Time To Break The Habit Of A Lifetime

I am not a fan of hypothetical Lions Test XVs. There is one simple reason for this, even when the final touring party is announced and they arrive in either Australia, New Zealand or South Africa, picking the first Test XV is still fraught with danger.

For instance, in 1971, Ray McLaughlin and Sandy Carmichael were pencilled-in as the Test props. Then came the Canterbury game and both were out of the Tour, leaving Ian McLauchlan and Sean Lynch to take the jerseys.

So, I never pick a hypothetical Lions XV. However, this year, I have decided to do this, and my trigger was a memory of going into the old Herald building in Mitchell Street one night in December, 1974 or maybe 1975.

“Dan” Archer came up with the notion of a New Year competition, this would involve picking an all-time Scotland football team, to most-closely match one to be selected – over a good lunch – by Dan and Scotland boss Willie Ormond.

The prize was a case of whisky and such was the interest, the competition got more responses than any Herald competition, before or since. You literally could not see the surface of the Sports Desk, and the pile of entries was of Everest proportions.

Poor Dan had to wade through them all, but, he picked-out one losing entry for special mention, and I seem to recall, he sent the entrant – a chap from Hamilton I seem to remember - a consolation bottle of whisky for his chutzpah.

But common consent, he picked the worst team of Scottish internationalists that could be imagined. The team started: Frank Haffey, Bobby Shearer, Davie Provan – then went down hill.

So, I have taken a similar approach to picking my 2021 Lions Test XV, which, in 1-15 order is:

Joe Marler, Elliot Dee, Simon Berghan, Adam Beard, Devon Toner, James Botham, Brad Shields, Josh Strauss; Henry Pyrgos, Owen Farrell, Jacob Stockdale, Manu Tuilagi, Ollie Lawrence, Jonny May, Mike Brown.

Well, it's no sillier a selection than some I've seen. I was, however, sorely tempted to pick Six Nations' Player of the Tournament HAMISH WATSON, seeing as so-many erudite and unbiased English commentators have been telling us he's useless and picking about a dozen English club players ahead of him in their selections.

THE Junta has seen fit to release the minutes of the last meeting of the SRU Board, interesting they are too. Of particular interest to me, is the decision to switch Stirling County from being a notional “North and Midlands” club to being a “Glasgow North” club.

With the suggestion that the FOSROC Super6 is set to become the Super8, this is intriguing.

• Does this mean the controversial plan for a Scotstoun-based S8 side has been quietly dropped?

• Where does this leave the whole of Scotland north of the River Forth – is the SRU writing-off all these clubs as incapable of producing good players?

I think we need clarity of thinking (no tittering at the back there) from inside BT Murrayfield. The Council members should have some hard questions for The Junta, while being ready to answer some themselves from the clubs.

No word either in the minutes about how those welcome £20 million in government grtants and loans will be spent. Well, I could hazard a guess or two.

• Refurbishment of TCD's office suite

• Ditto for whoever replaces the now-departed Dom McKay

• New top of the range cars for those two paid officials, plus maybe the new bean counter in-chief.

• Pay-offs to some of the failures, starting with Warriors' coach Danny Wilson. His jaiket has to be on a shoogly peg after recent results.

• The cost of recruiting Wilson's replacement.

All of that should get rid of a million or two, fairly easily. Also, I dare say TCD will need a wee trip to South Africa this summer, to check-out the Lions Tour. And, since he cannot go it alone, I suppose Super Trougher, our beloved Chairman JJ, who, as Lion number 607 has more right to be on the trip than TCD.

A wee trip to Africa, all-expenses-paid for those two, will be further good use for the cash.

Don't Cry For Us Bonnie Scotland

THIS POST was supposed to be Part Two of my look at Glasgow Rugby. However, since this is my website – my rules, I trust regular followers will forgive me if I change horses in mid-race, dump the Glasgow piece (for now) and take a fresh look at thing.

(And if you cannot forgive me, tough titty. I'm in my 75^th year now, I have decided to stop giving a fuck what anyone else thinks and just do my own thing.)

