Southern Hemisphere rugby invasion will be successful
Columnist By Spiro Zavos, 5 Nov 2008 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Bledisloe Cup, Brian Moore, Graham Henry, IRB, Ireland, Lawrence Dallaglio, Rugby Union, Six Nations, Springboks, Super Rugby, The Springboks, wallabies
121 Have your say
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Super Rugby news
- Wallabies news
- South Africa Springboks news
- Wallabies v All Blacks news
The British rugby establishment is awaiting the annual Southern Hemisphere rugby invasion of the Northern Hemisphere nations with a similar awe and puffed up defiance as the Romans adopted when they tried – unsuccessfully – to confront the barbarian hordes.
There will be the usual accusations of too much overtly brutal play, intimidation and of foul cheating tactics from the British rugby establishment after the Southern Hemisphere wins.
The occasional Northern Hemisphere victory will be acclaimed as an indicator that the rugby culture of the Northern Hemisphere, and its determination to keep the laws of the game as constipated as possible, has been triumphantly and perhaps even majestically (if one of these victories is by more than ten points) justified.
After the Hong Kong Bledisloe Cup Test, The Sunday Telegraph’s (UK) Paul Ackford, a rugby writer I admire, felt impelled to put the boot in by claiming, rather bizarrely, that the unpopularity of local Bledisloe Cup Tests was the reason why the series was moved offshore.
Sorry Paul, the exact opposite is the case.
The popularity of the series was the reason why another Test was added to the series and played in Hong Kong, to a full house, too.
The Usual Suspect insisted that the Wallabies and the All Blacks showed “nothing to terrify the European teams … although there was enough to show any victory will be hard-won.”
Brian Moore in his Daily Telegraph (UK) column reckoned that if England win two out of the four Tests, it will play against Southern Hemisphere teams that “will be an acceptable target, any more will be a real bonus.”
As England are playing the Pacific Islanders, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand, with the Pacific Islanders game generally accepted as an England win, Moore expects the home side to win only one Test against the three top Southern Hemisphere teams.
This is hardly a ringing endorsement of the strength and virtues of the English approach to playing rugby.
Lawrence Dallaglio, again in the Daily Telegraph, has indicated that he doesn’t believe England players are fit enough to really feel confident in knocking over all, or some, of their Southern Hemisphere opponents. He also made the point that since the 2003 RWC, the Six Nations sides had played the SANZAR nations 76 times, and won a paltry 13 of these contests (France winning 5, England 4, Ireland 3, Wales 1).
The Six Nations establishment likes to think that their ideas about how rugby should be played (the laws and so on, including refereeing interpretations) and the structure of the game (the various tournaments and world season) should be run entirely according to their dictates. This sort of arrogance would be, almost acceptable, if it were matched by successful practice on and off the field.
How many European coaches, for instance, are being chased to coach in Southern Hemisphere nations?
Another indication of the alarming lack of rugby intellectual and playing property comes from some statistics produced by Shaun Edwards, the rugby league great, who is the defence coach for Wales.
Since professionalism in 1996, Wales has played the Southern Hemisphere super-powers 31 times. Wales is the reigning Six Nations champions, but in that thirteen year period they have recorded just two victories against the Southern Hemisphere powers: against South Africa in 1999 (when Graham Henry was coach) and against the Wallabies in 2006 (when Scott Johnson was involved in the coaching staff).
Wales plays the Springboks at the start of the Southern Hemisphere invasion. The Springboks are coming off a stunning 53 – 8 massacre of the Wallabies.
They have an outstanding side, except for the five-eighth position, and a coach who seems to be rather unfocused. Earl Rose, a slight, flighty and occasionally brilliant player, and Rian Pienaar are being groomed to solve the five-eighths problem.
If this works, you’d have to fancy the Springboks going through their three Test tour undefeated.
This presumes that their long-time inability to win away from home has been resolved after their 2007 RWC victory and the win this year against the All Blacks at Dunedin.
