Very valid points, Hawko. Remember when Spiro used to write quite analytical articles? I used to look forward to reading him. I wish he’d get back to displaying his craftsmanship and knowledge of our game.

The most interesting part of your Monday diatribes, Spiro, is how you will work in your obligatory dig at Tom Carter.

Thank you for not disappointing.

I was at the game where Nicky died. It was at the Wollongong showground where St George now play their Illawarra games. It was the Grand Final of the Illawarra competition played on October 7, 1984. As I remember it Nicky was one of a number of Kiwis who had been brought over to play for Port Kembla who had a wealthy sponsor determined to buy a premiership.

According to a 2008 report on the stuff.co.nz website his brother stated that he had been prone to concussion and had suffered side-effects of this prior to his death.

Spiro said:

“The fact that none of Carter’s ‘tackles’ actually registered to viewers, or to this viewer, means as far as I’m concerned, that they were tackles in name only.”

None of 15 successful tackles registered with you or with “viewers”? Says it all really.

“Outside centre Rob Horne, starved with attacking ball by the plodder Carter, made a series of massive tackles to keep the Crusaders onslaught at bay. But when he went off, the only two tacklers in the side were now on the sidelines.”

What absolute rubbish, Spiro. Foxsport stats for the match show the “massive tackling” Horne made 6 tackles and missed 4.By contrast,”the plodder Carter”, up against the biggest centre pairing in the competition, made 15 tackles and missed none. So much for “the only two tacklers in the side” being on the sidelines.

Apart fom the bald and unsubstantiated statement, “The fade-out is not fitness, it’s tactical”, none of the comments addresses my contention that the Wallabies under Robbie Deans are losing a disproportionate number of second halves because of inappropriate physical conditioning.

Correction. The fourth last sentence should read:

Here we see that the Wallabies won an impressive 6 out of 8 first halves, but lost 7 out of 8 second halves and 7 out of 8 matches!

An excellent article. I agree that it is more than time that officialdom recognised the courage and humanity of these young men who were prepared to sacrifice their rugby careers on an issue of principle.

“there is far too much Sydney Uni. influence in the Waratahs … Dean Mumm as Captain will fix most of the issues.”

Something of a logical disjunct?

Jimmy stated, “John O’Neill, in the last 2 years, has repeatedly quoted that he planned to kickstart the national rugby competition again in 2011.”

Before we waste valuable time on discussing yet another illogical and unrealistic prescription for the Resurrection of the ARC, Jimmy, would you mind providing evidence of one instance where O’Neill has said that “he planned to kickstart the national rugby competition again in 2011”?

Just one will do, don’t bother detailing all of them.

2011, eh? The same year in which there will be both a World Cup and the introduction of an expanded and fundamentally restructured Super competition. Not to speak of several of the existing Australian franchises being on life support.

I have never been a particular wrap for JO’N, but I haven’t previously regarded him as feeble minded.

Over to you, Jimmy.

I think you overestimate the number of players available through the academy system, Rickety. The franchises have only a very limited pool of players on professional academy contracts. There are a greater number who are part of the broader academy system but they are paid only a couple of thousand dollars per year.

In order to meet their A or second team fixture commitments, the Waratahs, Brumbies and Reds already have to borrow club players. Increase the number of fixtures more than threefold and the logistical task becomes almost insuperable. That’s without taking account of the fact that you propose to restrict the competition to Under 25s.

As for your projected competition providing “more incentive for spectators to attend matches”, any possibility of this being so is negated by the fact that lead-up matches have to finish so long before the main fixture so that all the nonsense of main game players and their hordes of hangers-on wandering the field and pre-game blaring “entertainment” can take place.

Thanks, El.

By coincidence I bumped into Jim McKay yesterday. He was down in Sydney for a class in his Masters degree in sports coaching.

He discussed the game plan the Reds used against the Bulls. He is a very modest and likeable bloke.

My observation is that the coaches with non-inflated egos are usually the deepest thinkers about our game.

I’ll probably find myself in my customary situation of being out of step with everyone else, but I have a revolutionary suggestion with respect to Law changes:

The IRB should resolve to revisit and consider changes to the Laws no more often than once a decade and preferably less often.

The advantage of leaving the Laws unchanged is it gives the game a chance to evolve. Over time enterprising coaches and players work out strategies to exploit the Laws. In response referees adjust their interpretations of the Laws to try to ensure a fair contest.