Browsing through Facebook, the other night, I had an epiphany. I cannot remember who posted it, or on what site – my apologies for that, but, the poster got me thinking: that's a very-good idea.

The post in question suggested that the SRU should follow the lead of UAR, the Argentinian Rugby Union and go with one full-time professional sides, the equivalent of Los Jaguares, and allow our better players to go off and play elsewhere, if other clubs can offer them a better deal than the SRU.

The SRU, and indeed the Scottish Rugby Family, well, we: “Hae a guid conceit o' oorsels.” We appear to think, because we started the whole international rugby circus off in the first place, 150 years ago, we have some God-given right to a permanent seat at the top table.

Sure, if we can earn that seat, fair enough, but, we do not have a right to our exalted place in the game, unless we work at at – which means making the best of what we have, and not spending money we cannot afford on institutions and structures which are no longer fit for purpose.

Let's look at the two Unions in question here:

• UAR – 420 clubs – 102,790 registered players

• SRU – 241 clubs – 38,500 registered players

So, the Argentinian Union is twice as large as the SRU, and has nearly three-times the number of players, yet, they get bye on one full-time professional club side. We are currently ranked eighth in the World Rugby rankings, Argentina are ranked ninth. Obviously, there is not a lot between the two nations.

Another thing the two nations have in common – rugby comes a poor second to football in national consciousness. For every wannabe Finn Russell here, there are ten wannabe Kenny Dalglishes. In Argentina, for every wannabe Juan Martin Fernandez Lobbe, there are ten wannabe Diego Maradonas.

But, when, with their greater number of clubs and players, the UAR feels they can only fund and manage one full-time professional team, what gives the smaller SRU the right to think they can afford to fund two full-time professional teams?

Los Jaguares has a 100% Argentinian squad – no contracts given to cheap South Africans, Kiwis or Australians. Their coach is an Argentinian, no foreign imports there either. If Argentina can do this – why not Scotland?

Argentina's GDP (gross domestic product) is $454.4 billion US Dollars, this equates to a per capita income of $9,912.28 Us Dollars.

Scotland's GDP is $205 billion US Dollars, this equates to a per capita income of $37,460 US Dollars. So, you might think, from these figures, the SRU might be able to attract private investors to run their full-time professional teams. I wonder why this has not happened.

This inability to attract meaningful inward investment towards their full-time professional teams has forced the SRU to become team owners, rather than merely the governing body.

It is fair enough that the SRU is not the only governing body to also own teams competing in the PRO14. However, the Irish and Welsh clubs in that competition are more “arms length” than the two Scottish sides.

Particularly in Ireland, each of the four provincial teams in the PRO14 is managed locally – why is this not the case in Scotland?

While I acknowledge, both Edinburgh and Glasgow have had some success in attracting supporters who may not have a grass roots club of choice, in-general their supporter base comes from the long-established club scene. By releasing control from Murrayfield to more-autonomous Regions or Districts, I feel, as has happened in Ireland, the supporter base could be grown.

So, why don't the SRU take a look at the Irish and Argentinian models and see if we could adapt them to suit Scotland.

At the time of writing, the SRU directly employs over 100 full-time professional rugby players. Twenty-two of these players are not Scotland-qualified. There are also a further 30 Scottish players playing in the top-flight in England, France and Wales.

Suppose we go for the Argentinian model, the 22 players who were not Scotland-qualified could be let go at the end of their contracts, or have their contracts paid-off. The Union could then decide what to do with the 80 Scottish players they had left.

Up to 15 could be deployed as the Sevens squad, leaving some 65 players. Since the average full-time team in the three elite European leagues carries 50 players, that means some 15 players would need to be re-homed. However, it would still leave the SRU with 100 full time players from whom to pick the Scotland squad.

This is always a difficult and emotive subject. However, some would surely be able to re-locate to other clubs, some of the more-experienced players might want to start the switch to coaching, perhaps deals could be done to place them with Super6 (or as we hear it could be – Super8 clubs). Some of the older players might be absorbed into development roles within the SRU.

Now, if we could not put-out a competitive national team, and a competitive PRO14 team from that amount of SCOTTISH players, maybe we should just give it up completely.