The All Blacks have an incredibly hard tour involving (if one includes the Hong Kong Test) five Tests and a mid-week match against Munster in 28 days.
They start their Grand Slam quest against Scotland, a side they often have difficulty running over.
Scotland has not won a Test against New Zealand ever. But they are the masters of dirty tricks to unsettle opponents. Against the Wallabies a few years ago, they played on the narrowest field possible. Against the All Blacks in the 2007 RWC, they lied to the IRB about their jerseys and the All Blacks found themselves playing in an away kit that was virtually the same as Scotland’s.
And last year, too, they presented a forward pack that was incredibly bulked up. The recent accusation of illegal drug-taking by a Scottish forward has raised some eyebrows.
The Wallabies have, seemingly, the easiest opening match of the Southern Hemisphere invasion with a Test against Italy at Padova. I say seemingly because the last time the teams played, the Italian pack monstered the Wallabies and it was a close-run victory for the Australians.
After Hong Kong, I am not terribly confident about the quality of the Wallaby pack, especially the front row. Italy are coached by Nick Mallett, a sophisticated rugby thinker who took the Springboks to a record sequence of seventeen Test wins.
If the Wallabies can get enough ball and move it around using the width of the field, they should be able to record a strong victory.
If the Southern Hemisphere nations win their matches, I would not expect any praise from the British rugby establishment. There will be the usual accusations and recriminations.
If there are losses by the Southern Hemisphere teams, the boot will be put in about how airy-fairy Super 14 rugby is, how the Southern Hemisphere teams are chokers, and so on.
Unfortunately, the bleatings of the British rugby establishment are as predictable and as boring as the play of their major teams, with the exception of Wales.
Recommend this story.
Jim Beam Devil's Cut
As bourbon ages, a portion of liquid is lost from the barrel due to evaporation. This is known as the Angel's Share. When the bourbon is taken from the barrel, a certain amount is left trapped within the wood. It's that extracted liquid, and the rich flavours from deep within the barrel that are in Jim Beam's Devil's Cut.
Click here to learn more about Jim Beam's wicked new bourbon.
November 5th 2008 @ 8:12am
Colin N said | November 5th 2008 @ 8:12am | Report comment
Benjamin, what would you say was bemusing about Gatland’s team selection? The only one that really jumps out is that Peel hasn’t been selected to start, although Cooper’s been playing quite well, but he isn’t the class of Peel. Apart from that, I don’t think there is a problem with his selection. Halfpenny’s been called up, which I think is fair enough, considering his recent form. Whether he is ready-well we will find out on Saturday. James Hook is on poor form (he was shocking in the first-half against LI-improved in the second), so Stephen Jones was the logical choice as the Scarlets improved dramatically when he came on last weekend.
I’m never sure what Scotland will do. They have talent with Godman, the Lamont brothers, Blair and Patterson but they never seem to get a platform. Also, they’ve always had a problem at fly-half, but with Godman, who I’ve been impressed with evertime I’ve seen him, hopefully that can change.
Btw, where’s Rory Lamont, someone said he was injured, but being a Sale fan I haven’t heard anything and he’s been in good form recently. I also wouldn’t have selected to White as he’s had only had two game back from injury, although he’s been very impressive in those games.
Regarding Macleod, it was fairly recently that he was reprieved for a second time. It was a pretty minor story as it was resolved in hours because it was found that the second test had come back negative but he failed his ‘A’ sample.
November 5th 2008 @ 8:23am
Benjamin said | November 5th 2008 @ 8:23am | Report comment
Nick, the only SH team to have regularly come out on top are the ABs. England and Ireland have beaten SA and Australia regularly. It is only Wales and Scotland who have poor records. Also PI involvement has been barred by the SA and Australian provinces. There have been a handful of Islanders playing for the Sharks and WP and none for Australian provinces. The change is to take place next season but it will only accomodate 2 players per province and one of those slots will go toward a player who would qualify for Australia. Doesn’t sound like the leverage the PI islands needs does it?
