Ummm arn't we sort of playing proper test rugby??? You know like we all grew up watching befor the Stupor12 arrived and delivered 60 points worth of soft tries....... and thats to the losing team. Is it just me or was there a time when the All blacks putting 20 odd points on a team like Scotland was an absolute hiding. We were once quite happy for the AB's to strangle a team, kick their goals and score a try or 2 as the life left the opposition. You know what?? I like that hard nut rugby! Rugby where a try is hard earn'd and if not you squeeze the opposition till they cough up a penalty. Now days were trying to create Rugby for people who don't like Rugby! The game got along just fine without it being an entertainment product for "Fans" so why not leave it as it was in say 95-96 (with rucking!) and anyone who doesn't like it can go watch league or round ball. I bet rugby would be no worse off for it

Rubbish. If you actually read the ruck rule as it is written (which anyone can do via the IRB website) it states that a ruck is formed as soon as two players are in contact over the ball on the ground after a tackle. In international rugby this is effectively instantaneous. The next rule states that as soon as a ruck is formed in that way NO ONE is allowed to handle the ball if they are part of that ruck. No one. Not the tackled player, not the tackler. If someone like McCaw is playing at the ball and an opposition player makes contact with him then it's a ruck and all hands should come off. This isn't my rule or my interpretation of a rule. This is THE rule as written in the IRB's rule book. Now imagine if this was enforced. Imagine a game of rugby where there aren't 5 or 6 pairs of hands on the ball at every tackle area. Imagine how quick it would come back, how it would massively favour the attacking side. Now ask why isn't this rule enforced as it is written. Because it is ignored by referees, and they are given "directives" by O'Brien to "interpret" as they see fit.

Paddy, just get them to referee the actual rules!

I'm staggered. Paddy's credibility is in the toilet. He remains stone cold silent through a hundred transgressions, but the moment the ABs are on the receiving end he's running around apologising to them. Poor show Paddy.

Dont blame the refs or the players. The problem is the ridiculous state of the rules!

Am I imagining it or is international sport just becoming an endless round of blame, accusations, recriminations, foul play and cheating by top players? I am fully expecting there to be some new controversy in the New Zealand-England rugby match this weekend that will rumble on for months or even years afterwards. I will be very surprised if there isn't.

Paddy is right as far as teams attitudes are concerned as some are certainly just out there for scoreboard damage limitation.

But the referee and assistant referees are the facilitators so should be policing negative play such as offside back lines, delaying scrums feeds to look for scrum collapses, killing the ball etc.

Not so sure the South Africans would agree Wayne had a good game considering he dished out two yellow cards which in itself kills the game.

I still think Wayne Barnes is the WORST of all the refs - not at all consistent. it is also blatantly obvious that he favours NH teams to the SH teams. So now we know why the bok scrum was going backwards in the tigers game - illegal scrummaging from Martin Castrogiavanni - and to think he thought he was a hero. Unfortunately it cost the boks the game - good thing Henry complained about it, even though NZ beat Italy.

Ahh Paddy! The IRB ref boss with the scrummage consultant who is also the AB scrum coach...in anyones' book that is a HUGE conflict of interest! And as for the Aus-Ire game - when is a send-off for a legitimate tackle represent a good game by the ref?

Far out I am getting sick of this nonsense. We have running rugby, its called Super14, and people are losing interest in it. What's wrong with the style of rugby at international level? Our media are completely pathetic. One writer starts saying something, and because the rest are too stupid to think of something original to talk about, they just parrot what the first guy said.

Rugby needs to think outside the square to get the ridiculous rules sorted. There are many problems but how's this for a start...

Rugby I think relies to much on penalty goals on the scoreboard. I get frustrated every time a team gets in the opposition 22 through good rugby but then a penalty is given to the attacking team for an innoculous infringment. An easy 3 points. To me, I don't cheer when the penalty is given, I groan. It's like I feel cheated out of a try. It's an easy copout, a hollow victory. Therefore if penalty goals and droppies are reduced to 1 point then the emphasis for points scoring is tries.

This may initially increase the infringing as defending teams think giving away 1 point isn't much. But if 1 point isn't much then the attacking team will think there's more point to kick for touch and go for the try. Will this reduce the reliance on the penalty for scoring? Just a thought.