Five weeks ago your newspaper published an opinion piece I wrote regarding the total lack of common sense in regard to the rules of rugby and how they are interpreted.
Further, I suggested that come the World Cup final and the possibility of a yellow — or worse, red — card against one or other of the two teams, the game would be destroyed.
As I write this, I am in a somewhat distressed and angry state of mind — it is halftime and I have left the University club rooms where, along with others, I was watching the final of the — supposedly — most important game of rugby in four years.
I recall my earlier predictions and the fact that I highlighted in my previous article, that in centre stage would be the referee, the star of the show.
Oh, how right I was, and how invisible common sense actually is. Add to that the fact that some faceless fellow (another ref) is stationed behind a mass of computer screens, making decisions that will undoubtedly affect the outcome of the game.
That person is the judge and jury of whatever happens on the field, and their decision can and almost certainly may decide the winner of the cup, even if they successfully triumph over 14, or even 13, players in the opposing team.
The opinions expressed above apply to both teams, and I have to assume that what may have occurred during the first half to one team may happen to the other in the second half.
But, I have to again refer to the lack of common sense in the rules on rugby — especially as other codes, involving physical sport seem to get it right, and use the yellow card as a "report to the judiciary on Monday" card; the player is not binned for 10 minutes.
If that player infringes a second time, then the red card is shown, and the player is off, which may be fair enough.
The New Zealand national game of rugby used to be a simple game with as few rules as possible, and a desire to produce a spectacle and a game that could be understood and enjoyed by many.
Today the rugby unions around the world seem determined to preside over the death of this great game and instead produce a plethora of rules that make it almost impossible to follow. They are hell-bent on complicating the game beyond recognition.
The game has now become brutal and ugly, and in many ways a boring display of forwards grinding their way to the line. This is all very well in some instances, but for the viewer who is subjected to this as a main diet, that is not what the game is about.
It is about skills and the ability to pass and put a player in a gap, and for wingers to score tries. It is about the forwards getting to the breakdown and winning quick ball so the backs can shine and score tries.
It should be an exciting spectacle, instead of the crash-bash debacle the fans — well, those who still attend — are subjected to. It was not designed to be a morphed version of rugby league, which it has become.
I feel that with the way the game is going, and the way rugby unions seem determined to preside over the death of the game, that it is well past time for the game to be handed back to those who know and understand it.
The current administrators have really lost the plot and have abandoned the application of common sense, probably in favour of commercial interests.
As I complete this article I have been informed of the final score. It begs the question on the scoring system, and if there is very much common sense involved.
Our game is in a state of disarray. It is in need of a new vision and new visionaries.
— Bill Thompson is a Dunedin rugby enthusiast.
