Bad play, bad refs, and bad business

Goodbye to all that then, or should that be good riddance? By any criteria, the 1997 Interprovincial Championship must go down as one of the worst ever. "Putrid", "pathetic", or at best "scrappy" were just some of the adjectives which could be heard to describe them. And that was the players talking.

If they are in any way a harbinger of things to come from the provinces in the European Cup then grim days are ahead over the next six weekends. But with that in mind - and with the whole vexed question of whither-Irish-rugby-now - they shouldn't be just forgotten about.

Arising from the interpros, three abiding concerns came continually to mind: public apathy/lack of professional marketing (lesson number one being that the two are inextricably linked); unsympathetic refereeing, and error-prone rugby.

The first has been addressed here before. Suffice it to say that there is a chronic lack of initiative when it comes to promoting the interpros/provinces. Perhaps this is further evidence that the branches are too closely linked to the union to do otherwise. By comparison, four separate franchises comprised from the clubs would, of necessity, be run as businesses and have greater autonomy.

But, of course, "it can't be done". It seems nothing radical can be done in Irish rugby without the ratification of about 27 different committees. Irish rugby is so institutionalised. It's time Irish rugby got radical.

Consider this: all the unions in New Zealand rugby were compelled to come together to form five franchises from far more diverse geographical locations for the purposes of competing in the Super 12. And how long did the complexities and legal procedures take to complete? Two weeks.

With the arrival of the interpros in the tailend of summer comes an even greater need for more progressive marketing. Three of the four have floodlights. Yet, when one of the provinces suggested to another that they play on a Friday night, the away province rejected the notion. In 1997, in the professional era, that is more than faintly ridiculous. They should just be told to turn up.

The Leinster Branch, admittedly, have put together an impressive poster campaign on the dart line for their home European Cup games. Whatever the cost, this should have been extended to all clubs and schools.

Indeed, thinking of the paltry attendances on glorious, sunny Saturday afternoons, recalls another story of the branch man whose colleagues dismissed his notion of letting schoolchildren in free to a game, fearful that a few ineligible 18 and 19-year-olds would slip through the net. To buttress recent attendances would have been worth the lost £100 or so.

The Leinster Branch could also do worse than send out 50 free tickets or whatever to all rugby playing schools (and, more importantly, non-rugby playing schools) for this Saturday's visit of the French champions Toulouse. Ditto the other branches with home games.

Of course all the marketing in the world is just so much varnish if the product isn't good. Then again, Sky's often nauseatingly positive coverage of sometimes crass football would make you wonder. But, like never before, the punter of the 1990s seems to equate good sport only with the presence of tv cameras.

Instead, the national station (effectively, now, a one-sport station) decided not to show a single minute of the interpros. They wave their hands in the air plaintively and say "no money". The IRFU's commitment to terrestrial television, compared to the English union's, is praiseworthy, but unless RTE is more willing to make a commitment to the rest of the Irish game the union, one day, is going to have to look elsewhere. That is, if they can find an elsewhere.

All that aside, the product hasn't been good. As the New Zealanders long since discovered, if you're in the entertainment industry, referees are crucial - added to which is Brian Ashton's and the provinces' expressed desire to develop a new game.

People here bleat on about how the Southern Hemisphere don't apply the laws as laid out by the International Board - especially when it comes to the ruck, now the cornerstone of the game. Basically, if the ball re-appears on the attacking side, their referees let it go. It's hard to defend against, but I know which game I'd rather watch.

Alas, the increased communication between referees and players/coaches seems only to have confused matters. The players stand off rucks, fearful of going to ground, and look confused. And so do the referees.

As ever at the start to the season, they treat their whistle like a new toy. One could pick countless examples of them failing to let the game develop - having the put-in again when the ball is cleared after a collapsed or wheeled scrum, awarding a penalty when the attacking side have the ball, constantly penalising the attacking team with either a penalty when the "third" player to the breakdown goes to ground (even if he's been pulled down), or with a scrum to the defending side unless the ball plainly went to ground.

THE basic problem in the interpros was that the referees did not enter into the spirit of the game. Could it also be that, as part-timers lacking the improved fitness levels required for a game based on more continuity, they ensured more set-pieces so as to keep up with them?

Again, citing the New Zealand example, where they are about to expand their pool of full-time referees from three to five, it makes utter sense that the professional game demands professional referees from every country. It would also provide retired players with another way of remaining in the game.

It is at least comforting to note that the opening rounds of the English Premiership have thrown up the same confusion about interpretations of the ruck law and, indeed, a proliferation of early-season handling errors in perfect conditions - witness Bath-Harlequins on Saturday.

Of the former, the Gloucester coach Richard Hill commented after his side's defeat to Leicester, "We've got total confusion. I'm not clear on what is and what is not permissible at the ruck, the players aren't clear and I don't think the referees are either."

Of the latter, the Harlequins coach Andy Keast admitted: "I have never seen a game of rugby from two good sides where so much possession ended up on the floor." Brian Ashton, having abandoned the interpros for Bristol v Wasps, described that game as "bloody awful".

Maybe it's some sort of culture shock - both here and across the water - to be playing so early in the season. It's also, surely, more than a coincidence that so many of Ireland's Development tourists - even those who had reasonably good tours such as Richie Governey, David Wallace, Brian O'Meara, Stephen McIvor and Stephen Ritchie - scarcely look the same players given barely a week's respite before resuming pre-season training with their provinces.