‘I think rugby will die in five-10 years if we do nothing’

[whatisthejava]

Rugby unions screwed up and gave the clubs too much power, rugby's bubble must pop eventually as it's unsustainable

Sooner or later France will pop, Nigel wrap will either die or stop propping sarries up, rugby has a finite space and a finite interested audience unlike football ,


World rugby need to wait for the pop and then introduce sweeping rules around good governance to prevent this happening again.

[kk67]

Rugby unions screwed up and gave the clubs too much power, rugby's bubble must pop eventually as it's unsustainable

I don't think they had much choice in the matter. England negotiated a separate contract with sky for their 6n's games and the precedent was set.

Sooner or later France will pop, Nigel wrap will either die or stop propping sarries up, rugby has a finite space and a finite interested audience unlike football

I'd say that rugby as a spectator sport and a participation sport is becoming more entertaining. Soccer just gets worse.

[Banquo]

not sure this clamour will get any quieter, as said above schools are already twitchy, though prof Pollock has a lot of previous and emotional attachment
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 66907.html

[Puja]

I hate these f*cking articles. "Academics say that tackling should be banned," "Experts recommend ban on school rugby" - it's neither academics or experts, it's Pollock and Kirkwood recycling the same stories and the same papers over and over and over again.

No-one ever agrees with them. They never provide any new evidence, no studies or analyses of data that aren't hopelessly biased towards the result that they want. Take this latest one - it's taking injury rates from a study group of ages 8-20, including professional players, and attempting to draw conclusions about 8-12 year olds. Anyone with half a brain can tell that's bad science and even people without half a brain can probably tell that a 20 year old is bigger than an 8 year old and therefore might hit harder.

Two wankers with an axe to grind, who somehow get concatenated into "Experts recommend" when the headline writers come round, who can't even get the national head injuries charity to agree with them and who have yet to explain why rugby should be banned and swings/climbing frames should not, despite comparable risks of long-term damage. Tosspots.

Puja

[Banquo]

I hate these f*cking articles. "Academics say that tackling should be banned," "Experts recommend ban on school rugby" - it's neither academics or experts, it's Pollock and Kirkwood recycling the same stories and the same papers over and over and over again.

No-one ever agrees with them. They never provide any new evidence, no studies or analyses of data that aren't hopelessly biased towards the result that they want. Take this latest one - it's taking injury rates from a study group of ages 8-20, including professional players, and attempting to draw conclusions about 8-12 year olds. Anyone with half a brain can tell that's bad science and even people without half a brain can probably tell that a 20 year old is bigger than an 8 year old and therefore might hit harder.

Two wankers with an axe to grind, who somehow get concatenated into "Experts recommend" when the headline writers come round, who can't even get the national head injuries charity to agree with them and who have yet to explain why rugby should be banned and swings/climbing frames should not, despite comparable risks of long-term damage. Tosspots.

Puja

...nonetheless, you may hate them (and you really should come off the fence ) these articles influence parents, and then influence schools. My missis, rugby family, married to an ex player, senior in teaching profession is seriously worried that schools are coming under increasing litigious pressure, and also that refs will be shying away. I'd also say that looking at the AP this season, Rugby needs to get ahead of this wave of concern.

[Puja]

...nonetheless, you may hate them (and you really should come off the fence ) these articles influence parents, and then influence schools. My missis, rugby family, married to an ex player, senior in teaching profession is seriously worried that schools are coming under increasing litigious pressure, and also that refs will be shying away. I'd also say that looking at the AP this season, Rugby needs to get ahead of this wave of concern.

That's *why* I hate them. They're just two people with heavy biases, grinding an axe, but it's a good story that gets lots of clicks and debate, so they get far more publicity and influence than their actual science deserves and they run the risk of being a real problem just by being good at playing the game.

Puja

[Banquo]

...nonetheless, you may hate them (and you really should come off the fence ) these articles influence parents, and then influence schools. My missis, rugby family, married to an ex player, senior in teaching profession is seriously worried that schools are coming under increasing litigious pressure, and also that refs will be shying away. I'd also say that looking at the AP this season, Rugby needs to get ahead of this wave of concern.

That's *why* I hate them. They're just two people with heavy biases, grinding an axe, but it's a good story that gets lots of clicks and debate, so they get far more publicity and influence than their actual science deserves and they run the risk of being a real problem just by being good at playing the game.

Puja

quite, but don't shoot the messenger- as a rugby community we need to be proactive imo

[Puja]

...nonetheless, you may hate them (and you really should come off the fence ) these articles influence parents, and then influence schools. My missis, rugby family, married to an ex player, senior in teaching profession is seriously worried that schools are coming under increasing litigious pressure, and also that refs will be shying away. I'd also say that looking at the AP this season, Rugby needs to get ahead of this wave of concern.

That's *why* I hate them. They're just two people with heavy biases, grinding an axe, but it's a good story that gets lots of clicks and debate, so they get far more publicity and influence than their actual science deserves and they run the risk of being a real problem just by being good at playing the game.

