Wither Rugby the future of the game

I have been playing [briefly]and watching Rugby for 58 years,what I am talking is not nostalgia,or rose tinted glasses.I have some observations,some questions and the odd answer.In Amateur Days the highlight was the tour,All blacks,Wallabies,Boks,Lions,the last full one by the All Blacks was 1972-3,then we had midi,and mini tours.As a consolation prize we have the RWC.

Laws have changed over the years for good or ill,The Scrum,setting of it,standardization the 3-4-1 formation,the wheel all things of the past.Dribbling rushes,rush stopping,the ruck,lifting in the lineout,the offside laws,goal from a mark,themark,kicking out on the full etc.What was once a winter sport,is now a business,one of the silliest statements is no amateur
could live with todays players.

Think about that,a pair of boots,shirt[not skintight],shorts,jock strap[ and box]scrum cap.gum shield,and a leather ball.These amateurs played 80 minutes,stayed onthe park as long as they could walk when injured.Goal kickers had to contend with a heavy wet ball alot of the time.Yes they played a lot less rugby in a tour year they would play a maximum of 10 tests for the home teams in a 5N.

There was a flourishing European Rugby Federation,where teams like Italy ,Spain.Rumania,Georgia,France played on a semi regular basis .Rugby was test,Currie Cup,NPC/RANFURLY SHIELD,in England,Club,and County,Wales club,Ireland regions,Scotland clubs mostly Borders ,Glasgow,Edinborough,France clubs and Regions.With the coming of profession lism,Boots with square toes for goal kickers,skin tight shirts /shorts,plastic covered balls,stadia with closed roofs,most games played under flood lights.Modern sports medicine etc.most of the greats of previous eras would have got quite well or very well.Today players are expected to play maybe 50,or 60 minutes before being subbed.Also they stop every 10minutes for energy drinks etc.I know the substute is now part of the game,but should tactical replacements as opposed to injury replacements have happened.?

Has the wide spread influx of overseas players improved the game in the NH,at club level maybe but at national?Are we playing to much Rugby,should the NH adopt a season on the SH pattern.A club or Heineken Cup series in its entirety at the start and end of the season with the tests in between leaving widows for july,and autumn tests either end.Has the standard of play relatively speaking improved much in NH since going pro.Has Welsh and Scottish Rugby improved or declined with regional teams.Is the S15 3 teams too many should it be reduced to 12[Grant Fox`s idea not mine].Certainly the current comp the draw seems very weighted to the Australian franchise.

To what do you attest is the reason fore the dominance of All Black Rugby,the decline of Bok Rugby in the PRO era.Australia with players no longer going league in droves have improved dramatically for example.Answers anyone?

I think there are too many issues to really tackle individually in this but the question overall seems to be is modern rugby better than older rugby. I've only experienced the pro game so won't give any answer. However ask yourself are the fundamental things you originally liked about rugby still there. If they are thats great. If they aren't you need to ask why you're still a fan.

I personally enjoy,and continue to watching Rugby at all levels. But a lot of the questions I asked have been bought up by other individuals here.I don`t pretend to know the answers,but a more structured NH season I think would help.

My own take on the Northern Hemisphere system is that it disadvantages us due to the different competitions peppered throughout the year. However i wouldn't change it as I find it more entertaining as a fan.

Emack, I'm with you. Modern life is awful. People moan about things they don't understand and what they don't realise is that what they loved changed because of the way they chose to spend their money. The IRB are a bunch of idiots who have sold the family silver to the TV execs, who don't understand that less is often more. The laws have been complicated and almost unfailingly have had consequences that are the exact opposite of what they had in mind. Referees are berated, but their task is in fact impossible. Rugby is not unique, a lot of things have lost soul, character, mystique, charm, whatever you want to call it. It's funny though. I still love the game. The time I remembered as my golden age - the 80's - had my Dad bemoaning his golden age - the 60's. I'm sure if my grandad was a rugby man he'd have his golden age as well.

I wonder what my golden age is? Probably 2005-2015

The career of Brian O Driscoll. He will be held up as the last great star of the amateur age and the first great star of the professional age.

Truth is there was no golden age for me,but i`d still like the answer to my questions.The biggest one for me is how come the best team on the planet the Boks pre pro era[loosely].Has such poor results since ,especially versus the All Blacks,40%win rate overall and less than 30% in the pro era.Man for man they are as good as any in.the world. The Currie Cup and S15 side are usually good to excellent,the coaches with the odd exception good too.There devilshly hard to beat at home too.I just don`t get it any Bok fans here any theories?

My view- rugby is different now - you have pointed out some of the changes, but the one I see the most is the enforced change inherent in professionalism - now the players are paid, so they have the time to devote wholly to rugby and training - so they are better physical specimens and have a lot more practice under their belts. The other side of that coin is they now depend on the game to a large extent for their livelihood, so for them it isn't "fun" any more. As a result perhaps the Corinthian spirit has lessened - although I think it is still there, there is probably more temptation towards the professional foul, in order to keep you team ahead. Also - because they are all fit now - the opportunity for open running rugby is less - in the old days the forwards job was to grunt and groan at the scrum and line out and then amble to the next set piece - so the backs had a bit more room as they didn't have to contend with props running after them. Also in the good old days the players were more likely to have their fitness curbed by the old tobacco weed - I remember hearing the story of Willie Duggan an old Irish war horse forward who used to stub his fag out in the tunnel as he went onto the field!

The professional foul is as old as the game itself,some of the things that went on in lineouts and scrums.Would make your eyes water,among other things, As to forwards defending have you never heard of the famed All Blacks cover defence.The rush or blitz defence today only works if the defending side starts from an off side position.Euphmisticaly called "lazyrunning"