Rugby gets its own 360 show on Fox Sports

Hi i am a self confessed rugby tragic and love everything about the game from playing, coaching and watching. I have a 8 year old son who proudly is following his dads path of enjoying this great game. I coach his under 9's team and get great enjoyment out of watching the boys grow and learn the game. What concerns me is that out of 17 players in my team and many others from the other teams only 1 or 2 kids know the name of any of the Australian players and could tell you which super rugby club they play for. However they could all give me a list of NRL players and their clubs. I try to encourage my boys to wear a footing jumper to training and the only Rugby jumper i see is my sons Brumbies jumper among a sea of NRL jumpers. I believe if we want to compete for player numbers we need to make watching the game and wearing your teams colours easier for our children. Does anyone have any ideas how to achieve this?

To the Rugby 360 Foxtel panel Why do the commentators avoid commenting on the degeneration of our game – the destruction of the shape of rugby by failure to insist on halfbacks putting the ball in straight – in the middle of the tunnel – on a line parallel to the cross field lines i.e. the halfway line the 22metre lines or the try lines? The scrum should be lined so that a line through from one number 8 to the opposing number 8 is parallel to the touch lines. Has the IRB, RUF and the ARU misdirected the referees not to police properly the laws involved or have they changed these laws without consulting the ordinary members of the local rugby unions. The unfortunate result is that coaches will instruct their teams to stand up in close defence when the other team is feeding the scrum where, with correct centre feeding the scrum gives both teams a chance of winning the ball and thus coaches would have their backs stand deeper and have more space to develop effective attacks. A scrum usually is called when a player makes a not deliberate mistake and many of us feel a penalty for scrum collapse is too harsh. Where deliberate cheating occurs a penalty is appropriate. Where props come over the top and push their opposites downwards they, the perpetrators, and not the victims, should be penalised. Often the thug is rewarded for being a thug. Players who only rest a finger on those in the ruck or scrum are offside and obstructive and should be penalised. I think it is still illegal to have four players in the front row! Some players are persistently on the opposition’s side of the ruck or scrum and even if they do not contact an opposition player, obstruct by closing off one side for the opposition halfback to pass. Tackling or interfering with an opposition player who is not in possession of the ball is still illegal and should be punished immediately after any notified advantage has ceased. We rugby lovers want these cheats penalised and/or removed from participating in rugby. We do not want the thugs and cheats to be applauded or rewarded. I have raised these issues in letters to the IRB, RFU and ARU. Not only have they failed to reply but have not had the courtesy to acknowledge receipt of my letters sent by B.R.Stanhope at 6/31 Belmont Rd, Mosman NSW 2088

I have watched the first few episodes and I'm underwhelmed. In my opinion, they've chosen the wrong two headliners. Marto and Kafe. A lot of people like Kafe for his 'technical analysis', I don't. I find him too 'high level' and 'washes' over things. He doesn't really give you much but the standard 'ability to do this, x-factor'.. great with the buzz words, but not too solid on ripping someone a new one when required or critiquing the game properly. He dissects parts, facets, but doesn't really bring about a decent solution (he highlights potential solutions, but doesn't concrete it in enough for me). Marto - well.. likeable rogue, but not my ideal person to highlight. Thank heavens they've piffed Sean Maloney. I quite liked McArdle, Eales and Horan. It was like having the host and two proper experts (not just former wallabies). In my opinion what we really need is a host and two experts who can give constructive tips, areas of improvement and even run 'master classes' on the show for young kids to learn. Take NZ.. I saw one segment and not sure if this is all the time, but Richie McCaw was on giving a breakdown masterclass.. now we can all take a punt and shot at RM for the way he does it but as a kid, you want to emulate your greats and RM gave a pretty solid demonstration with tips on how to beat the 'battle of the shoulders' and it was lovely to watch. Thought then.. hey we need this in Oz. Get a couple of props in, "this is how you scrum' almost like a little 3 min coaching segment.. tips from the master.. It doesn't have to be an Australian either.. just grab a positional expert who's one of the world best and give them some air time. Just a thought. I'll be tuning OUT of 360. It is just 'meh' in my opinion. Each to their own though.