Colin, Stoddart is the form full back. His omission shocked me. Halfpenny deserves his debut and Williams is an obvious starter. Henson should be at 12 but Shanklin is playing reasonably well so where is he? Fair enough Roberts is a big man and a clever player but he has never played 13 and it is a very different channel than 12, in terms of defence. With the new positioning of Pienaar I thought it would make sense to go with the Henson and Shanklin partnership. I think he lacks the pace of a 13 and let’s not forget that he is only a recent conversion to 12. Personally I think Jones is an appalling fly half but Hook isn’t playing well so Gatland hasn’t gone with him. I’m glad that Powell has got a call up.
The MacLeod story was broken on Sky News and yet I didn’t hear a dickybird about his innocence. Terrible business.
November 5th 2008 @ 8:25am
OldManEmu said | November 5th 2008 @ 8:25am | Report comment
I thouroughly enjoyed that Spiro and look forward to viewing this thread.
November 5th 2008 @ 8:25am
OldManEmu said | November 5th 2008 @ 8:25am | Report comment
I thoroughly enjoyed that Spiro and look forward to viewing this thread.
November 5th 2008 @ 8:28am
Arky said | November 5th 2008 @ 8:28am | Report comment
Benjamin,
You really sound like you are having a whine. What is it that makes you so unhappy and miserable? Is it the shortening daylight hours, miserable weather and wet pitches?
If you look at Test results NH rugby is currently floundering and in the professional era has rarely been otherwise save for one RWC win in 2003. Only Wales has ventured to break the mold of driving an eight man maul around the paddock until within striking range and then slot a field goal or wait for a penalty. It might work, but it is boring and will not be the future of any professional sport that relies on spectators at games and viewing rights.
And you could hardly be called a progressive lot? Is your resistance to change based on defending the record of the past? That sounds somewhat illogical.
Unfortunately for you the stats don’t lie. As stated by one of your own in The Tele since 2003 there have been 76 games for the NH against SANZAR and only 13 wins for the NH. In all your bellicose retort you have not answered that one?
So before you decide to bully Spiro all over the paddock – take a good hard look at where the NH game is and what role the NH is playing in the future of the game? You have a long way to go before any of the NH teams can take the benchmark mantle held by SANZAR in the professional era.
Good luck. As Spiro suggests I hope England are satisfied with one or two from four!
November 5th 2008 @ 8:42am
Benjamin said | November 5th 2008 @ 8:42am | Report comment
I think its baseless ignorance actually that makes me unhappy.
1. No NH fans are running around stating how great their respective nation so I’m not sure what your point is.
2. Your comment about driving mauls shows a crass ignorance. Were you to have watched the recent Australia v Ireland test then you would have noted that only one side was attempting to play all the rugby there. I doubt you know anything about European rugby so I think you should keep your ill-informed comments to yourself.
3. Australia have won at Twickenham once since 2000. SA have also only won at Twickenham once since 2000. Ireland and France have also regularly beaten SA and Australia at home recently. The only side to do consistently well on tour is NZ. Lest you forget that England have won in NZ the same amount of times that Australia have this decade, also in SA. Incidentally … France also have had better results in SA than Australia have in recent years. Not only that but in the pro era England have featured in 2 WC finals. But having said that I don’t need to answer why the home nations have such a poor record because I am not ignorant enough to have been stating how good they have been in the first place.
4. Bully Spiro? Grow up.. For a man of his age and experience the above article is embarassng. Allegations of substance abuse? How I laughed.. And as far as I am aware the NH game is growing. The SH game is not. Before you get sanctimonious you should check what Australia has done for the world game recently. When was the last time that SA, NZ or Australia toured Asia, Argentina or the PI? When did Australia last invite Romania or Georgia to tour?
November 5th 2008 @ 9:12am
Arky said | November 5th 2008 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Benjamin,
Enjoy the rugby.
