VERY recently, a member of the International Board from across the water, when asked about the detrimental effect professionalism was having on the game, said it was "all part of the evolutionary process of rugby."

It would have been much more appropriate and pertinent to say what we are constantly witnessing in rugby is revolution and ongoing friction. The game is riddled with uncertainty, mistrust and division. Nor are the divisive elements confined to differences between nations.

We have had a telling example of that and are continuing to get graphic illustration of it, as the English Professional Rugby Union Clubs and the Rugby Football Union recurringly fail to reach agreement. The knock on effects of that extend beyond England.

While we are at the start of the international season and the quarter finals stages of the European Cup have been reached the activity on the field is being downgraded as rugby continues to get headlines for all the wrong reasons. Forces outside the game continue to exert undue influence. Professionalism, and all its attendant elements, came with a rush and rugby continues to fail to cope with it.

Last week when Va'aiga Tuigamala was called into the Western Samoan team, currently very welcome visitors to this country, he said while delighted to get a chance to wear his nation's jersey at rugby union for the first time: "It is a weird game these days. Things change so often that you just do not know what the next day is going to bring."

He is correct and understandably pleased to be back on the international rugby union stage. Yet the fact that he is eligible to play for Western Samoa after playing 19 times for New Zealand is yet another example of the absurdity of what constitutes eligibility for international rugby union. Not indeed that we in Ireland can point many fingers at anyone in that direction. We have had our share of the carpetbaggers and expedients and opened the door for them - and continue to do so.

Rugby union's great fraternal days are over, replaced by the "brotherhood" of professional players, inspired by their agents and legal advisers. It all mirrors the ongoing devaluation of a sport. The sense of community, once and for so long an integral part of the game and so attractive a feature of the international occasion, is gone.

As we stand on the threshold of the international season, it is very appropriate to reflect on where the game now stands. Hearts are reeking with disloyalty as the wallets grow fatter. But at what cost? Rugby followers always had a special identity with their national teams because those who made up those teams were kindred spirits, playing the game for fun and enjoyment. Now players are paid for attending national training sessions.

Let us be aware of the price the game is paying and has paid. But the "brotherhood" and their agents would do well to be equally aware of it and the price that they may have to pay. Gone the old excuse of it being an amateur game.

But will the ever faithful supporters and spectators continue to remain ever faithful. Their loyalty should not be taken for granted nor their perception under estimated. They know what the whole current scene embraces. They will spend their hard earned money to support their team and their heritage. But they will go to matches with a new perspective. They have a much bigger stake in the game and are much more important to it than the agents and the lawyers who seek to control what they do not own.

I would suggest that it would be a very worthwhile exercise for some of those people and the greedy players to go and see what crass commercialism is doing to some of the clubs in this and other lands. Ask some of the club members who have given their services free and their loyalty without question to a sport because of their love for it and the clubs they have served. They will tell you about the current "evolution.

Daily happenings are such that people no longer recognise the game in which they have been involved all their lives. The clubs are feeling the pinch as people walk away disgusted and disillusioned. They are the people who sold the raffle tickets subsidised the clubhouse building and contributed in so many other ways. Who will be there in five and 10 years' time to keep the clubs going. The fall out of the true amateurs from the clubs is considerable already. It is likely to grow rather than diminish. Day after day people tell me how disillusioned they arc. They are people I know to have contributed to the game but will not now have any involvement.

Was professionalism supposed to be about players refusing to train with their national squad because their agents told not to in an alleged show of strength that turned into a public relations disaster. One of the agents' representatives went on radio to tell the nation why it happened. He did not tell the nation, however, about the abject apology subsequently sent by the players to the IRFU. That, you see, would not be good for the image. That apology was reactive rather than pro active. The players got the message about the public's utter disgust at their actions.

We had some more unedifying examples last week of just how ill prepared rugby union is to deal with professionalism and the inadequate laws that apply in this era, with the arguments and wrangles about the release of players for the Irish training sessions in Limerick. It was another demonstration as to the advisability of the IRFU doing everything possible to keep Irish players in Ireland.

I admit to having some sympathy in the circumstances that obtained last week with the English clubs in relation to the five day Ireland training sessions. But having said that, some of the comments made by ill informed English commentators were grossly inaccurate.

The clubs were notified on September 25th and then again last Monday about Irish requirements. Nor, as suggested in one cross channel daily last week, did the Ireland manager tell the Irish media before he informed the English clubs that the players would not be released. The policy was laid out by Pat Whelan long before last week. Comment is free and facts are sacred.

But has the time not come for men to get around a table and work out a programme for internationals, European Cup matches, domestic league games and national training sessions that would be mutually beneficial to all? Is it not high time too that a specific period be laid down by the game's rulers as to the exact amount of time allowed for team training before international matches. That would be much more beneficial than back door dealings that enable the rich to be subsidised by the poor.