The big bonus, however, would be – the cost savings to be made would allow the SRU to divert more money to grass roots club rugby, thus ensuring the game's survival and good health in Scotland.

Mind you, for Scottish rugby to have a healthy future, we need further change – of which, more later.

Let's Look At Glasgow Rugby - Part One: If You Know Their History

WE REALLY need to talk about Glasgow Rugby. OK, everyone and his brother and sister believes the Dear Green Place is a football city, but, right from the start of rugby 150 years ago, Glasgow has had a proud rugby heritage.

There were six Glasgow Academicals and one West of Scotland player in the original 20-strong Scotland team which beat England in the inaugural international in 1871. These two clubs, plus Allan Glen's, Clydesdale, GHK, Glasgow Hawks, Glasgow High School FP, Glasgow University, Hillhead High School FP, Jordanhill College, Hutcheson's Grammar School FP and Kelvinside Academicals have all as individual clubs, produced full Scotland caps over the 150 years of international rugby. (I appreciate GHK and to a degree Hawks are amalgamations of clubs also listed separately, by the way.)

In addition, from the wider Glasgow District: Ayr, Greenock Wanderers, Kilmarnock, Paisley and Stirling County have produced full caps. So, Glasgow District rugby has history.

In the final season of the old Unofficial Championship in 1973, there were eight Glasgow District sides listed in the 30 Championship clubs. The following season, the first of the Official Leagues, there were 11 Glasgow District teams in the three National Leagues. Today, there are 18 Glasgow District (now West Region) sides in the four National Leagues. Below that, there are a further 31 clubs playing in the West Regional Leagues.

These figures indicate – there is nothing wrong with club rugby in the West, at least as far as numbers are concerned. However, this quantity does not always transfer into quality.

For all the old Glasgow District had the most clubs; in 46 Inter-District Championship tournaments, Glasgow won a mere three, and shared a further five – hardly a case of biggest being best.

Back in the days of the Unofficial Championship, Glasgow Academicals won the title ten times, and shared it on a further five occasions. Accies, however, did not win the title again after the glory days of Herbert Waddell and Jimmy Nelson at half-back, in 1926.

West of Scotland come next, with six wins and a further three shared titles – their last in 1971, the heyday of Sandy Carmichael and Gordon Brown off with the Lions, and the likes of Ronnie Hannah, David Shedden, Ian Murchie, and Quinton Dunlop being around the Scotland team, and Lionel Weston capped by England.

Glasgow High School FP come next, with four wins and three shares – their last in 1962, when Hamish Kemp was still playing. Jordanhill College famously took the title in 1969, while Allan Glen's are the only other outright winners from Glasgow – taking the title in 1939. Hillhead High School FP have twice shared the title, in 1934 and 1937.

The Official Scottish Club Championship was not a Glasgow success story. In the first 21 seasons, from 1973-74, there was not one Glasgow winner, although West of Scotland did travel to Mansfield Park and beat Hawick in an epic play-off game, in the inaugural season. However, they still fell short, the Greens taking the title on points difference. That was as close as a Glasgow club came to winning the crown, before Stirling County finally triumphed in 1994-95 – the last season before the game went open.

No side form the West won again, until Glasgow Hawks had their run of three straight league wins, between 2004 and 2006. Since then, Ayr has consistently been the Best in the West, with title wins in 2009, 2013, 2017 and 2019. Marr were on-course to win the Premiership in 2020, when Covid intervened and the season was cancelled.

So, it could be said, the story of Glasgow or West club rugby has been: lots of clubs of a near-identical standard, with one club at a time leading the way and standing above the rest.

Of course, the rugby landscape has changed greatly over the last few years. At the highest level of the club game, it's all about full-time professionals – Edinburgh Warriors and Glasgow Warriors – playing in the PRO14.

We could, therefore, view Warriors as the one West club standing above the rest and leading the way. However, when the likes of West of Scotland held that role in the amateur days, or Hawks or Ayr or Marr was the leading club side – their squads tended to be made-up of locally-trained young men.

That is not the case with Warriors. The club might have a 50-strong playing squad, but, only 12 of these players – less than a quarter – are genuine West of Scotland boys, who came through local clubs. So, there appears to be a definite glass ceiling which locally-reared players struggle to break through to the professional ranks.

