Paul Lewis: Beginning of the end for test rugby?

International rugby is disappearing deeper into a hole it is digging itself and the fact now seems to be taking firm root in the public consciousness. All Black luminaries such as Sean Fitzpatrick and Grant Fox are speaking out and there is a groundswell of opinion beginning to grow that the game in its current state is in a bit of trouble.

There was a bit of good, old Kiwi isolationism, parochialism and arrogance when discussing the fact - quel horreur - that the evil French might be villainous enough to send an understrength team to New Zealand next year. I heard some grumpy old men on the radio talking about the arrogance of the French for doing this, apparently unaware that Graham Henry and the All Blacks have been happily doing the same for some time.

Somehow, the French sending an understrength team out here in World Cup year had morphed into what arrogant sods the Frogs were and what about the Rainbow Warrior?

The French would no more send a full-strength team to New Zealand in World Cup year - to the country that seems likeliest to beat them in their home tournament - than we would if the roles were reversed. The psychological stakes are too high.

Anyway, why is there a June tour of this country except to keep the NZRU/IRB/Sky money-go-round nicely oiled?

The 2007 French tour is an example of what is wrong with test rugby - countless games, too many of which are ordinary because of rotation. When the ordinariness filters down, as it has, to Super 14 and the Air NZ Cup, the fans will do what fans do in this situation - vote with their feet.

Many already have, while rugby authorities are pleased with the fact their TV audiences are up. Make no mistake, this is important. If the broadcasters, who supply the gold for the egg the NZRU goose lays, were to feel audiences were dropping, there would be hell to pay. Merde! (as we say in France).

But if you listen to the talk in the rugby clubs, bars, pubs, and even, gulp, on talkback, the main theme is how boring the game has become. When was the last truly compelling test we watched?

Some of us would say the July 29 13-9 Tri Nations test at Brisbane was a good 'un and so it was. But it is an obvious choice - standing alone in a featureless field of test mediocrity. When was the last really thrilling try the All Blacks scored?

Many fans have joined Fox, Fitzpatrick and others in worrying about what happens after the 2007 World Cup. Do we have another three years of rest, rotation and below-par tests in the name of 2011?

God help us, no. The international game may not be strong enough to stand it. People will turn off in droves or do something more exciting - like watching glaciers move or kauris grow. It would be like Winston Peters and the spider. You don't know who to feel sorrier for.

The international game badly needs some leadership which transcends the money of the professional era. As Fitzpatrick pointed out in his column last week, it is not just the Southern Hemisphere in trouble, the north is too. For different reasons, player burnout among them.

The potential saviour is a global season, something the NZRU is pushing. International teams could play in this common "window". A global league would obviously be good, with points maybe accruing from competitions such as the Six Nations and Tri Nations.

This could also be used to draw closer into the fold countries such as Argentina, Samoa and Fiji who complain justifiably about being left out in the cold. The matches could also be used to rank teams for the World Cup.

This is all hopeful stuff, of course. It's like wishing for world peace. The road blocks are immense, not least that the north is ruled by the clubs and that a global programme would mean dismantling the very system that is making the rugby rich richer - in everything except content. Naked self-interest would have to be put aside, something at which humans are not very good.

But someone has to do it. Otherwise we could be watching the beginning of the end.

It's a bit like champagne, if you'll forgive the return to things French. I did not like champagne nor the bubbly stuff that is not allowed to use the name. Then I tasted vintage champagne. All was explained. One is like nectar, which is why it costs so much. Some of the others are like a cross between fermented hedge clippings and Sprite and, in my experience, give you heartburn.

International rugby is giving us all heartburn at the moment but at vintage prices.

It needs to find a way out of this unique marketing proposition.