Rugby Was F***ing Better When... E-Book

Paul Williams

• Herausgeber: Polaris
• Kategorie: Lebensstil
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 152

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025

Beschreibung

According to legend and a cursory look at Google, rugby was created in 1823. When William Webb Ellis allegedly picked up the ball, and ran with it, rugby was born. How true this is, we don't know. But what we can almost guarantee is that no matter how the game started, even after just one day of the sport being invented, some people will have said that it was better in the f***ing old days. As progressive as rugby has become (both on and off the field) many feel that rugby 'yesterday' was better than rugby today. But do the stats back this up? Do the ill-informed opinions of the book's author back that up? This book examines various aspects of the game, and judges whether rugby's best days are behind, or ahead of it. Let the debate commence . . . Hilarious, off-beat and (surprisingly) insightful, this is the perfect gift for rugby fans all around the world.

Leseprobe

RUGBY WAS FING BETTER WHEN . . .

A GUIDE TO THE MODERN GAME

PAUL WILLIAMS

First published in 2025 by

POLARIS PUBLISHING LTD

c/o Aberdein Considine

2nd Floor, Elder House

Multrees Walk

Edinburgh

EH1 3DX

www.polarispublishing.com

Text copyright © Paul Williams, 2025

ISBN: 9781915359391

eBook ISBN: 9781915359407

The right of Paul Williams to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form, or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the express written permission of the publisher.

The views expressed in this book do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions or policies of Polaris Publishing Ltd (Company No. SC401508) (Polaris), nor those of any persons, organisations or commercial partners connected with the same (Connected Persons). Any opinions, advice, statements, services, offers, or other information or content expressed by third parties are not those of Polaris or any Connected Persons but those of the third parties. For the avoidance of doubt, neither Polaris nor any Connected Persons assume any responsibility or duty of care whether contractual, delictual or on any other basis towards any person in respect of any such matter and accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by any such matter in this book.

Every effort has been made to trace copyright holders and obtain their permission for the use of copyright material. The publisher apologises for any errors or omissions and would be grateful if notified of any corrections that should be incorporated in future reprints or editions of this book.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available on request from the British Library.

Designed and typeset by Polaris Publishing, Edinburgh

Printed in Great Britain by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

SET-UP

CORE RUGBY SKILLS

PLAYERS

SUPPORTERS

MEDIA

GEOGRAPHY

EQUIPMENT

OFFICIALS

SAFETY

MONEY

COACHING

DIVERSITY

MATCHDAY EXPERIENCE

CONCLUSION

Thanks so much to my beautiful wife and two children,and my fantastic parents and brother.Paul x.

INTRODUCTION

According to legend, and a cursory look at Google, rugby was created in 1823(ish). When William Webb Ellis allegedly picked up the ball and ran with it, rugby was born. How true this is, we don’t know. But what we can almost guarantee is that no matter how the game started, even after just one day of the sport being invented, some absolute dick will have said that it was better in the old days – even if the old days were technically just 24 hours prior.

As progressive as rugby has become (both on and off the pitch), many feel that rugby ‘yesterday’ was better than rugby today. But do the stats back this up? Do this author’s ill-informed opinions back this up? This book aims to look at various aspects of the game and judge whether rugby’s best days are behind, or ahead, of it.

As with the author’s previous book, none of this is done as an attack on the game today or yesterday. This author is a rugby nerd of the highest order and doesn’t wish to denigrate anyone who plays, officiates or supports the game of rugby in any regard.

Also, it’s worth bearing in mind that this book isn’t going to deliver a definite conclusion of any note. If you think this is going to be the Domesday Book of rugby and an accurate representation of all that exists in the kingdom of rugby at this moment, or in the past, then you are in for one hell of a shock.

This book is intended to be informative, yet light-hearted. If you believe this book is going to be detailed enough to use in a court of law, or in any educational institution, then you’re out of your tiny little mind. Using this book as reference in a court of law will likely end in you doing some serious time in jail. Referencing this book in any academic arena will probably lead to you being kicked off your course (if you’re a student) or being sacked (if you’re a teacher).

So, with that said . . .

Let the debate commence.

SET-UP

Before we start, we need to define when the ‘old days’ actually were, in comparison to the ‘modern day’. Comparing rugby from last week to rugby in 1890 would be pointless, as the game is totally different – like comparing politics before and after Donald Trump. Also, most of the sources from that period would be written or oral, which isn’t ideal. For the purposes of this book, the ‘old days’ will be pre-1990s(ish). The ‘modern day’ will be after that period (ish).

You’ll notice the word ‘ish’ is used a lot in this book.