Looking ahead, it appears the SRU is planing to use the FOSROC SUPER6, which will be expanded to at-least a Super8, as a sort of finishing school where those players who can train-on to become full-time professionals will be sorted out from those who, in Murrayfield's eyes, don't have what it takes.

However, it looks as if, rather than inviting either GHA or Glasgow Hawks, currently the two top clubs in the city, to take-up one of the additional Super franchises, the Murrayfield Brains Trust will place the franchise, under central control, at Scotstoun, playing under the Warriors banner.

Murrayfield has form on this. There are long-standing Hawks officials who will tell you, and provide compelling evidence, that Murrayfield played its part in stifling their club's ambitions to be the best in the west by amongst other activities: “encouraging” Hawks' sponsors to divert their cash from the club side to Warriors.

NOT having an S6 franchise in the city was one of the many failings when Super6 was concocted. I am positive having no club input when this failing is rectified is to compound the folly.

Look at the top two clubs in the city. GHA has direct links to two of the top rugby-playing schools in the city: the H in the club's name stands for Hutcheson's Grammar School, while the A stands for St Aloysius College.

Hawks was started as an amalgamation of Glasgow Academicals and GHK, with direct links to Glasgow Academy, The High School of Glasgow and Kelvinside Academy, the three leading rugby-playing schools in the north of the city.

OK, some of the backwoodsmen around Anniesland were never happy with this arrangement, and contrived to get Accies and GHK back climbing through the leagues, weakening Hawks in the process. Then, the SRU stuck the boot in with the bourach they made when they set-up S6.

In short, Glasgow District (now West Regional) rugby has under-performed for too-long – what can be done to end this long history of under-performance?

I have my own ideas on this – which I intend to expand on in part two of this look at Glasgow Rugby.

A Long Read - Random Thoughts On A Sticky Subject

THIS WEEK, I have been following an interesting debate, on Facebook, concerning the future shape of Scottish Rugby. I have copied and pasted the thread below, for the edification of those who may have missed it.

Original post, by Gavin Blackburn:

Rumours and I reiterate its rumours but from what's being branded about: the FOSROC Super6 will be rebranded to Super8 with a squad from London Scottish and one playing out of Scotstoun under the Glasgow Warriors banner.

This could finish many of the clubs playing in Premiership and National league structure. Will take us back to potential regional rugby.

Scottish Rugby you are going to finish our game as we know it.

Andy Miller (first reply):

Don’t think it will change anything if these two teams were to join - it was always going to be expanded anyway. What they need is to play the academy players all the time and get them into the pro teams without buying players in.

Kevin C Brown to Andy Miller - Exactly this.

 

Gavin Blackburn to Andy Miller: It will change how the Glasgow clubs can hold onto players. Anyone that dismisses this is really holding the club game in low regard. They want a franchise out of Scotstoun, then Glasgow clubs are going to be seriously affected.

Iain Milne:

It was always likely to go to 8 and the inclusion of London Scottish is a great idea. Tap into potential down South, it will create interest up here and give a new challenge to the clubs up here. If the Welsh cross border were to continue we have exciting challenges for the players up here.

John Thorburn to Iain Milne:

Don't see how it will challenge the clubs up here, it may challenge the franchises which are half owned by the SRU. It will be good to see what the strategy is and how club rugby will look?

Kevin H Wyness to Iain Milne: The Welsh clubs have their own issues and are very unlikely to be part of this malarkey.

Jim Gemmell:

It’s all ££££££££££££££££ feck all requirement of clubs .. it’s really pathetic of the SRU. Time they woke up and listened to the clubs and fans.

Gavin Blackburn:

Where do these academy players come from that will be playing under the potential Glasgow Warriors banner? Hawks, GHA?

So these young players will be lost to the likes of these clubs I'm sure. Now Stage 3 players, they will be affiliated to Warriors anyway but what about the Stage 1 and 2 players where will they go? Warriors as well?