Puja

quite, but don't shoot the messenger- as a rugby community we need to be proactive imo

Even if the messenger is creating a panic by screaming that the sky is falling when it's actually just lowering very gently?

Puja

[Peat]

Even then. Fun as it is to dismiss such things as hyperbolic bollocks, it is still wise to listen to the bits about the sky lowering.

And even wiser to be seen as listening and acting.

Billy Vunipola was in the Indie Online telling kids to only get into pro rugby if they were okay with having operations by the time they're 25. Commendable honesty but shit PR.

[Digby]

Even then. Fun as it is to dismiss such things as hyperbolic bollocks, it is still wise to listen to the bits about the sky lowering.

And even wiser to be seen as listening and acting.

Billy Vunipola was in the Indie Online telling kids to only get into pro rugby if they were okay with having operations by the time they're 25. Commendable honesty but shit PR.

Good PR would have dealt with the risks of concussion and diabetes too

Edit - and depression

[kk67]

Edit - and depression

You get the feeling Billy is getting a bit sick of the game..?.

[Timbo]

Billy chats a load of nonsense. Seems like a nice bloke, but loves a good blab. A few months back he said he wanted to go and play NFL...now he's saying he wants to be a plumber when he retires...when asked about Billy even Mako says he talks a load of rubbish.

[kk67]

It was something WT said about non-recuperation from minor injuries that reminded me how miserable some of my rugby seasons were when I was at skool.

[Banquo]

That's *why* I hate them. They're just two people with heavy biases, grinding an axe, but it's a good story that gets lots of clicks and debate, so they get far more publicity and influence than their actual science deserves and they run the risk of being a real problem just by being good at playing the game.

Puja

quite, but don't shoot the messenger- as a rugby community we need to be proactive imo

Even if the messenger is creating a panic by screaming that the sky is falling when it's actually just lowering very gently?

Puja

I meant me as the messenger

[Banquo]

Even then. Fun as it is to dismiss such things as hyperbolic bollocks, it is still wise to listen to the bits about the sky lowering.

And even wiser to be seen as listening and acting.

Billy Vunipola was in the Indie Online telling kids to only get into pro rugby if they were okay with having operations by the time they're 25. Commendable honesty but shit PR.

aye

[Puja]

quite, but don't shoot the messenger- as a rugby community we need to be proactive imo

Even if the messenger is creating a panic by screaming that the sky is falling when it's actually just lowering very gently?

Puja

I meant me as the messenger

Oh right - well, I'll shoot you just on general principles.

Puja

[Banquo]

Nice

[bitts]

Billy chats a load of nonsense. Seems like a nice bloke, but loves a good blab. A few months back he said he wanted to go and play NFL...now he's saying he wants to be a plumber when he retires...when asked about Billy even Mako says he talks a load of rubbish.

The fact that he's talking so much about injuries in rugby, yet considers playing NFL is weird. Although they may play fewer games, the attitude towards player welfare is shocking. And that's just at NFL level, college and below they are basically treated as meat. The concussion levels in NFl are staggering.

I don't know if anyone has seen last chance U. But the way these young players were being treated was shocking.

[Mellsblue]

For all his many qualities, Billy is not the sharpest. I hope his book sells well.....

[Saison]

The age group I coach at U10 is very well subscribed, i'm sure its not the same story the country over but M&J section of Old Leamingtonians is thriving, we have 44 in our squad and could field 4 squads with subs easily, numbers have steadily grown over the last 5 years. I'm not involved with the political side at all and don't know if we are an exception, if the club has taken special measures to make us so (one or two may have done but not the club as a whole) or if we are just lucky. We thought that once contact was introduced there would be a level of attrition, not the case, this year we introduce rucks mauls and uncontested scrums, we have had to implement a waiting list! Could all change in 2 years when they go to secondary school and play there as well of course.

My son's group which I work with has just gone to Colts (U13) and it has massively curtailed - this being 3 years post contact I thought it should be okay but a combination of schools having increasingly louder voices in kids' activities and specialisation (kids cant carry on playing too many sports) has really reduced our resources. We have gone from a squad of 60 last year to 34, and half the first team is now fully plying schools rugby so unavailable.

[Puja]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41430245

This basically sums up my frustration to "We'll increase squad sizes and have more rotation" arguments. You won't. You never will. Players will always want pay rises, because it's a short career and no-one wants to be underpaid. They'll also want to play in all the important games because if someone else plays and does well, they might not get back in. Coaches will always want to give pay rises, because they want to keep their best players. They'll also want to play their best players in all the important games, because a loss could count at the end of the season and cost them their jobs.

Basically there are only three ways forward: 1) Devalue some of the games, like the French do with away games. This makes some games 'acceptable' to lose or to miss, but turns the tournament to sh*t, 2) Reduce the number of games in the season by adopting Which's idea of a 10 team Prem and curtailing the AWC, or 3) Continue to flog the players and have the players flog themselves while wringing your hands about how awful it is.

