I've watched a couple of cracking matches recently and it dawned on me why we are in danger of falling out of love with modern day rugby, or at least much of it. There are mercifully always exceptions, like Japan at RWC2019.
Brilliant crisp handling with no forward passes and fewer ‘flat' balls; no 40-phase passages of keep ball that send you to sleep and wonderfully efficient recycling of the ball at the breakdown with no crude illegal clear outs from henchmen who are blatantly offside.
There were a couple of injury stoppages but no great emptying of benches on the 55th minute to further slow things down and mess up the continuity of the game.
In all the games the ball-in-hand pace of the players seemed up a notch from everybody bar the current Japan team and England on a good day, scummaging appeared a relatively straight-forward process not the torturous exercise in procrastination we currently suffer. There was more space generally around the field, possibly because the refs seemed keener to apply the offside law.
When a team powered forwards 20 yards with an irresistible driving maul they were awarded the put-in if play came to a halt, normally when an undetected member of the opposition got away with dragging the maul down or accidentally-on-purpose falling down in the middle of the maul. Don't think we don't notice these things, guys.
The matches I have in mind are the 1991 World Cup quarter-final between England and France and then France's epic semi-final with New Zealand eight years later which have been replayed as live by World Rugby on their Facebook page.
And before we go any further can we just pause a minute for a belated hat tip in the direction of John Taylor and Steve Smith for their commentaries in both games.
That Anglo-Welsh duo seem to get overlooked a little when it comes to the commentating roll of honour but JT and Smithie were good, they stand the test of time. They sound modern, were witty and non-hysterical – how could it not be with Steve Smith in the box? – and the old mates dovetailed nicely. They caught the essence and drama of both games very well.
On top of those two belting French encounters I also caught the bristling first Lions Test of 2001 – how good was Matt Perry by the way, what an underrated player – and of course the Wales/Fiji World Cup classic of 2007. Lockdown has its compensations.
All the games were unedited ‘as it happened' versions and that is important because you get the complete picture. Rugby is blessed with some wonderful technicians and editors behind the scenes and they can make a silk purse out of a sow's ear of a game with their highlight packages. Much better when possible to see the Fully Monty.
My conclusion after this rugbyfest is that watching rugby ‘then' – not so very long ago to be honest – and ‘now' is the difference between the excitement and volatility of a lawn tennis encounter at Wimbledon as opposed to the more controlled, groundhog day, fare served up on the clay courts. Apologies to all clay court and Rafa Nadal fans.
It's an important difference though. Tennis? I can take it or leave it to be frank but Wimbledon does unquestionably draw me in every summer. The spectacular rawness and its rugged speed and unpredictability is compelling whereas an afternoon watching the French Open with its interminable rallies and players sliding around in blood red sand is, for me, an afternoon wasted.
Just as the vast majority of 40-phase attacks in rugby leave me cold, most 40-shot rallies on a clay court test my patience sorely. Again there are the occasional exceptions.
Rugby has lost something in the last 15-20 years and it's important we identify that missing component because when the current coronavirus crisis subsides we need to collectively put our best foot forward as a sport. Rugby needs the crowds to come flocking back in large numbers and for the TV companies to know they have a product that will command a captive audience again. So let's not arrogantly dismiss some of the old ways in the desire to be modern, innovative and woke.
If I had to concentrate on just one area it would be the breakdown. What struck me time and again in both the 1991 and 1999 games is that every player arrived at the breakdown looking to clear the ball asap. I'm not saying there wasn't a little thuggery on the way – there was some pretty tasty rucking in the 1991 game in particular – but the breakdowns and rucks were largely quick and efficient.
These days the majority of those involved have no interest whatsoever in the ball and clearing it, instead they just lap up the excuse to ‘clear out' and maim the opposition, a bar room brawl fully licensed and approved by officialdom. Why do we allow this to continue?