Would they not be better playing for their club of origin to continue developing? So clubs in Glasgow could potentially nurture young players from P3 up to U18; they show potential THEN they are whisked away to Glasgow Warriors Super 8 without playing a 1st team game for their club?

But it's OK because as a certain individual said "Fewer is stronger" and that man has been allowed to rip the heart out of the club game. Come on clubs: wakey wakey sit up and do something about it collectively.

John Thorburn to Gavin Blackburn:

Spot on.

Iain Milne to Gavin Blackburn:

Gavin, the clubs have failed miserably to work together for years, they have been to full of self interest, I have witnessed this sitting on Prem 1 forums for years, speaking to clubs at all levels who agree in principle to sensible ideas but when it comes to push or shove they do what’s best for their own club!

Ambitious players have always moved up the ladder to test themselves, you won’t stop that. Clubs of course were the worst offenders at encouraging this by offering money to players of dubious standard and motive.

We will talk sometime but club rugby needs to work hard at giving a product players want. Most of club rugby should be about fun, that is or was our strength over many years. This fixation about climbing up leagues no matter what the cost is driving players away.

Kevin C Brown to Gavin Blackburn:

The thing is, the average return for a club spending 12 years developing a player through to exit at U18 is about 6. 6 guys move on to playing Senior rugby in year one. In any year how many of these guys will be good enough to move into super 6? It’s unlikely that even one will be ready for that.

Gavin Blackburn to Kevin C Brown:

I think Hawks and GHA would feel they have many talented players that could be lost to Super 6/8.

Kevin C Brown to Gavin Blackburn:

But at 18? Probably not and the reality as Windy said is players move on. I would argue a bigger concern for Rugby clubs is players who just stop playing at 17/18.

Trevor Carmichael to Kevin C Brown:

There are no incentives for players at Senior Rugby at 18+. Resurrect Inter-District championship at various age groups(U16(maybe), U18 & U21) and senior level. 8 week block of fixtures in a semi pro environment after league campaign or break in season for a Regional Cup competition.

GHA supporters are not going to watch a ex GHA player playing in Super Six. On the other hand GHA supporters would go and watch a GHA player who has been select to play for District side.

Rangi Jericevich to Iain Milne:

We are all entitled to our own views and in a democracy such as the SRU all views should be given a fair hearing and voted on. That is how disputed ideas can be resolved in a civil manner.

The rivalries and differing views between clubs at various levels are a reflection of human nature and with the right system in place these rivalries can be harnessed to drive the game forward. If clubs are to be looked down upon for daring to be ambitious then why do any of us bother to get out of bed in the morning?

I don't wish to get into detail about why I think you are misguided in your thinking but it would have been nice to be given the opportunity to do so at any point during the development of the S6 concept in the first place and now in it's expansion.

The problem with all of this Iain, is that it goes against the very principal of what a Union is supposed to be about and destroys the trust required to keep it on an even keel. There is no forum for discussion or consultation, the SRU is now a dictatorship.

I hope you can reflect on the manner in which this change is being implemented and, whilst we may disagree on things, ask whether this is truly the right way for our game to be run.

Kevin C Brown to Trevor Carmichael:

I wouldn’t disagree about a district competition for Senior amateur players. Regional competition already exists at U16/18/20 level. Why wouldn’t a GHA supporter not go to watch an ex GHA player playing Super 6 as long as it didn’t conflict with a club game? I’d go and watch any game of rugby available to me.

Iain Milne to Rangi Jericevich:

Firstly can I say, as I have said before: Super 6 was not my choice however we have it now and I will support it and try and make it better.

Again as I’ve said before the clubs could not make a decision on how to move forward ( there’s a surprise) but they had the opportunity to put forward their ideas.

Please do no get my views on rugby mixed up with with lack of ambition. That had never been my attitude playing or involved off the pitch.

Ambition can take many forms, it is simply just not about climbing leagues as seems to be the mantra these days. My ambition is for club rugby to be a success again, on and off the pitch.

I would suggest most clubs ambitions should revolve round increasing playing numbers and busy fun club houses, a game for all.

Local leagues. I’ve tried to put forward my ideas in the past but they seemingly are not what clubs wanted so I will concentrate my efforts at My own clubs.

