For once in a lifetime SBW has said something really intelligent. I was shocked to read it first and had to pinch myself and re read it a few times. I’m happy to say for the first time ever I agree with all that SBW has said. It has got to be all that time as a commentator, something must have got through from mixing with some good rugby players like Merts etc who are commentating nowdays

I understand to a point where lots of old blokes that have been around the ridges get mentioned. But why, I ask. Why do we have to go for blokes that are 50 and 60 years old, they played when the rules of the game were vastly different to what it is today. The game has evolved so why do not we evolve with coaches. Why are we still talking up blokes that are 50 and 60 years old? My opinion is to get a coach that can relate to the game of rugby as it is today. My preference is for that to be Larkham and for Gilmore to be his assistant. And by all means have a coach to specialise in scrum, maul and lineout, but that should be all of the assistant that is needed. The head coach and his assistant should know everything else. If they don’t they should not be coaching. IMO it is really confusing for players to have about 6 to 8 coaches for the team. The message is so muddled between all of the coaches that the players get confused then it all stuffs up. Perfect example was the recent WC with Jones and his team of coaches.

I have no problem with the selections of Schmidt and Horne in their respective roles But the comment of bringing Nucifora in as a consultant is over kill. How many more people do you need to coach a team and do a job. What’s with the crowding of top positions. Too many cooks spoil the broth. It also dilutes the message. It’s like Jones having ten people to coach the Wallabies in the WC, look at the result!!!!! It would seem that in this modern day you have to have a coach for each position on the field, one for defence, another for attack, and so it goes. You would get a lot better performance if the message was clear from one coach, with maybe an assistant to help with the drills. I would have Nucifora in a heartbeat if he was hired to do Horne’s job but not as a consultant to Horne etc.

Could not agree more with your dissertation, it says exactly what Rugby needs to day. There are so many penalties that have come into our game. Like the knock on when you try to intercept a ball and it is ruled a deliberate knock down and then draws a penalty. Just play the knock on and be done with it. There is so much wasted time in a game of rugby its like watching grass grow, like watching test cricket. It takes nearly 3 to 4 minutes to set a scrum or a line out, I mean how difficult is this. back a while ago it took max 30 to 40 seconds to set a scrum. If you don’t believe me have a look at rugby test matches that were played in the 70s. Line outs were the same even the winger sometimes threw into the line out. We introduced all these pedantic rules and regulations but all its done is make the game less appealing and like watching paint dry. Streamline the penalties and only allow the TMO to concentrate on tries and foul play.

IMO he should stay were he is for the near future and enjoy his sojourn coaching a good side. The learning curve will be good for him and his future. I have an opinion that Larkham should be the Wallabies coach with Gilmore the Aus A side coach his assistant. Blades could be the scrum coach and then have a team manager. That to me is enough coaches to coach the national side Too many coaches muddies the message that the head coach is sending and this leads to confusion within the team.

Piru you have encapsulated the nub of the problem. I do not agree with the criticism of refs but at some times some refs want to be bigger than the game. However there is so much latitude in the rules of the game so that the interpretations are sometimes ambiguous to say the least. Rugby needs to clear up the laws of the game to simplify them so that we are all on the same page. The day they took away rucking was the day that the rucks became a complete mess. But international rugby has not worked to simplify the rules around the ruck, so that one refs opinion is so different to another, from game to game. It is confusing for spectators and players There needs to be reform in this area to clarify the decisions made by the refs so that we as spectators understand what and why the decision was made. This may assist with the problem of refs being badly criticised

The three that played before Lote, Wendall and Matt were well known really good experienced league players. They bought with them a great interest to see if they could convert to rugby. They made a success of it and went on to play some great rugby. Because of their status in league they put bums on seats and paid for themselves in tickets sales, so the investment in them was warranted. The bonus was that they performed very well and contributed to the success of the Wallabies and their club sides. Now we have a young man that is a good club player (that is all) being paid a large amount just on spec. He is not a SOO champion and has achieved a good level at his club but that’s all. Therein lies the difference in him to them. I do not think that heaps of people are going to pay overs to see if he does OK. Therefor he either has to be a standout super star to recoup the outlay or it will be a financial failure. Enormous pressure to be under even before you play. IMO he should spend some time at the Tahs to learn first before we evaluate him and not put him in the Wallabies tour side on spec

