Last night I went to Aldershot for the IS Rugby, Army v RAF (I'm in the RAF by the way). I'm not pissed off with the result (11-67) as it's expected these days but the Army had a player sent off in the 5th minute. And in the 64th minute the lights failed but still the score mounted. Question is why do the RAF still award caps and get a place at the top table of Services Rugby when they obviously no longer deserve it? Even the Vets got thrashed and the Ladies lost 0-72. So in all seriousness why do the Army and Navy still play us? Look at the RAF Soccer team - they still win games (mens and ladies) and have fuller fixture lists. This season outside the set-in-stone IS, the RAF mens team have played just three games - not their fault but maybe other teams don't think it's worth it? The RAF is a football service now, even large stations such as Brize Norton only muster one team. It has downsized in many ways, and Operational Needs affect player availability - but the other two services suffer this. Perhaps the Army actually encourage sporting success, look at the Army's rugby budget (training camps in South Africa etc) and standing (a respectable fixture list and a love for sevens). The RAF talk the talk but don't back it up by releasing players, all a far cry from the amateur era. I would like to know what others think - should an IS cap for the RAF game be an intermediate one, the equivalent of an 'A' team cap? If so should the RAF continue to award full caps for being on the same pitch as decent players? I know there's nothing you can do when faced with Fijian internationals etc but the Army went looking for these years ago - why not the RAF? Do Army players treat the RAF game like an England international getting a cap for playing Romania or the Barbarians, ie not quite the real thing - you have to really earn it in the Navy game? So what is the solution to make the RAF competitive? We last scored decent points around 1997 (two high scoring draws) but nothing since. Ironically the RAF rugby league team is pretty good, and punch above their weight constantly. Would the powers that be resign their commissions before the RAF concentrates on league than union? At what point does common sense take over - when the Army put a ton on the RAF? No RAF coach wants to be the first to suffer this on his watch but one day it will happen, I guess in the next 5 years. We shouldn't even be allowed a century of IS rugby before we pack it in as there is still a decade to go! The RAF barely play sevens and therefore don't treat rugby seriously. It must be galling for SNCOs and Senior Officers that remember (and may have played in) the good old days. I saw the RAF play Oxford University this season and we lost 9 tries to 1. We no longer score many points, or even pressure the opposition. It's now a question of will we actually get in the opposition 22? The answer is rarely. So I'm not questioning the committment, as the players do their best but, come on, it's time to politely ask the ARU and RNRU if we can crawl away quietely. Station rugby can continue, and the players will still earn much pride from doing so, but the Senior XVs should not embarress themselves any more. In 2010 what price the Army 95 RAF 3? Navy 50 RAF 3. It can and probably will happen, it just depends on Army and Navy committments. Even if all the troops came home today would the RAF be competitive. I think not.