Having been closely involved with club rugby over the last 10 years or so it disappoints me at the lack of progress at club rugby to produce a product that young players of today want, there really has been no change bar Super 6, numbers when I last looked still continue to drop and more fixtures fail to take place.

The clubs have it in their own power to make change but despite many words spoken we have not moved forward.

 

Trevor Carmichael to Kevin C Brown:

Age grade district competitions??? Not to the level that the inter district championship provided many years ago at U18 & U21 levels.

What I’m actually trying to say is crowds would be bigger at an inter district game than at a Super Six game due to this factor. Clubs would also get the benefit of selected players coming back to the club, bringing there experience/ development back to the club and pass onto younger players.

Bottom line everyone would be playing rugby rather than someone being signed to a Super Six side and playing no more than 3 games in one season if that.

Kevin C Brown to Trevor Carmichael:

I’d disagree with you on that. Having coached within the age grade programme with Edinburgh the quality of rugby and the players it has produced is just as good as it was many years ago.

I don't disagree, the appetite for Senior district rep rugby is there. There’s an appetite for Super 6.....2500 folk went to a Boroughmuir game in the first round of games. I’d imagine that an Edinburgh District XV would get about the same in a crowd.

Trevor Carmichael to Kevin C Brown:

Boroughmuir game when they gave away loads of tickets free. I’m not saying the quality isn’t good I just don’t think competitions/tournaments lends well to increasing their experience at a higher level of rugby.

Maybe they would get similar crowds but we need players playing rugby every week during the season - super six doesn’t do that, it’s there to get players ready for step up to the pro game. How is that achievable if half of them aren’t playing.

Kevin C Brown to Trevor Carmichael:

Giving away free stuff is the cornerstone of good sports marketing. I don't think Super 6 is perfect and the issue of players not being able to play for club is probably one of them, but it’s there and happening. It is very unlikely to go away.

Speak to Super 6 players and they will tell you it is a step up from club rugby. The margins of making it as a pro are so thin, but training and playing in higher intensity, more physical and more skilful environments will hopefully help with a greater return.

If in 5 years it doesn’t work then I think people can feel aggrieved but we are always on a knife edge of becoming a rugby backwater......this has to be given the chance to work.

Gavin Blackburn to Kevin C Brown:

Who says Super 6 is the best way forward? The "Union"? The fact remains they could have created a competitive environment by bringing back district rugby within the club season and investing In the top 10/12 clubs in Scotland rather than part owning 6 franchises that play in a structure that actually inhibits players playing the game.

The total investment could have been spread across the premiership and they could quite easily have brought in the top 4 playing in Cross border league with teams from the principality. Now I'm sure that was done before oh that's right it was called the B&I cup.

If we are looking at growing numbers and the quality they should have looked at the top 10/12 maybe even 20 clubs and funded them properly that would have created a sustainable structure that would have kept players playing every week.

The identity players would have had playing for their district would have been massive for the players at the same time.

Kevin C Brown to Gavin Blackburn:

But who’s to say that it isn’t? It here and happening. Could it be done better - absolutely......but time will tell.

In reference to your model, there’s clubs in that top 10/12/20 that I wouldn’t give 50p to because they’d squander it. Not every club is as well run as GHA.

Keeping it narrow focussed the funding on those players most likely to step up. Spread it thinly and it’s less likely to generate success. Similar to the targeted funding in Olympic cycles.

Gavin Blackburn to Kevin C Brown:

We will agree to disagree. The track record the union have with implementing new structures isn't exactly pulsating so we will see what happens.

When you say narrow focused I find your views narrow minded but that's your opinion.

Kevin C Brown to Gavin Blackburn:

I don’t see it as narrow minded, it’s just working within the reality that currently exists.

John F Brown to Trevor Carmichael:

You are 100% correct, the game should be about players playing the game, up or down. So why did the clubs that missed out on Super 6, block players playing for a club side.

It is incompetent of clubs to stop a talented GHA player trying for Super 6, who on a free Saturday is not allowed back to play for GHA. It is also farcical that the Scottish Clubs XV is not allowed to choose 200 players from the club scene!