After reading this I have to say I’m with Johnson. Warner does not deserve to be lauded as a great due to his involvement in the sandpaper episode, As someone said you cannot be a great if you are involved in dubious actions that influenced the game unlawfully. And another problem I have with cricket is the temerity of the captain Pat Cummings to complain about the sponsorship of Australian test cricket side. I asked the question then, if you don’t agree with the sponsorship don’t accept it or don’t play that would solve the problem. I actually have not watched test cricket since then. Where do these woke people get off complaining about getting money to play a game for a living. Maybe they should try and make a living in the real world like some of us. I do watch the BBL and enjoy the bash. The women are just as enjoyable to watch in this format.

Having read this article I have no problem with some of the coaches mentioned they all have credentials that would allow them to coach the Wallabies. However I wonder why there is this perchance to have so many coaches to coach a team. Why is it that we have to have a specialist for each position. It’s like we have 15 men on the field and 10 in the coaching box. Way too many coaches that mar the message. What is wrong with having a head coach that overseas all, a specialist forward coach for scrums and mauls and lineouts and maybe a kicking coach to be part time. If you have got to the level as a coach of this experience you generally know how to run a backline, how to show a scrum half how to pass and a flyhalf how to kick. and then you should know about running lines etc. Back a while ago we used to have a head coach, maybe an assistant and a team manager, and we won a lot of games, way more than we do now

Check should stay with the Argies they did well under him and Contepomi is the heir apparent and that as it should be. Another 12 months would see them consolidate their improvement and then Check can retire gracefully to let Contepomi take the helm. The Argies are on the improve and they will only get better with time

I agree that speed is essentially one of the most important ingredients for 7s. However if you do not have people that can do the tough work up the middle you are never going to give your speed men room to move out wide. That is why I think the transition of Hooper to 7s is a very astute move. He is an excellent pilferer of the ball and has a turn of pace and a step that was lauded in 15s. If he can bring a modicum of this to 7s he will be a godsend for the team and for the speed men out wide waiting for his pass. Speed men need room to move and if you get that right along with defence you will be successful at 7s

Your comment has a lot of sense in that I agree with all that you have stated. The conference system is a Do Do and always has been. I like the idea of NZ players playing for Aus Teams and vise versa for the Aus players. The comp would then become an equal competition and would be so much more entertaining. There then could be the avenue of creating a look alike SOO competition at the end or during the season. I know that this would be a copy of League but if they do it successfully, why could we not copy them and be successful at it

An article that is so welcome in this current age. It is an article that should be first and foremost on every rugby blog. It has taken me back to the 70s when this used to occur regularly. You could ring the QRU and ask for a few stars to come out and meet and great at a young players day and they would send quite a few reds and wallabies out without any bother. Then it got to be, Oh no we cant risk them they might get injured etc and all other reasons. They might send out a few unknown young blokes to appease the masses, but you were not allowed to get the stars, and that has continued all through the 90s etc and then on further into 20s. I’m so glad that the Force are getting back to what rugby actually was, a game for all. Lets hope that this has a follow on effect and the other states learn from this. We need to engage the whole of community not just a selection of it. We need to include all the state schools not just the GPS schools. Rugby is a game for all shapes and sizes and for all types of people. Maybe this is moment in time that we are all waiting for. The turning of the tide to see the resurgence of rugby as a national sport