Puja

[Stom]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41430245

This basically sums up my frustration to "We'll increase squad sizes and have more rotation" arguments. You won't. You never will. Players will always want pay rises, because it's a short career and no-one wants to be underpaid. They'll also want to play in all the important games because if someone else plays and does well, they might not get back in. Coaches will always want to give pay rises, because they want to keep their best players. They'll also want to play their best players in all the important games, because a loss could count at the end of the season and cost them their jobs.

Basically there are only three ways forward: 1) Devalue some of the games, like the French do with away games. This makes some games 'acceptable' to lose or to miss, but turns the tournament to sh*t, 2) Reduce the number of games in the season by adopting Which's idea of a 10 team Prem and curtailing the AWC, or 3) Continue to flog the players and have the players flog themselves while wringing your hands about how awful it is.

Puja

You forgot 4) Extend the EPS agreement, and have it so NO player, regardless of nationality, is allowed to play more than a certain number of games. Would also have the added bonus of devaluing overseas players, increasing the chances teams give to academy lads.

[Banquo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41430245

This basically sums up my frustration to "We'll increase squad sizes and have more rotation" arguments. You won't. You never will. Players will always want pay rises, because it's a short career and no-one wants to be underpaid. They'll also want to play in all the important games because if someone else plays and does well, they might not get back in. Coaches will always want to give pay rises, because they want to keep their best players. They'll also want to play their best players in all the important games, because a loss could count at the end of the season and cost them their jobs.

Basically there are only three ways forward: 1) Devalue some of the games, like the French do with away games. This makes some games 'acceptable' to lose or to miss, but turns the tournament to sh*t, 2) Reduce the number of games in the season by adopting Which's idea of a 10 team Prem and curtailing the AWC, or 3) Continue to flog the players and have the players flog themselves while wringing your hands about how awful it is.

Puja

You forgot 4) Extend the EPS agreement, and have it so NO player, regardless of nationality, is allowed to play more than a certain number of games. Would also have the added bonus of devaluing overseas players, increasing the chances teams give to academy lads.

Club v country is looming large......fortunately, at present, a lot of big cash sits with the international game....but...

[Puja]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41430245

This basically sums up my frustration to "We'll increase squad sizes and have more rotation" arguments. You won't. You never will. Players will always want pay rises, because it's a short career and no-one wants to be underpaid. They'll also want to play in all the important games because if someone else plays and does well, they might not get back in. Coaches will always want to give pay rises, because they want to keep their best players. They'll also want to play their best players in all the important games, because a loss could count at the end of the season and cost them their jobs.

Basically there are only three ways forward: 1) Devalue some of the games, like the French do with away games. This makes some games 'acceptable' to lose or to miss, but turns the tournament to sh*t, 2) Reduce the number of games in the season by adopting Which's idea of a 10 team Prem and curtailing the AWC, or 3) Continue to flog the players and have the players flog themselves while wringing your hands about how awful it is.

Puja

You forgot 4) Extend the EPS agreement, and have it so NO player, regardless of nationality, is allowed to play more than a certain number of games. Would also have the added bonus of devaluing overseas players, increasing the chances teams give to academy lads.

That's 1) by another name. Set a limit of 20 games per season per player and keep the season at 40ish games and half the games are going to have to be played with the A team. That leads us to unedifying scenarios like London Irish putting out the U20s at Saracens away and getting 100 put on them.

Puja

[Doorzetbornandbred]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41430245

This basically sums up my frustration to "We'll increase squad sizes and have more rotation" arguments. You won't. You never will. Players will always want pay rises, because it's a short career and no-one wants to be underpaid. They'll also want to play in all the important games because if someone else plays and does well, they might not get back in. Coaches will always want to give pay rises, because they want to keep their best players. They'll also want to play their best players in all the important games, because a loss could count at the end of the season and cost them their jobs.

Basically there are only three ways forward: 1) Devalue some of the games, like the French do with away games. This makes some games 'acceptable' to lose or to miss, but turns the tournament to sh*t, 2) Reduce the number of games in the season by adopting Which's idea of a 10 team Prem and curtailing the AWC, or 3) Continue to flog the players and have the players flog themselves while wringing your hands about how awful it is.

Puja

You forgot 4) Extend the EPS agreement, and have it so NO player, regardless of nationality, is allowed to play more than a certain number of games. Would also have the added bonus of devaluing overseas players, increasing the chances teams give to academy lads.

That's 1) by another name. Set a limit of 20 games per season per player and keep the season at 40ish games and half the games are going to have to be played with the A team. That leads us to unedifying scenarios like London Irish putting out the U20s at Saracens away and getting 100 put on them.

Puja

Or possibly Sarries put out their squad players and Academy lads as well targeting the game as one they can rest the "big guns".