CORE RUGBY SKILLS

SCRUMS

Scrums are rugby’s equivalent of the Victorian street urchin who’s constantly getting a clip from a ‘Peeler’. Whenever there’s something wrong with rugby’s perceived attractiveness, the scrum gets a quick slap. If anyone ever negatively mentions the amount of ball-in-play-time in a rugby match, scrums get the blame. However, in the 1987 Rugby World Cup there were an average of 32 scrums per game, yet in the 2019 Rugby World Cup the average was just 14 – you weren’t expecting that, were you? The completion rate of scrums between both tournaments is also 6 per cent higher in the modern era, with just one extra scrum penalty per match in the modern era – something that flies in the face of what many ‘old-school’ supporters like to believe.

The fact is that, in the modern era, there are fewer scrums, and they’re executed at a more effective completion rate. You could argue, of course, that there are more resets in the modern era. But would that extra time spent on resets equate to the same number required for double the number of scrums? The one piece of data where we can measure the impact of time taken for scrums (and lineouts) is in the ball-in-play time between the old and modern era. In the 1987 Rugby World Cup the ball was in play for an average of 28 minutes-ish, in 2019 it was 31 minutes-ish. The next time that an old man (leaning on the end of the rugby club bar) tells you scrummaging isn’t what it was, tell him he’s right. It’s better now.

Decision – Rugby is better in the f’ing modern day

LINEOUTS

Only someone with a very questionable grasp on reality would argue that lineouts were better in the old days. Without the ability to lift the lineout jumper, which finally happened in the mid-1990s, the lineout was rugby’s daddy long legs – in that it didn’t look as if it had a fucking clue what was going on and nor did it care. Watching old footage of lineouts is like watching a broken pinball machine that’s covered in mud and surgical tape. Made all the more incredible when you consider how many lineouts there used to be in amateur rugby. In the 1987 Rugby World Cup there were an average of 45-ish lineouts with a success rate of 68 per cent-ish. Compared to just 25-ish lineouts in the 2019 Rugby World Cup, with a completion of nearly 90 per cent-ish. It’s an incredible difference, until you realise that pre-1970 the situation was even worse. Prior to the early 1970s, teams retained possession from the lineout even if they kicked the ball into touch. It meant that in the 1960s there would be games where there were 110-plus lineouts per match. It was reported that in one Wales vs Scotland game of the period that the centres didn’t touch the ball once – literally once. If you know someone who thinks lineouts were better in the old days, you may need to get them medical help.

Decision – Rugby is better in the f’ing modern day

JACKALING

‘Jackaling’ has probably changed rugby more than any other individual skill within the game. It’s the act of parking your body over the ball, after the tackle, and trying to steal the ball from the ball-carrier as they lie on the floor. Reading the above description, you’d be forgiven for thinking that it doesn’t sound that dangerous, but it is. There’s no other example in daily life where people would be prepared to expose their neck/spine and then let people run full tilt towards it. It is insane. This is an aspect of the game that simply didn’t exist in the amateur era. The injuries that occur as a result of players being in the jackal position are the biggest concern in the game and make high tackles look like a cuddle from your mother. Rugby would be a better game without the jackal – of that there is no doubt. The problem is, how do you stop it without bringing back ‘old-school rucking’?

Decision – Rugby was better in the f’ing old days

CLEANOUTS

Cleanouts in rucks have never been pretty things. Whether it’s 1970 or 2025, if you get cleaned out of a ruck you’ll get hurt to one degree or another. But one aspect of the modern cleanout that simply didn’t exist in the past is the ‘torpedo cleanout’ – where players leave their feet entirely and fly into rucks, head-first. In the amateur era, players always remained on their feet, tethered to another play, while in the act of cleaning out. But for some reason that law is no longer enforced. In the modern game you can dive off your feet like some f’ing mental killer whale and fly into the jackaler like they’re the actual abusive Florida-based pool trainer who taught you how to do that cruel trick in the first place. Much of rugby’s safety procedures are trying to protect players in multiple ways, when one simple solution would often remove a massive amount of the danger – no more diving ruck cleanouts, please.

Decision – Rugby was better in the f’ing old days

DIVING TRIES

Diving tries have always existed in rugby. Very few players have ever been able to resist the urge to score a glamorous try, even though you could snap six vertebrae in doing so. It is, of course, unfair to state that all diving tries are driven by vanity, as many are done out of necessity to score in the corner. But as fine an example as some of those dives in the 1970s were, they’re nothing when compared to some of the modern finishes. With a need to keep their feet out of touch and in the air, modern players look like something from the Chinese State Circus – with players often having their feet way above their heads when scoring. If Britain’s Got Talent ever needs a change of focus and location, send Simon Cowell down to watch some of the finishing in Super Rugby Pacific – it would blow those lip-fillers clean off his face.

Decision – Rugby is better in the f’ing modern day

PASSING

Passing is another one of those skills where trends come and go with each decade, but as a whole the quality has been consistent. Criticism in the modern game tends to focus on the perceived increase in kicking, rather than a decrease in the quality of passing. The major differentiation in passing is arguably within the forwards, especially the tight five. Tight-five forwards are now involved in far more passing scenarios and, in many pod systems, props and locks are key decision-makers. In that regard, modern-day passing gets the nod.

