Jeff Probyn: Let’s hope Ian Ritchie’s warning does not stop team bonding

As England prepare to jet off to their Colorado training camp the words of RFU chief executive Ian Ritchie must be ringing in the ears of every member of the squad, including the management. His statement that ill-discipline would not be allowed to distract from England's hopes and aspirations come the World Cup, can be seen as a warning that even the slightest misdemeanour could cost a place in the final squad.
Calling in Martin Johnson to ask what went wrong in 2011 was meant to show that Ritchie has left no stone unturned in an effort to save England from similar embarrassment but, in all honesty, I feel he hasn't addressed the real issue.
That is one of choice. Threats, no matter how real, will not prevent people making wrong choices and Ritchie's pronouncement could stifle the group's ambition. Rugby is very much a social game, even at the professional level and part of what makes a successful team is the bonding that takes place off the pitch and away from training.
What has changed over the years is the choice of the media to focus more on what happens off field, rather than on the game itself. Why Ritchie chose to talk to Johnson is a puzzle because there was a full and frank review after 2011 which identified no systemic reasons for what had happened – other than that the English Press had chosen to publish stories about players off-field exploits that other countries had not.
Johnson would have told Ritchie that the reason the England players went to the bar they chose was because the Welsh and Irish teams had both used the same watering hole and had taken part in similar activities.  The big difference was that neither the Irish nor Welsh Press chose to print stories of drunken players that many believed would damage their country's chances of success.
The reality is, the 2011 squad were, in all probability, no better or worse than any of the other squads that had gone before or since. Things changed for English rugby in 1991 (the last time England staged the RWC). Until then rugby was covered by a small group of journalists from mainly the old ‘broad-sheet' papers, the Times, Telegraph, Express, Mail and Guardian, with the Press Association briefing the rest.  The squad knew all of them and were on friendly terms, knowing that they were only interested in the games, not what we got up to between them.
When we got through to the knock-out stages we were warned by one of the ‘old Press guard' that news reporters were starting to take an interest in the squad and wanted some stories.
He later warned the squad that one of the ‘red tops' had decided to create a story and had bussed in some girls (and a photographer) with the idea of creating a headline.
That warning was heeded by the entire squad and no headline appeared but that moment changed forever the relationship that future squads had with the Press.   The choice made by the papers to take the step from just reporting the sport to reporting on individual members of a squad was a logical reflection of the growing interest the success of the ‘91campaign inspired and has in some ways been beneficial in a now professional sport.
In what is essentially the ultimate team game where every play is reliant on a number of intricate manoeuvres, that choice has enabled individual players to ‘stand-out' in the eyes of the media either for good reasons (Jonny Wilkinson's drop goal) or bad (Danny Cipriani's potential drink driving charge).
It has also created the cause-celeb where a player is suddenly pushed into the headlines – a perfect example is Steffon Armitage.  Steffon made the choice to go to France when he assumed his England career was over and has been a very successful signing for Toulon, who appear to have got the best out of him.
Steffon would probably have been happy to continue his ‘international retirement' on the Cote d'Azur as a local hero of the Toulon crowd but then somebody suggested in the media that he should play for England again.  When asked would he like to play for England again he replied as any player would (including me at my old age), given the chance, “Yes of course.”
His answer has spawned a thousand headlines accusing England of choosing a policy that could cost them the World Cup but that policy was in place long before Steffon made his choice. All players make choices and in doing so, they weigh-up the possible consequences.
In 1989 I was asked to play in a World XV in South Africa along with four other England players, Paul Rendall, Mike Teague, Peter Winterbottom and Steve Bates. It was an official tour and invitations came via the RFU but Steve Bates received a call from Will Carling telling him not to go, as any player who went would never be selected for England again.
Everyone apart from Bates decided the opportunity was too good to miss. The tour was a success with the president of the RFU coming to support the final game. The opportunity to earn some money from off-field activities also made it rewarding and despite Carling's warning we four carried on being picked to play for England.  Bates stayed at home, a choice he came to regret as he was never picked to play for England again!