John Drake: Big squads, but the crowds are getting smaller

For anyone north of Taupo, the first Super 14 has been pretty hard work.

Both the Chiefs and the Blues, if only mathematically, still have chances of making the semifinals but it will take drastic change of form in both teams, and more importantly, those above them.

The general standard of the rugby by most teams has been average at best with the individual skills lacking and some teams looking as if they have just met before the game, let alone professionals who have been together since last November.

Crowds in New Zealand have been erratic with most picking and choosing their games. The cost for an average family to attend Super 14 rugby week-in, week-out is beyond most, and I understand corporates are struggling to fill their boxes, even when everything is free and paid for, and guests are looking for excuses not to attend live matches.

Again the standard and excitement generated week-in, week-out in most matches has made the decision not to attend easier.

Despite this, I doubt either the administrators or the All Blacks brains trust will be too concerned.

The Rugby Union people in Wellington have got all the TV rights and sponsorships sorted, and although the irritation of relations with their Australian counterparts is a concern it shouldn't be taken too seriously on either side of the Tasman.

So, with little local interest in the outcome of the Super 14 - except that we expect the Crusaders and Hurricanes to do their bit to keep the flag flying - it is the upcoming internationals that I'm looking forward to.

Last year we dined on wounded Lion and tired Tri-Nations. This year we face a smorgasbord with the likes of Manu Samoa, Ireland, Japan, Tonga, Argentina, Australia and South Africa being matched against the All Blacks and Juniors or a combination of both.

Henry's announcement that he will select up to 39 players to face the first challenges of the season has been greeted with muted consent from most.

Last season when Clive Woodward arrived with 40-plus players, we jested that it was overkill and unwarranted. Yet there has been little disagreement with Henry's plan to rest, rotate and even have half the squad preparing in another continent while the others play a test in New Zealand.

Again, I recall the howls of disgust when Sir Clive had the cheek to suggest basing his team in Sydney and flying in for the tests in New Zealand.

I guess the difference between Henry and Woodward is that the Englishman wasn't winning and sought the media's assistance to help his floundering crusade.

We can assume Henry is on top of his game, rarely speaking to the media but always being open and straightforward when asked.

Maybe Henry's 30-odd years of coaching, and particularly his last few in Wales and New Zealand, have made him more cunning and streetwise than poor Woodward. Maybe if this year's results don't go the All Blacks' way, the public and media will treat Henry with the same mistrust we have for the likes of Woodward.

Of the decision to select a group of 39, few have dissented as the reasons seem valid and logical.

Player burnout, mental and physical fatigue are sound reasons and in the background there's the thought of saving our best for next year's World Cup.

Again, as long as New Zealand win there will be no complaints from me even if our players actually face a maximum of 30 matches a year.

My great concern is that if we continue to field teams which are a mix of the best and the rest, and the likes of Ireland arrive in June with only half their stars, then is it a real test match?

If this is to become the standard, will the supporters continue to fill the stadiums?

Last year Jade Stadium, Carisbrook and Eden Park were less than full for test matches, and those games were against some of the toughest opponents.

The rugby public now have the choice of rugby from February to late October.

Every week the public relations guys are hyping a must-watch match.

The saturation television coverage at reasonable pricing is a compelling reason to stay at home, and if the footy's not that great there's always a movie or rerun of Desperate Housewives to fill in the gap until the next game.

But if the rugby is of an inferior standard, or the best aren't playing, then why keep coming back to watch?

The quality must match the quantity.

While the players are being rotated and rested from fatigue and staleness, maybe someone up high should spare a thought for the fatigue and staleness of the loyal supporter being asked to front every week.

They may deserve better than what's being dished up at the moment - and I'm not just talking about the long-suffering Blues followers.