Interesting points from Eddie Jones

Listened to Eddie Jones on the radio the other day and I really admire his intelligence and take on all rugby in general.

Eddie talked a lot about Super Rugby and how the demands and the constant rule change will only add to the confusion and the high turnover of players. The issue being that the faster the game the more our leading players will suffer - which he says will only detract from the spectacle of skills and consistency that we all want from our fav rugby teams.

The age of rugby players coming through and the support and resources required to maintain this will takeaway from the quality of the game. He qualified this by saying that it will become a game of youth and you will see some amazing talent end there careers at the tender age of 25. Eddie obviously doesnt have a lot of faith in the IRB making rugby better.

Eddie said that the IRB have no choice to listen to the demands ofthe paying public but this will come at the detriment of the game itself....actually I think Jake White stated this many times also?

However what I found the most fascinating was the point he made about the RWC and why it is so hard for nations to back up after winning it.

• Eddie said that history has shown that all nations that won the RWC maintained the same leadership and player base going into the next 4 years and this was mostly detrimental to the development of the changes required to win a back up WC
• Player development and the strategic planning  for winning must start immediately and not usually around the 2 year mark out as this doesnt give the teams enough scope to make sustainable changes to ensure that (and here was his crux point) culture, character , composure and consistency are ingrained into these players
• This point was probably the most interesting - He said if you have a team that has won the RWC the 4 years previously that there motivation may be detrimental to having the total motivation to go ahead and want to win again (obviously this is debatable but it makes sense) - there are many arguments of this point that could probably be another whole other discussion
• He also stated that the fear of changing a winning combination after the euphoria of a cup win would be a coaching suicide, however he said that a very deliberate and planned effort from the day after winning the RWC will enhance considerably that nations chamnces of goingback to back.
• There were many other things such as rule changes, which effected playing styles but noted that the RWC needed something different and this was again evident with the ALBLACKS winning by only a single point against the FRENCH whom up to that point didnt deserve to be there.
• Eddie finished by saying that the format of the RWC should be pushed out to a 5 year cycle so that the emphasis on tours can be integrated back into international rugby.

I've always had a great respect for Eddie, he's probably amongst a select few who really know their stuff. Shafted by political deviots in his own backyard like his mate Jake White he will never coach an Ozzie team again. I have a dream of Eddie coaching the Bok backs again, unlike the local pretenders he'd fix it  quicksmart, that said had we had him at the last WC there's no doubt our blokes would have known how to break down defences and scored tries.

ooops, I forget...welcome to the nuthouse, enjoyed your posts I trust there'll be lots more.

The game is not as attractive as it was 40 years as a result of misguided rules changes.

1) The scrums are a mess with lots of penalties. Most of these come, not from a desire to cheat but because one side has prevailed. This is only case in sport I can think of, where being outplayed, results in a penalty. Use the old method and set the scrums without a hit. And insist on a fair feed....hooking used to be a skill, we have lost that.

2) The continuous play from the advantage rule creates a rugby league like barrier. Advantage ought to be immediate.....eg the attacker still retains the ball....not require that the team gets a tangible benefit. If an immediate benefit exists, don't call things back if the team botches the advantage.

3) WE ought to have more set pieces, not less. These platforms provide the space for running rugby and old style centre play.  The desire to eliminate set pieces has simply made running impossible unless there is a mistake.

4) The desire for a "fair contest on the ground" is a killer. Centres and wings can't give it a full go because the ball can't be protected if they do.  And backs have to dive in like forwards to protect....often leaving only forwards to barge the ball up.

The only rule change I like is the lineout. Allowing lifting has made things safer, and the immediate feed, from on high,  from a supported player is a thing of beauty. Matfield getting the ball into his scrumhalf's hands in micro seconds is perhaps the most aesthetic thing in rugby.

But lineouts aside let's set the clocks back....40 years back.