Darwinian principles ensure that successful strategies are emulated and adopted widely. This in turn leads to the development and implementation of counter strategies. Thus there are ongoing cycles of innovation and counter-innovation.

By contrast, constant experimentation and adjustments to the Laws distort this evolutionary process. The development of our game is stifled because coaches and players no sooner adjust to one set of Laws than they are faced with another edition.

Law changes are invariably decided by committees, a notoriously inefficient means of reaching useful decisions but a very effective way of stifling creative thought.

In rugby, due to the number and complexity of the laws, compounded by periodic reinterpretations of them, there is an almost universal preoccupation with the decisions of referees.

I have found that the best way to avoid stressing over such matters is to regard the referee as an RDG or Random Decision Generator, an entity that is outside the control of the players, coaches and most definitely the spectators.

So my advice is to ignore the RDG and watch the rugby. It’s better for the blood pressure.

Sheek, thank you for your comments on the “unjustified personal attack”. I am old enough and ugly enough not to be bothered by these things, which often tell you more about the attacker than the attackee.

This was certainly the case in the present instance, where the anonymous poster launched a nasty raced-based slur on someone who has absolutely nothing to do with discussions on this site. Fortunately in our present society, such outbursts happen so rarely as to occasion astonishment as well as disgust.

Further up the page you asked: “Quick question, how much development input did SU have into those 24 players since most of them would have come to SU having been given the basics at some private or high school & before that, primary school?”

Firstly, almost all players coming into any senior club will have learnt the basics of rugby at a school and/or a junior rugby club. In many cases district-based senior clubs claim the credit for developing particular players when the real work has been done by the largely unrecognised volunteer coaches and officials at a local junior club with minimal real input from their nominal parent body. Such is human nature.

When we talk to potential players with their parents there are extremely few who mention any attachment to a district-based club. Those that have strong attachments quite often decide to remain there, which is fair enough.

Secondly, the question of how much development input comes from Sydney University. A very talented young school leaver coming to the club is offered the following:

1. A full-time Colts Technical Director who coordinates the activities of the Colts’ coaches in each of the three grades as well as being Head Coach of First Colts. He works in close liaison with the full-time coaches in Grade.

2. Players’ weekly game involvements are extracted using state-of-the-art game-analysis software which is then used for personal video sessions with the CTD and follow-up personal review using the DVD which he is given.

3. A weekly written assessment of a player’s strengths and weaknesses as displayed in the previous game.

4. Access to a serious grunt gymnasium which has considerably more equipment relevant to rugby strength training than any of the Australian Super franchises.

5. Strength and sprint training supervised by full-time strength and conditioning coaches. The head S & C is widely regarded as one of the top practitioners in Australia, irrespective of the sport. The S & C coaches do a lot of individual or small group sessions, particularly in rehab situations.

6. On-site access to sports medicine practitioners, physios, dietitians and sports psychologists.

7. Transfer from Colts to Grade determined by the player’s stage of development and his own preferences, rather than by him being badgered to move up prematurely in order to fill a coach’s desperate need to fill a gap.

Most importantly, a culture has developed among the players themselves where they routinely train eleven months of the year, doing three to four heavy weights sessions per week in the off-season followed by two to three during the season, right up to the finals. In addition there are regular sprint sessions throughout the off-season which also continue through the playing season. How does that compare with most district-based clubs?

Sheek, you are always banging on about there being no tribalism at Sydney Uni. Try telling that to the players who routinely knock back serious money from district-based clubs. Or why not go and ask those players who have left Uni whether the Club played any significant role in their development.

And this is the system that you are continually demanding should be totally dismantled.

“Quick question” It’s for you this time – who do you see as being both willing and capable to fill the rugby development void left by Sydney University redirecting its resources into other sports?

I was referring, of course, to 24 First Grade starting players in the Shute Shield.

The Fruit Loop Proposal gets yet another run!

“Sydney University has its place, but in suburban rugby, not premier rugby.”

Why? Apparently because of one decision taken 110 years ago!

“In 1900, the then Metropolitan Rugby Union introduced the district system, exempting Sydney University to majority approval …”

So a Club whose world class development system has produced 12 of the Australian Super 14 players this weekend plus 24 of the starting players in today’s round of the Shute Shield is to be demoted to Subbies.

I know it seems that Australian rugby often seems to have a collective death wish, but if you really want to make a laughing stock of the code you have the template in front of you.

