned Wasps around. You did not make one answer in your weak response. Just appalling. I'd be intrigued to know what Premiership games you watched because Gloucester, Bath, Sale, Wasps, Harlequins and London Irish were playing a far more liberal and exciting game than any of the guff the Aussie Super 14 teams knocked out.

Matta Yep Tom Walkinshaw is from motor racing and has a reputation for being a tough negotiator. He is also Chairman of Gloucester Rugby. Over the years is has been very outspoken about the RFU and there lack of initiative in grasping the nettle on the professional game. With him on this board it will certtainly be lively with Peter Wheeler as his sidekick. Personally I am intrigued that MJ should part of his team stepping away from his employers the RFU. There is an alot to be done, particularly as an example both Gloucester and Leicester have invested heavily in academies and they will want to see results. By the way one positive result from their initial meeting, they have moved the GP final so as not to clash with the start of the Lions tour. Looking forward to a few fireworks from Walkinshaw.

hey Ian is that Tom Walkinshaw of Tom Walkinshaw racing?

oh how very british..to the queen ol' chap.

Just a quick update on the Professional Game Board which met recently for the first time, 13 years after the game went professional in 1995. For clarification the board comprises of the following people It's Chairman is Martyn Thomas, the Chairman of the RFU Management Board. There are four RFU representatives: RFU Chief Executive, Francis Baron, Elite Rugby Director Rob Andrew, RFU Council member and former England, Harlequins and British & Irish Lions prop Jason Leonard and RFU Council member and former England captain, John Spencer. The Guinness Premiership clubs are represented by Tom Walkinshaw, Chairman of Premier Rugby Ltd (PRL), Mark McCafferty, Chief Executive of PRL, Leicester Tigers Chief Executive, Peter Wheeler and England Team Manager Martin Johnson.. The Professional Rugby Players’ Association (PRA) is represented by its Chairman, David Barnes and Chief Executive, Damian Hopley. Geoff Cooke OBE, Executive Director of First Division Rugby represents FDR. In the past, English rugby has found it difficult to understand and get to grips with the professional game. Tom Walkinshaw, incidently a Scot, and Peter Wheeler are renowned as being people who take no prisoners and hopefully this board will move the professional game and the new club/country agreement forward. The balance between the success of PRL and the commitment to the England team is a difficult balance and I am sure there will be points of conflict, but hopefully the PGB can deal with issues as they arise. I suspect among other items for discussion will be the alteration of the playing calendar to avoid a clash between the start of the Lions tour to SA and the GP Final. It is presently programmed to be on the day the Lions depart for SA. Looking at the SH tours at the end of the NH season. How to give more game time to academy and the increasing number of young players being produced by the elite player development programme? . Will they need to look at the relegation/promotion issue from the GP as there is an urgent need for a number of clubs to invest heavily in their facilities and increase capacities, and relegation can have an adverse impact on income projections? What is the right balance between English qualified players and those from elsewhere in Europe and the SH? The rugby academies in England are now starting to bring through the first graduates into the England set up,. Cipriani, Haskell, Rees, Naraway, Care et al. These young players have made a commitment to professional rugby and they need to see career progression and the opportunity to continue to earn a reasonable living. Their outlook is different from players such as Dallagio, Catt etc who started their careers in the amateur era, particularly as many became professional players from an early age of 18/19. The problem is that there are only a limited number of playing slots available and my club Harlequins loan out some of these younger players to First Division clubs to gain experience. Perhaps there should be a second tier GP league for these up and coming players. Will a limit on the number of foreign players help their development? The future of the England team is in their hands and it will be interesting to see if this Board can really overcome the problems that have bedevilled English rugby for the last few years.

Benjamin, a lot of your "diatribe" has nothing to do with what I said originally. And your saying it repeatedly at great length does not make it correct. Brevity and clarity: "No, they don’t have to enter into contracts but they have and so do not have the opportunity for change at this point. " GP agreement has now been changed to accomodate an embryonic national team timetable and you switch your argument from the GP to the HC mid stream. The HC contract will run out in time. "Elite - blah blah blah relegation ...." You keep talking about relegation. Red herring. "I don’t mention Ulster because why should I? " Because they won the HEC in 1998-99. "Regarding player fitness a fan can never comment on such a topic because they aren’t aware of individual stats. " Thank you for that oracular pronouncement. As a former player,coach, and now fan I have a different view - I can look at a player and the objective physical signs are there if you know how to read them. "The Premiership, apart from Newcastle and last season - Leeds, has teams willing to throw the ball about and play an up-tempo brand. ,,," We disagree, my observations of the premiership were of slow paced, set piece, maul and kick "dross". Similar to the dross the 6N teams usually serve up. France and Ireland occasionally excepted. "David Moffet didn’t win Wales the Grand Slam, ..." You queried my mentioning Wales as an example of a national team being improved by having a provincial, not club, competition underpinning it. A higher standard domestic competetion generally raisng skill levels, and standards including fitness levels, to the benefit of the national side.You have now pointed out it wasn't the CEO, and it wasn't the players, and you don't think it was the flow on effect of the reorganisation of the elite competition. So in your view it must have been the coach who did it. I don't think so and I don't think I'm Robinson Crusoe. And that is my last message on the subject.

Homer, if you had followed the conversation you would have noted that I had tried to maintain the thread of discussion. I would willingly discuss Martin Johnson.