On the subject of Concussion. I have experienced numerous concussions in my life as early as 13 years old being knocked out at school, loosing that day and the next to oblivion, then when I was 17, I spent 23 hours in a coma in hospital after a head kicking. and then multiple times in the boxing ring being knocked out. Luckily I have not had any lasting effects and I am now 78 years young. However on the other side of the coin I witnessed the ultimate result for concussion one day at a Rugby match in lower grades. I watched a player get tackled quite innocuously and go to ground he didn’t move, we ran out and stretched him off and he was lying on the front apron of the club and went into a death rattle and died on the spot there and then. You see he had been tackled the week earlier in a match and had been knocked out but recovered, or seemly he did. The problem was that he had sustained a brain embolism in the first instance and didn’t know and when he got tackled the next week it burst and he died instantly. This was all before anyone was concerned about concussion (mid 70s) This was rather devastating to me as I could not revive him and it will stay with me for my life time. So even though I loved playing contact sport all my life there is a duty of care that should be addressed in regard to concussion. I realise that I’m one of the lucky ones, however there are many that are not near as lucky as me

On the subject of coaching the Wallabies. Why are we obsessed with overseas coaches when we have home grown coaches here in Australia that have a good record. I refer to Larkham and Gilmore. Obviously we could employ a Forwards coach and we have a few here in Aus that have credentials. This would take the Wallabies on a new era of youth and experience, and that is what is wanted. By all means have a high performance director like Nucifora and then we would be set for the long term up to the next world cup. I know that there will be lots who do not agree with my pick but IMO it’s as good as any other opinion. So my set up would be Larkham as head Gilmore his assistant with a specialised forward coach that would be all that is necessary. Sometimes we overload the coaching with far too many and then the directive gets muddled and the message is not the same. This would be my favoured pick

Although he is a very excitable ref and sometimes bewilders me with some of his decisions he is absolutely right on the spot with his remarks on this subject. We are all fallible and from time to time we all make mistakes. Players, coaches, refs, administrators. (as just revealed). The only thing that sometimes troubles me is that most refs learn reffing lower grades or youngsters. And that in itself creates a problem, in that both the players and the ref are learning at the same time. It would be so much better if we designated a experienced ref to ref youngsters and some lower grades so that players could learn from them and be better at understanding the game. But it is probably not going to happen in that we want the experienced ref to ref the top players. I used to coach/manage at Wests Rugby Qld in the 70s and 80s and there was a very experienced ref around at the time who explained every decision he made, some players were annoyed but there were a lot of players who learnt so much from this type of reffing. I learnt so much listening to him to then in turn convey it to our players during training and for future use in coaching in years to come

After reading all this, perhaps a Queensland takeover may be in the best interests of Rugby in Australia. After all it has been in the control of NSW since inception and that in recent times has not turned out too well. So maybe the Ashgrove old boy may be the panacea that rugby needs. I know both the Herbert boys and they are good operators. So lets get behind Dan and see what he produces over the next 12 months. Along with Waugh I think they will make a good team and make some good decisions for the good of rugby

The Sualii deal was in hindsight rather silly to the extreme. I know when they had sailor and Rogers transfer over for some dollars they did pack stadiums for the reason to see how they performed and it was successful. However sailor and Rogers were standout performers at the top of their game and were standout NRL players at rep level etc. This young bloke is not at that level, he may be one day but he is a good young player, that’s all, he is not an icon yet and will not draw crowds to matches. The deal was silly in its extreme, to pay that much for a young man that is still learning the game is just lunacy. I have confidence in Herbert and Waugh to get Rugby on to the right track

This is the perfect format for Hooper to go to. His stamina and his skill set are perfectly suited to the 7s Format. A few comments are about his speed has he still got it and has he slowed down. Well 7s is about being a bnit quicker but it does not totally rely on speed, there are a lot of other factors that come into play and would suit Hooper’s style of play. He is good at the breakdown and pilfering the ball and he is also good at making the initial break, then he can pass to the real speed merchants in the side. Couple all that with his experience at the top level over a good length of time and IMO he fits perfectly to 7s. I wish him well and the 7s side are much better off with him in the side.