Russ, I have posted this information before, but since you’ve just lobbed on this site let me bring you up to date about ” the club that has no juniors”. This is from the Juniors Report in the Sydney University Football Club Annual Report 2009:

“Off the field this season there were two standout events that must be noted; firstly Ray Hudd took on the role as Juniors Coaching Coordinator and in the pre season for 2009 the Junior EDS [Elite Development Squad] was introduced under the management of Nick Ryan [Colts Technical Director] and Greg Mumm [Director of Rugby].

“Ray has been instrumental in raising the standard of coaching and in his creative thinking on ideas to raise player stocks and ability. Ray also steered his under 16’s team to that impressive State Championship victory as Head Coach. The Junior EDS program provided valuable insight into SUFC culture and the professionalism which drives the club at higher levels. This pre-season program will be an ongoing part of our Juniors/Seniors structure into the future.

“Recruiting the right calibre of coach is a challenge in rugby and no less in Juniors. So we were extremely pleased to secure Ray Hudd, Joel Rivers, Dane Cole-Clark and James Godfrey for the 16’s, the indomitable Charles Carter and Wade Gudgeon for the 15’s and Sam Williamson and Carl Tui for the 13’s.

“Once again the Juniors gained from the contributions from senior players who gave their time and expertise at coaching sessions. These included Tom Carter, Luke Burgess, John Morellato, Alex Kanaar and of course Nick Ryan and Greg Mumm.

“This season we also took on the responsibility of hosting both the Under 16 and Under 17 State Championships at the University.”

Thanks for the correction, Ora.

I blame Murdoch. Giving the franchises non geographic names, although I obviously should have associaed Cape Town with the Stormers.

They are fourth rather than equal third, bennalong, on points difference, a factor that may be vital at season end.

Where there are byes, competition organisers frequently allot points for the bye precisely to prevent the anomaly of what we have now, the Waratahs appearing to be on top when they still have a week to sit out and earn no points.

And four points rather than five for the bye as it is rare for teams to pick up the four-try bonus.

I hope that clarifies the logic.

You may well be right about the Blues, Peter. They actually have a run of four games against bottom-5 teams: Force at home; and Sharks, Cheetahs and Lions away.

Oops! I have just realised that I have totally omitted Week 14. It illustrates the perils of getting up in the middle of the night to put together a complex article.

As it happens I left out the most critical week with eight of the nine top teams having key matches.

Just to update, in Week 14:

The Bulls play the Stormers at home.

The Crusaders play the Brumbies at home.

The Waratahs play the Hurricanes at home.

And finally, the Blues play the Chiefs at home.

What I intend to do is to update the analysis on a weekly basis. The next two weeks may provide some real clarity to a situation which currently has a myriad of permutations.

Couldn’t agree more, Rickety.

Midfielder, touch rugby is a variant of rugby league. Its links to rugby union are extremely tenuous. Further, as a sport it demands aerobic fitness whereas rugby is very clearly anaerobic.

I certainly see no logical progression from touch to Rugby Sevens to 15-man Rugby

Tighthead, let me bring you up to date about ” the club that has no juniors”. This is from the Juniors Report in the Sydney University Football Club Annual Report 2009:

“Off the field this season there were two standout events that must be noted; firstly Ray Hudd took on the role as Juniors Coaching Coordinator and in the pre season for 2009 the Junior EDS [Elite Development Squad] was introduced under the management of Nick Ryan [Colts Technical Director] and Greg Mumm [Director of Rugby].

“Ray has been instrumental in raising the standard of coaching and in his creative thinking on ideas to raise player stocks and ability. Ray also steered his under 16’s team to that impressive State Championship victory as Head Coach. The Junior EDS program provided valuable insight into SUFC culture and the professionalism which drives the club at higher levels. This pre-season program will be an ongoing part of our Juniors/Seniors structure into the future.

“Recruiting the right calibre of coach is a challenge in rugby and no less in Juniors. So we were extremely pleased to secure Ray Hudd, Joel Rivers, Dane Cole-Clark and James Godfrey for the 16’s, the indomitable Charles Carter and Wade Gudgeon for the 15’s and Sam Williamson and Carl Tui for the 13’s.

“Once again the Juniors gained from the contributions from senior players who gave their time and expertise at coaching sessions. These included Tom Carter [*Red alert for the Carter haters*], Luke Burgess, John Morellato, Alex Kanaar and of course Nick Ryan and Greg Mumm.

“This season we also took on the responsibility of hosting both the Under 16 and Under 17 State Championships at the University.”