Get this man Cobus Visagie a beer

Here's the link to an article that for once comes across as refreshingly honest but knowledgeable: :http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,16017_8155657,00.html

He claims there is a big difference between a provincial coach and a national coach. Players selected for the national team cannot be expected to be retrained and developed by the national coach. They have been selected based on their efforts for their club or provincial teams. If you select a player and then try to make him do things he hasn't been doing then you shouldn't be selecting him. Take a note Declan Kidney, for example.

That said, ideally a team shouldn't have one gameplan and look to play to their traditional strengths. Because you can be sure the opposition is aware of those traditional strengths and will be looking to disrupt your team in those areas. So it is not just a question of developing your style to playing a certain team, you need to be able to adapt your game to each specific game. So versatility on your bench becomes crucial. It's not just a question of having players who can all play to your gameplan but having different players who offer different skill sets to be able to enter the game and tweak what you are trying to achieve.

His comments about the rules are also interesting. How many times did we hear the commentators say this year do you know if that's the ruling? Many are ex-players but how easy is it to lose track of all the changes that have been made? Then the traditional rules that have always been there don't seem to be refereed because the ref has too many other areas to look at. A ref who blows everything gets accused of killing the game and a ref who lets things slide gets accused of allowing teams to get away with murder. The breakdown, the scrum and indeed lineout continue to be endless sources of contention and frustration.

So it's refreshing to read a columnist who can offer up an opinion that gets you thinking and doesn't need controversy to be at the heart of the article to provoke a response and encourage more readers. Good work sir and it makes me want to sit down and have a beer with you and find out more of your thoughts. Like what does he really think of Bok rugby at the moment. Cause for optimism or cause for concern?

Have been reading his observations on Planet Rugby and thoroughly agree with him on most of his comments.Myself I have often commented about the over complexity and constant tinkering with the laws.That again you may have different rules in NH and SH or they are trialled in tournaments many Super/Test players may never play.

Great stuff Kia. I think the thing with NZ is that a similar style of rugby is played from grass roots rugby up to the ABs.

In Ireland we have had 3 provinces playing very different styles of rugby. Leinster have been playing a very fast paced, multi-phase, NZesque, short passing/offloading game, Ulster a more set piece orientated, territorial game and Munster trying to evolve from a forward orientated game to a more expansive one with mixed results.

Now we have NZ coaches at all of them and a more attacking approach so maybe we'll see a more consistent style of play at that level. However at national level there is a big challenge to put square pegs and square holes and get the players playing the way they do at club level. I'd say with Kidney there the chances aren't good but one can only live in hope.....

P.S. Jarod Payne is awesome. Cheers!