KEY POINTS:
If proof were ever needed that rugby's obsession with the collision is killing the sport, it has come at this World Cup.
It is now clear rugby is no longer a game for all shapes and sizes. It is now almost exclusively for hulking great lugs, men who
spent so long at the muscles queue, there wasn't much left by the time they got to the stall handing out brain cells.
As a consequence, this World Cup is shaping as the worst ever. In 40 pool matches, not one truly memorable game was produced. There was plenty of drama, some close games, some exciting finishes and sporadic acts of brilliance.
But not one single game where two sides produced low-error, compelling rugby for sustained periods.
In time, what will we remember of the 2007 World Cup pool games? Argentina's defeat of France, Tonga's bravery against South Africa and Japan's brilliant late comeback to draw with Canada.
We will remember these games because they were dramatic, absorbing at the time in the sense they forced even neutrals to invest emotion.
Yet the sobering reality will kick in when these games come to be reviewed further down the track. Now that the outcome is known, these games have little going for them.
Argentina's clash with France was physical and nothing else and that critique can be applied to almost every other pool game.
Rugby has not advanced since the last World Cup. If anything it has regressed, with most sides seemingly having studied the successful English team of 2003 and determined that size and power are all you need.
Win the collisions, the coaches say, and you will win the game. And most international coaches truly believe that is all that needs to happen - judging by the teams they select and the game plans they pursue.
Big men have been everywhere at this World Cup.
Tonga, one of the success stories so far, have relied on the power of the 110kg Finau Maka. Samoa looked to play off the 126kg No 8 Henry Tuilagi. South Africa have oodles of giant forwards, France recalled Sebastien Chabal to help them win more collisions and the Scots en masse spent the summer in the gym bulking up in preparation for the war of attrition.
The focus is one-dimensional and there are probably only three sides at this World Cup who have thought beyond smashing their way to victory: New Zealand, Australia and Wales.
France no longer play a beautiful game. They have been caught up in this head-down-and-charge stuff.
Saddest of all, even Samoa were duped into thinking that was for them when they played Tonga.
After their loss to Tonga, when they adopted a conservative approach where they kicked excessively and shied away from generating width, coach Michael Jones said: "We felt that was the best way to play Tonga, we've beaten them that way before but the Tongans, when they're in that mood - and I've never seen them in such a mood - it doesn't matter what game plan you throw at them, they're going to smash you over."
Previous generations of Samoans might beg to differ. They might legitimately ponder why Jones didn't look to run the Tongans around, to push the ball wide and keep the tempo of the game fast. That, after all, has worked well for Samoa at previous tournaments; it suits the natural skills and instincts and takes the contest away from simply being about brawn.
It is clearly important for teams to compete physically, to punch over the advantage line, to be clever and secure at the breakdown and strong on defence.
But rugby has always been as much about guile as about strength. And the chronic lack of skill should be a massive concern to those men hoping the game will advance into new frontiers after this tournament.
The likes of Georgia and Romania have improved since 2003, but not in the leaps and bounds their results might suggest.
What they have done is allow the French professional clubs to condition their forwards and build them into wrecking balls. To compete at this World Cup, it is a simple case of putting eight big men in your pack and telling them to hammer into rucks and tackles with or without the ball.
Everyone else plays the same way and, when it is reduced to a contest around the collision, the likes of Georgia and Romania can compete for most of the 80 minutes.
It helps, too, that many sides have also reverted to heavy use of the up-and-under at this World Cup a tactic which is an admission that few teams believe they have the skills and pace in their backline to even bother trying with ball in hand.
Maybe the minnows haven't really improved at all, maybe the established nations have regressed further than anyone realises.
Those who want to believe otherwise should take the time to think whether they have actually seen an act of subtle genius at this World Cup. Has there been a delayed pass, a magic dummy, an impossible to read side-step, an instinctive decoy run?
The answer is: Not really. Dan Carter's cross kicks at Murrayfield were inch-perfect, Bryan Habana finished brilliantly against Samoa and Chris Latham has sprinkled a bit of pixie dust here and there.
Collectively, the opening 30 minutes produced by the All Blacks against Italy and Australia's first half against Wales has been as good as it has got so far.
This World Cup, in purely rugby terms, has to be a contender for the worst ever and, once the dust has settled after the tournament, the words of All Black assistant coach Wayne Smith should be revisited by every international coach at the tournament.
"There might have been a perception about England at the last World Cup that they only had power and size and played a game of attrition," said Smith. "I think that failed to look beyond what they had done in the previous two years.
"They played some of the best rugby ever seen in 2001 and 2002. It's easy to look at them as World Cup winners and say that was the way to go and I think some teams have looked at that and they haven't recognised the need to develop the game as well."
The obsession with size has to end. 2011 can't be another tournament for big men only and if it is, the sport will be in a very dark place.
