There does seem to be affectionate nostalgia for the rugby of yesteryear - but was it really that good? For every "Edwards' try for the BarBars" there were twenty matches dominated by unfit forwards lumbering from set piece to set piece. At its best, as in England/Scotland this year (first half? IIRC) modern rugby is a much more exciting and entertaining spectacle, with all 15 players involved most of the time. I can see the problem of recruitment and retention at lower levels, but I would not welcome a split. So long as players have to tackle and cannot just smash I think there is room for everyone.
Yes, I tend to agree with that. The amount of people refusing to watch and enjoy top level rugby union is, I suspect, pretty small overall (if not minute). But I wonder if numbers will increase over time if thins like the scrums are not sorted out?
Looking back at 1970's matches, the lack of fitness and strength of the players is obvious compared to modern days, but this did lead to a more open game, particularly as defences wer enot organised as they are now. It is liek watching a completely different sport at times, with the heavier ball making goal kicking far more difficult. I suspect it is the sense that it is a different sport that has led tot he diea amongst soem that it might be a good idea to actually have two different sports!