It was a game that I watched with a certain disquiet, in that it was always going to be really tight. A couple of things that I thought were wrong was the TMO penalising Cane with a red card. I thought that a yellow was suffice. The TMO mistake in regard to the Smith try was blatant. I have no allegiance to the ABs or South Africa I am a Wallaby supporter. but I thought that the ABs got the rough end of the pineapple. I would hope that there is a review of the performance of the TMO in this game and he is demoted and serves a time in lesser games. Also there needs to be a review of the TMO and what they can intervene on during the game, I like the view that the TMO should be restricted to scoring tries and intervening on actual foul play if not noticed by the ref. I also like the way that League does this. The ref may issue a yellow card and put the incident on report, that can be dealt with by a tribunal at a later date. That to me seems a lot fairer system

Good read Geoff and this mirrors my opinion also. McLellan has to go so that Rugby can survive, if not we will see the demise of Rugby in Australia. I also think that Super Rugby has had its day and we need to go to somewhat of a scenario that Waugh is suggesting. Whatever the direction we take it will take years for rugby to recover from this disaster. The only hope is that the lions tour may save us from bankruptcy. I hark back to the days when I used to go to Ballymore I was a long term member and attended monthly lunches and it was just great and then some people got elected to the QRU and came up with an expansion to buy a place in the city etc and within a few years it all imploded and we lost everything no membership after 38 +years to Ballymore club, it all fell over due to a McLellan type getting on the QRU board, and totally destroying the whole show. This is a scenario that is playing out at the moment with RA

Hi Ken Your assessment is totally spot on and I agree with every word. It was the most ludicrous decision that Jones made to go into the WC with an inexperienced flyhalf. I felt so sorry for Carter (who I think has some potential) he was thrown into the deep end and Jones had noone to back him up. He should have taken either Cooper or Foley as a backup to run on when it got a bit tough and to mentor carter at training. This was a no-brainer. And the person that orchestrated the whole debacle is still sitting on the throne thinking he is the Messiah (Mr Mclelland). We need a total cleanout of RA so that Rugby can claw it’s way back from this debacle that has set rugby back 10+ years

It was never a red card in the first place, I watched the game and then the video in slow motion and at all times the contact to the head was not intentional it was accidental. That is the problem with the rules of the game they do not differentiate between intentional and accidental, The same with Frissells yellow card he didn’t intentionally fall on the players leg. Cane was doing as we all did, a front on tackle with arms wrapping and he locked the ball up, as we were all taught as youngsters. It is ludicrous that a red card is the interpretation of this type of tackle. The game has deteriorated into a game for faint heart touch footballers. (meaning no disrespect to touch football which is a different game). We play rugby and it is a full contact sport, you are always going to get accidental head contact. By all means card intentional foul play, but give me a break by having a look to see if it is accidental or intentional. If its accidental play a penalty to the aggrieved team and play the game as it should be a CONTACT sport. Its not a game of marbles.

I’m actually disgusted with the performance of the Chairman of RA. that he should even be speaking on any subject at the moment is ridiculous. Waugh should be the person who is speaking not McClelland. McClelland should be gone for his absolute error in hiring Jones and also for his total lack of even any real thought process of assisting the women in reaching the heights that they have achieved. The women are the success story but they are treated as second class citizens. I have said before, the States should collectively request his resignation and then we could all move on to a much better future. This review should reveal that the continual employment of the chairman is not in RA best interest. For Rugby to even survive we need to change our direction totally and that means getting rid of the chair that was behind this mess. Blaming it on the last twenty years is pathetic. Why when the present chair was first elected didn’t he step up and make some changes if he thought that things were wrong. No good saying things were wrong and then doing nothing about it. I believe that Waugh might be a reasonable bet in the direction that he is thinking about rugby in the future. I would be willing to give him the latitude to try and implement the changes that he envisions to allow rugby to survive

As I have said on a previous post Barnes is a good referee, he is pedantic and refs to the letter of the law. The problem with this is that the laws are the fault as I have previously stated. This is no dispersion of Barnes, he did his job. I have watched him over his career and always liked what I saw. Good luck to him for the future and I hope that he stays within the refs assossiation so that he can impart his knowledge on to others.