Good show but they don't need that rediculous "ticker tape" style constant flow of information across the bottom of the screen. As bad as US news shows and distracting from what is being said.

why don't rugby360, discuss the real blight on our game, which is sub-standard refereeing? Neutral referees? The standard of rugby has far outstripped the standard of refereeing. And the fact that Angus Gardner was awarded a NH international is a joke

Greg Martin and Rod Kafer will be the hosts.... There lies the problem.. NO! NO! NO!

Peter Meares ?/

Just make sure we're clear. Rugby is not continuous. The game is in play 35' of the 80'. That means there is almost an hour of stoppages during the game.

You're totally missing the point about NFL. Its more than replays of live matches. I have an article on this, which hopefully is clearer to you. On the topic of replays, watch NFL closely. As soon as a play is over, the analysis and replay is immediately done. Time they have for swaps is not relevant. And yes, there is more time to do analysis, replays. But they do only 15min out of the 3 hour experience. Its not about quantity its about quality. 1 hour is for ads. 1 hour for shots of players, coaches, crowd mascot, cheerleaders Rugby has less time, but still has plenty of time. Time is a poor excuse for the production we get.

It's only in australia where this sort of boys club crap would be tolerated. The coverage in the UK wipes the floor with these peasants.

Yeah but you can only watch those videos if your a sky customer. I'm a virgin tv customer and have the sky sports tv package but can't access it now also I'm assuming the vids are much shorter then the usual 30 segment which the rugby club used to comprise off.

The Rugby club was changed to a lead in program. http://www.skysports.ie/watch/video/tv-shows/rugby-club

NFL isn't a continuous game like Rugby, has time outs, four 15 minute quarters, playing 'staff' swap over when defence changes to attack so much more time for over analysis, replays.

Kafe knows his stuff ,and I can forgive Marto most things purely for the support including the charity match for the ChCh earthquake victims . Would like to see Horan in there but happy not to see Phillbilly Kearns anywhere near it .

CGI will fix that ! Not Martos head though ,nothing can redeem that .

The rugby club is no longer aired on sky sports in the uk. Hasn't been on for over a year actually. BT sport is quite average at covering games too btw.

Rugby is a two hour show with 35 min playing time, less than 20 cameras, overtly biased commentators, less than 10 minutes of rewind type replays, and rugby league type statistical analysis NFL is a 3 hour show, with 11 min playing time, 40 cameras, overtly unbiased commentators, 15 minutes of highly analytical reviews of players, plays and teams including past games interviews, and detailed stats of players and teams And that's only match production. Coverage of players, player development, recruitment, coach analysis, tactical review is eons ahead of Rugby. There is no comparison in production values. Its an embarrassment. Bakkies your comment about the lack of time is a fallacy. It is a lame excuse and attitude I expect to hear from Rugby producers who inherited their approach from the amateur days of Rugby.

When I read the title of this article I was hoping they had some new talent but tbh the Fox rugby team is by far the worst bunch of commentators in the tier 1 nations by a long long LONG way. Sean, Marto and Phill are really quite awful. Im not just saying that because they are absurdly bias towards Australia but they dont even understand the rules of the game. I dont think Australia has the worst commentator in the world but as a team they are pretty bad. Rugby HQ is pretty ordinary and does nothing for unions image in Australia and 'The Cup Runnith Over' was horrible imo. Australia has good rugby brains but apart from Kafer, none are on Fox. Sure union is about 5th in Australia but in all seriousness, the commentary and coverage is far below 5th and is cringe-worthy.

Rugby doesn't have the down time due to frequent stoppages that the NFL has. They have for more time to go in to detail than Rugby pundits and production tools (in terms of aids) .

No, not Tim Sheridan.