The Modern Rugby Dilemma: Quantity Over Quality

As most of the world’s domestic competitions begin to commence, as lovers of the sport we can look forward to a feast of rugby. But has it all become a bit too much, and is the game suffering as a consequence?

The reality now is that the game is professional, and the roots of both rugby union and rugby league can trace their origins back to the tension between amateurism and professionalism in the late 1800’s.

The Rugby Football Union strictly enforced amateur status on the game. There was constant political unrest as some clubs, such as Leeds who compensated their players for missing work, and were then subsequently fined by the RFU.

This was despite the fact that the 1888 England team which toured Australia was reported to have been paid.

These tensions reached a head in 1895 when representatives of some Northern clubs formed the Northern Rugby Football Union. This new body allowed payments to be made to players, and is seen by many to be the genesis of the game of Rugby League. 

Although initially their clubs played under “union” rules, eventually changes would occur, most notably reduction of teams to 13 men, and the implementation of the play the ball law.

For years the RFU took strong actions against these breakaways, and for the next one hundred years, as new organizations within rugby union were formed, namely the IRB and other national bodies, the game would remain fiercely amateur.

Despite the best attempts of some countries like France to do otherwise.

As we all know, things were a lot different then.

Tours formed the backbone of international programs, and most test teams would play no more than six or seven test matches a year, and often would play less.

But, under increased threats of professional sports (ironically, rugby league) the IRB, now the games governing body, would declare in 1995 that the sport would become fully open, and removed any restrictions on either payments or benefits to the players.

So suddenly, the fact came forward that rugby was now not only just a sport, but big business.

A business, as we all know, must continually drive to increase their numbers.  A budget, the classic backbone of all money driven operations, must seek to increase year after year.

So it has become with our rugby calendar.

But has it even become too much for the most ardent of supporters?

A phenomenon occurred of late that truly confounded me. There were empty seats at a British and Irish Lions test match, in South Africa, a country that is truly passionate about the game.

And this was for the rarest sight in the rugby world—a Lions team.

The All Blacks, considered the greatest crowd puller in the international rugby world, will play their 450th test match this weekend against the Springboks.

Officially, New Zealand played their first test match in 1903. Their 225th test match (the halfway point) was a 3-16 loss to France in Nantes in 1986.

The first half of their international matches was played in 83 years.

The second half has been played in the next 23 years.

It is just as staggering for other international countries. England, essentially the first international rugby team, played their first match against Scotland in 1871.

In the next 100 years, they would play 313 test matches.

From 1972 to the current day, the Red rose of England has run out onto a rugby field for a test match 305 times.

Growth of course is paramount, especially to our game, with prime assets like the Pacific Islands, Argentina, Asia, and the United States needing capital and resources to become genuine and regular practitioners at the top level.

But at some point, somewhere, things may need to be scaled back.

For a while, opportunity and money is out there to be had, the financial success of the big unions will eventually regress, if the market becomes so convoluted and saturated that we get a bit sick of it.

Luckily for the sport, I am a rugby tragic, and am excited for every game that is on the immediate horizon, but will it always be this way, and is it this way for all of us?