‘Rugby is spreading and we will struggle to keep our place in its upper echelons’

One way or another we have to make the most of this World Cup, and of the next one, in England, in 2015. The game is spreading, and from now on we will struggle to keep our place in its upper echelons. By that I mean in the top ten. The more countries play the game seriously, the harder it will be. The high-heid-yins at Murrayfield must sometimes glance nervously over to Glasgow and see where their equivalents in the round-ball game now stand in the world rankings: somewhere in the fifties. Football is a simpler game in which it is easier for formerly minor or backward countries to make quick progress, but we shouldn’t deceive ourselves or rest easy. If countries like Germany, China, Brazil and the USA, not to mention others such as Kenya, already successful on the IRB Sevens circuit, ever really apply themselves to rugby and devote resources to it, we will find ourselves outweighed. There’s no guarantee that kids now playing mini-rugby will grow up in the reasonable expectation that Scotland will qualify for the RWC quarter-finals. And the same goes for Wales and Ireland.

Meanwhile, happily for us, the rugby world remains a fairly small one. It’s not really a global game as football is. It’s more like cricket in its range. This is the seventh RWC and only four countries have won the cup to date: Australia and South Africa, twice each, New Zealand and England once. France are the only other country to have reached the final, losing to New Zealand in 1987 and Australia in 1999. Yet one can make too much of this. The last six FIFA World Cups have had five winners: Brazil twice, Germany, France, Italy and Spain. A great many countries seek football glory, but, as Jim Telfer used to say, the cream always rises to the top. Everyone hopes that this World Cup will be less attritional in its later stages than the last ones have been. Certainly some countries, notably New Zealand and Australia, seem committed to running rugby and an open game. France, too, should play in imaginative style, but it’s by no means certain that they will. The selection of David Skrela as their back-up fly-half indicates Marc Lievremont is prepared to play the South African-style boot-it-in-the-air game if circumstances seem to demand it. The temptation to play the percentage game becomes harder to resist in the later stages of the tournament when nerves take over and risk is shunned. In the last two finals, only one try was scored.

Traditionally we are at our best when we play a fast game, but this has more usually been successful in harrying and disrupting the opposition rather than producing flowing try-scoring movements. Scotland have only rarely scored as many as three or four tries against good opposition. There have been exceptions – the 1999 Five Nations-winning side played splendidly adventurous running rugby. Yet our best results in recent years – Calcutta Cup wins at Murrayfield, victories over South Africa and Australia there, and over Argentina away – have been gained by defence, disruption and doggedness. It would be nice to think things will be different this time, but it’s unlikely. This is arguably our best World Cup side since 1999, and surely the strongest and best-prepared squad, but that’s as much as it is sensible to say at the moment.

Meanwhile there is domestic business to attend to. Edinburgh and Glasgow made poor starts to the season last weekend. Once again their lack of strength in depth was exposed, and this is likely to be the case till their international players return. More encouraging were the remarks made by new chief executive Mark Dodson and his recognition of the need to put the professional game on a sound footing. That said, for many of us, the club game is at least as important. Standing on your club’s touchline is more fun than watching international rugby on television – though often every bit as heart-rending.