Decision – Rugby is better in the f’ing modern day

TRIES

Tries have changed a lot over the years. You may think that this is merely a comment on the aesthetic of the tries, but it isn’t. Tries have changed in value. Tries are the oysters of rugby, initially being worthless, but then becoming a luxury. In the 1880s in London, oysters were largely worthless and considered a peasant food. Rugby tries have followed a similar path. In the 1880s they were worth nothing and simply gave you a ‘try’ to kick at goal. That has, of course, changed over the years, with their value increasing from one to five points over the past 140 years.

However, while their numeric value is clear and objective, their value aesthetically from the amateur era to the pro era is a subject of contention. According to most men over 70, rugby players used to score tries that were more akin to art than sport. Ask any supporters about the type of tries that were scored from the 1970s through to the mid-1990s and you’d swear that you were listening to a review of the Vaganova Ballet Academy in St Petersburg. Also, back in the day, according to the sages from yesteryear, many more tries were scored. But the data doesn’t back it up. In the 1987 Rugby World Cup, for example, there was an average of seven-ish tries scored per game. In the 2019 World Cup there were 6.25-ish tries scored per game. The debate should really focus not on the number of tries scored, but the defence systems that they were scored against. Scoring a try in the 1970s was far easier than scoring a try in 2025. It just was. This won’t be popular, but tries in the modern age are far harder to score and therefore better by definition.

Decision – Rugby is better in the f’ing modern day

KICKING FROM HAND

Talk to anyone about the modern game and they’ll mention that players now kick the ball too much – that seems to be most supporters’ gripe. But while many fans still want players to run blindly with the ball (into three-man tackles) and risk getting turned into human Ardennes paté – most coaches don’t. Modern rugby requires more kicking not because players and coaches love kicking, but because there’s simply less space than there was in the past – modern rugby is like flying Ryanair. But more than that, there’s some data to suggest that modern rugby actually kicks less. In the 2023 Rugby World Cup, for instance, teams kicked about 25–30 per cent-ish less per minute than in 1987. Another weird stat that may blow your mind with regards to kicking is that the highest total number of kicks in a match at the 2023 World Cup was 82-ish. With England kicking more than any other team in that competition with 33.8-ish kicks per match. Compare to that to the 106 total in the 1973 Barbarians vs New Zealand match. If you split that number down the middle, for mathematical simplicity, it means that on average the ‘best match of all time’ had two teams kick over 50 times each, in 80 minutes. If you’re over a certain age this stat will have just made you angry and have you reaching for a pint of mild ale.

Decision – The author of this book can’t f’ing decide

TYPES OF KICK

While the data around kicking frequency suggests that modern rugby kicks largely the same amount of ball as they did in the past, maybe less, the type of kicking has changed. Box-kicks, for instance, now make up about 25 per cent-ish of all kicks taken, whereas in 1987 it was about 5 per cent-ish. Box-kicks are, of course, a necessary part of rugby/life, but so are those plastic boxes from Ikea that seem to collect in your house and turn your life into a shit game of Tetris. So, Ikea boxes and box-kicks can both f’off.

Decision – Rugby was better in the f’ing old days

THE SPIRAL-KICK

The spiral-kick was once the only kick in town – especially in the 80s and 90s. Being able to spiral-kick a rugby ball was a rite of passage. It was like being able to drive a car or use the ‘nudges’ properly on a gambling machine. However, the spiral-kick was a cruel bastard. Much like tight jeans, it looked cool but caused problems with your balls. A spiral-kick either flew through the air like something NASA would be proud to produce or flew immediately off the side of your foot and into the car park like a pissed-up pigeon. As an aside, with the number of pigeons/seagulls that the author of this book has seen drinking directly from pints of lager/cider, it’s amazing that they don’t fight more on the streets – but it does also explain why they’re drawn increasingly to chips and kebabs.

We digress. With the spiral-kick becoming an ever-riskier option, the ‘end-on-end kick’ came into fashion – it meant less distance, but also less risk. In recent seasons we’ve seen the spiral-kick return. Especially the ‘spiral bomb’, which involves sending a spiral-kick up into the air with a spiral so tight that what goes up as a normal rugby ball comes down with the same force and velocity as some kind of new metal-based weapon invented by the Russians.

Decision – Rugby was better in the f’ing old days (bring back more spiral-kicks)

GOAL-KICKING

Goal-kicking is the gold of rugby, in that its value hasn’t really changed and it remains the most precious commodity in rugby. Yes, we now have the deadly ‘driving maul’, which you could argue is the diamond/platinum of rugby, but goal-kicking is still where it’s at. No one remembers their team not winning a match because they missed a try-scoring opportunity, but everyone remembers when they lost because they missed a kick at goal. Data on the change in goal-kicking accuracy over the years is scant. While every other inch of the game seems to have been analysed to death, the comparison between goal-kicking in the