Scotland tour manager Arthur Hastie yesterday issued an angry rebuke to a leading Australian Rugby Union official after the war of words over the quality of tour parties being sent Down Under was reopened.
Timed to coincide with the arrival in Australia of the English tourists, as well as the Scots, ARU chief executive John O'Neill even went as far as to question whether British sides were earning the right to be invited to visit the leading Southern Hemisphere nations.
''If they continue to be unable or unwilling to provide their best possible sides then we have to ask is that fair to our players? The answer is no,'' he is reported as saying. ''Is it fair to the rugby community? No. Is it fair to our broadcasters, to our advertisers, to our sponsors? Again, no.
''It's quite simple. If the Home Unions, some or all of them, don't want to play international rugby at a high level - and that means having their finest players available, then we have to look elsewhere.
''It's not as if international rugby can't get on without them. France always wants to play the best countries, Argentina are having a bit of a resurgence, the Pacific islands of Fiji, Western Samoa, and Tonga are desperate for world-class games.
''And the big unknown is the USA and Canada. There is some prospect of rugby in the USA not only becoming more competitive, but better organised. So, if you have teams from Britain more interested in club rugby than internationals then perhaps we should look for replacements.''
O'Neill was clearly making the point that Scotland's defeat in Fiji reinforced the views previously expressed that the squads Scotland and England are sending are too weak to make an impact and there have been claims that the damage done to Scotland's credibility will seriously affect attendances at their matches in Australia.
However, Hastie responded by saying: ''While O'Neill's reported comments have undoubtedly been coloured by our poor performance against Fiji, it is regrettable, to say the least, that he should now choose to reopen this issue after he had previously accepted SRU assurances that the touring party was the strongest available and that no untoward pressure had been brought to bear by English clubs.''
He outlined the reasons for the absence of some of the better-known Scottish players. ''Before we left Scotland, O'Neill accepted our assurances that Newcastle players Gary Armstrong, Doddie Weir, Peter Walton, George Graham, and Alan Tait were not selected after they had discussions with our director of rugby, Jim Telfer.
''They are variously suffering from long-term injuries which require rest over the summer or from accumulated fatigue.
''Ronnie Eriksson, of London Scottish, was withdrawn from the tour party because he has to undergo a finger operation, Craig Chalmers suffered a serious knee injury on the eve of selection, and Tony Stanger was unavailable because of family reasons.''
Hastie also took a swipe at the damage the ARU was doing to its own cause by taking such a negative attitude to the tour.
''Rugby union is fighting the good fight for exposure and prominence against the competing attractions of rugby league and Austra- lian Rules Football,'' he said.
''O'Neill's comments represent a novel attitude so far as marketing the upcoming Tests by both England and Scotland are concerned.
''So far as future tours to Australia by Home Unions nations are concerned, that is a matter for the ARU. We are here to play rugby, not to engage in politics.''
As if offering a counter-example in public relations, the tourists yesterday welcomed 50 primary schoolteachers from all over Australia to their team hotel. They were given tour mascot Bruce the Lion to pass around their schools.
It was presented to the tourists by pupils at St Francis Primary in Craigmillar and the school aims to create links with all the Austra-lian schools that Bruce visits.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article