Enjoy the ELVs – let’s just pray you don’t continue to knock them back and really kill the game. Otherwise we will be back to the dismal display of the most recent RWC final – a spectacle that if repeated will kill the game! Surely we can agree that we don’t want the game to head that way?
The win loss records are what they are – no disagreements there. And they are skewed somewhat by the second rate teams the NH send south. Let’s hope that practice ends or rugby will risk irreparable damage. Surely a calendar for all needs to be agreed upon and then delivered as has been promised. Anything less will see the SH teams spend less time and energy traveling to play the 6N and that would not be a good outcome for rugby.
Enjoy the upcoiming contests – I know I will. And to my point above let’s hope they can also be there again in the years ahead.
To say NZ are back to their best would not do them justice. Despite the earlier ructions under Henry they have moved on and are well into new territory. I suspect they will travel unbeaten. Most of all they are showing why they deserve their reputation despite their poor RWC record.
Australia are on the rise with some very inventive and creative rugby – watch out – we were lucky to get away with each of the last two wins but our work is ahead as they are rapidly gaining momentum in a new era under Deans. The Aussies are down one test but I suspect they will only lose one other on this tour.
SA are deserving of their RWC crown and showing that they are not out of the equation by any stretch. A successful tour by them will likely unearth some very promising talent. This tour will show a favorable win loss for them.
Good luck – enjoy the rugby.
November 5th 2008 @ 9:22am
Benjamin said | November 5th 2008 @ 9:22am | Report comment
I do enjoy the rugby but I don’t enjoy unecessary and frankly bizarre attacks upon NH rugby. If there were NH contributors posting about the ills of SH rugby and the greatness of NH rugby then fair enough but Colin and Ian are perfect examples of the average rugby fan in Britain. Respectful and interested, not hostile and narrow minded.
I’m not going to start the ELV debate again but needless to say that there is no tangible proof whatsoever that they are positive for the game of rugby. The NH unions are perfectly entitled to resist them and for every positive aspect you could think of I could offer a negative. However that is another debate for another time.
I hope that you enjoy the rugby too Arky. Personally I can’t wait.
November 5th 2008 @ 9:48am
Nick (KIA) said | November 5th 2008 @ 9:48am | Report comment
I don’t think the international community is doing enough for the PI, but I think it’s fallacious to suggest that the NH is doing them favours that the SH is not. It’s all about economics. The NH are paying for the best players they can extract from anywhere they can get them. NZ/Aus/SA have a bit of cash to add to any prestige of playing for your nation to keep some players in their national squads. PI teams have no cash, and no-one is doing anything particularly impressive to turn that around.
As for my suggestion that SH teams usually come out on top, well that is true, even if it is because of the ABs record, rather than the other two particularly (and the NH contribution of the non England/Wales/French teams). As a rabid ABs fan it’s probably easier to feel good about that though…
Incidentally, I’m a doctor by training (currently working in research hence time to look at these boards!). I’ve looked into this doping business a bit more out of interest. There has been a bit of erroneous reporting going on. I thought roarers might be interested, while we’re waiting for the weekend.
Macleod tested positive to terbutaline earlier in the year. This is a beta agonist drug, which acts on the lungs to releive asthma in people with asthma. You take it by inhaler. It’s the same drug class as Ventolin, which might be familiar to a few people.
Beta agonists act on adrenalin receptors, so they give you a boost in heart rate and heart pumping strength, if they act on the heart. Terbutaline is relatively specific to the lungs though, so there isn’t a great effect on the heart. Adrenalin is released when you exercise anyway, causing a rise in heart rate and pumping strength, so additional beta agonists would be unlikely to have a great effect on any performance, unless you had asthma that was limiting your performance (by preventing you breathing properly). WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) doesn’t ban enhaled terbutaline but asks atheletes to seek exemption before using it. I’m not sure how hard it is to get such an exemption, but you can download a form. They have blood levels that are consistent with enhaled use (most of it stays in the lungs) so they can tell if anyone is trying to use it orally to get some performance use.