 

Iain Milne to John F Brown:

Totally correct, this typifies what goes on in club rugby in Scotland. As I’ve said many times it is riddled with self-interest and a lack of vision.

The league structure as it stands at the moment is totally outdated and not suitable for today’s players. Clubs would rather hang on to their beloved National leagues, struggling to full fill fixtures, unable to field a 2nd xv and talk about ambition.

Everyone’s ambition has to get more adult players playing the game, we don’t have a future if we don’t do that. Players of today are our future administrators and volunteers with them there will be no club rugby.

Andy Miller:

Only stage 3 academy players will play for the Glasgow franchise I would have thought; but don't be surprised if they add in Stage 3 players from all over the country to play for the Warriors - some Super6 players are only getting 6 games a year and they need to get the academy boys playing.

It's the nature of the beast now - players have always moved on from the lower league clubs and now we're seeing the same thing happen to the National 1 teams. It's a good thing only if they get game time and then pathway into pro teams but if they don't then you have a much bigger issue in that people just won't play rugby anymore.

Why would you spend all your time training and playing only to see the pro teams buy a pro and you've no chance of playing? Where is the incentive? I wouldn't, and I'm not going to encourage my kids to do that under the current circumstances.

What rugby doesn't realise is that so many other sports have got their act together over the last 10 years so there is lots of competition for bodies. Ever been to a Hockey club? It's a tough game now and the social side is fantastic.

Martial arts is attractive due to UFC - you can get a Black Belt in about 4 years and you don't have to spend nearly as much time training before you get decent - and what is missing in Judo? Decent players at over 100kg. You could take a rugby player at that weight, train him and within 4 years he could be fighting for Scotland. Now, what's more attractive? 4 years playing rugby and never getting a sniff of a pro appearance or 4 years of training, getting a Black Belt and fighting for your country?!

Basketball, cycling all these sports are achieving because they've developed. The other massive competition for rugby is SkySports. Why would I pay 25 quid to go and watch Edinburgh for almost the same price I can sit and watch rugby from Fri night solidly through to Sunday teatime.

And people are still interested in watching rugby. Boroughmuir Bears had 2,500 people at Meggetland for Super6 because it was an experience and affordable.

Clubs can still build as community offerings and incentivise fans but they need to work at it. Gone are the days of just opening the gates and people flood in.

Paul Justice:

I wonder, will these two new teams be subject to the same franchise agreement as the other 6?

Will the two teams be allowed to parachute a back-up team into National 1?

Will the Scotstoun XV be a separate trading entity, and if so, who will own them?

Super 6 franchisees had to guarantee a minimum investment, with Scottish Rugby paying in £137k (I think) - how much will the Scotstoun XV be costing Scottish rugby (including pitch rentals, etc.)?

And don't forget, Super 6 was being funded out of the domestic rugby budget, so guess where the finance for Scotstoun xv is coming from.

Ian Notman to Gavin Blackburn:

Gav they may use the Warriors name but sure it will be the clubs GHA and Hawks that will take the franchise on.

It would mean a wider spread of Stage 3 players and more game time.

Personally I would rather see another Pro team for these youngsters.

Stephen Winter to Ian Notman:

Why would the clubs, GHA & Hawks, take the franchise on?

Ian Notman to Stephen Winter:

Just a suggestion Stephen. It’s obvious that the SRU would want a Glasgow based team.

Hawks tried for a franchise last time so why wouldn’t they try again?

Stephen Winter to Ian Notman:

Take on the franchise and costs but play as Warriors?

Ian Notman response:

Play as any name they want under there own banner. They fund it they call the shots to a certain extent.

John Roxburgh:

First step is to introduce school age youngsters to the fun ethics and discipline of our great game.The player base is not sufficient to maintain our present status across the globe which sadly does not seem to concern the Governing body!!!

AS I said, at the start of this post, some very-interesting, not forgetting varied, opinions on show there. Also, some contributions from leading club officials and guys with a long track record of success in Scottish Rugby.

I have my own ideas on how we should move forward, but , I thought, I should share this Facebook thread and throw it open to the Aristotle family.

Let us know what YOU think, then I will follow-up on this interesting and crucial debate.