It’s been reported that Macleod switched enhalers in the first instance earlier this year – this probably means he was taking ventolin (and had an exemption presumably) and switched to terbutaline being unaware that this was a different beta agonist and needed a different exemption. He got a warning.
They aren’t steroids, which has been reported in various places. The confusion comes because antiinflammatory steroids are used in asthma (and other conditions). They have long term complications if used in high doses (they actually weaken connective tissues like ligaments and bones and increase bruising – not great in any contact sport). Similar to beta agonists, when used in inhalars they mostly stay in the lungs. There are theoretical reasons why they might be helpful in sports in big doses (they can reduce perception of pain, for example), so intravenous use is prohibited. Inhalational use for asthma needs an exemption applied for.
Now he’s been pinged for an abnormally high testosterone level.
Anabolic steroids, like nandrolone, testosterone, are steroids that promote muscle growth. The trick here is that some (like testosterone and a bunch of others) are naturally produced.
Taking anabolic steroids is prohibited. There are ones that only exist because they have been created in the lab (to treat medical conditions) like nandrolone. If they are found, then youve been taking anabolic steroids. Testosterone is produced by all people (males at greater amounts than females). So WADA ban the presence of ones that you don’t produce naturally, but have cutoffs for normal levels for athletes, based on population normal ranges.
Like all things in people, some people produce more testosterone than others. Most people produce amounts in the normal range, but there are always exceptions. Think about other human characteristics, like height. Most people are within a range, say 5’3 to 6’8, but there are occasional exceptions, even though the person is ‘normal’. So for testosterone, there is a range of acceptable values, then if the level is too high, it’s flagged as suspicious and more testing is undertaken over time. It could be that the individual is naturally producing high levels, or that there was a lab error.
My reading of the situation is that Macleod has had an unusually high testosterone level found. If it was very high, then they’d have proven it was administered to him and he’d be facing the rap. It must therefore be ‘high but not very high’. The lab has to report the finding as atypical, and the athelete has to undergo an additional testing over time to see what happens (or to have additional testing on stored sampels, if available).
That would explain why it’s kinda hanging out there and hasn’t been confirmed or refuted yet.
More technical info is available here: http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/2008_List_En.pdf
November 5th 2008 @ 10:05am
Homer said | November 5th 2008 @ 10:05am | Report comment
Hostile and narrow minded! Have you read any of the NH ‘journalists’. Stephen Jones doesn’t even like the way SH teams kick off. He really gets narky when we score tries.
There is evidence of the success of the ELV’s after a recent report stood up to all the NH rants about their impact. The first was that the ELV’s are not a SH plan to change the sport but the result of an international coaches convention to spruce the game up after the 2003 World Cup. Yes, all the coaches not just Australian’s and Kiwis.
The sceond showed that there are actually less kicks in the game and that the scrums are now of more importance as more tries are scored from scrums thanks to the 5m rule. Read the report and then come back about the ELV’s.
Spiro may be slightly off the mark in some opf his comments here today but in general his opinion is highly regarded but not taken as law. Your attacks have been on the vitriolic side and from someone who has contributed so much to this site, somewhat blinkered.
After the wallabies won the 1999 world cup we heard how we were all creatine drug cheats and that we played boring football. When England won in 2003 we were called whingers because we said England played boring, kick orientated fottball and since the dawn of time, the usual suspect and his blind mates have attacked everythign Sh with little justification. SJ even said half the All Black squad would struggle in the GP!?!?! How does he justify the world rankings then? The fact that SH teams dominate the world rankings but only one SH player is up for player of the year is another joke that we have let pass.
WHoever wins doesn’t really matter as long as the football is good. there will be more games next year and the same arguments will be thrown up.
benjamin there will always be journalists trying to one-up the opposition and sway public opinion. Use you own resources to make a judgement as will we.