By Spiro Zavos
November 5th 2009 @ 2:28am
It’s Game On for NH v SH rugby bragging rights
New Zealand's Jerry Collins, center, attempts to get past Wales' Stephen Jones, left, and Robert Sidoli, right obscured, during their international rugby union match at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff. AP Photo/Matt Dunham
On Saturday night, the Wallabies play England and the All Blacks play Wales, two intriguing Tests that have their origins back in the 1900s when New Zealand (1905), South Afrrica (1906) and Australia (1908) made their first tours of what was then, and even now unfortunately, called the Home Unions.
I say ‘unfortunately’ because this title of the Home Unions denotes a sort of proprietary and benevolent control over the rugby game, which the unions concerned, England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales, have not honoured.
Wales (the exception) in several different decades of the the last 100 years, Scotland in the 1920s, Ireland in the late 1940s and again in the last couple of years, and England between 2001 and 2003, fielded national teams that graced the rugby fields with their expansive, skillful rugby.
But most of the time their rugby has been what the veteran British rugby journalist, John Hopkins, described Gloucester’s play as being going down to the Wallabies last night: “Honest endeavoiur, plodding play and a lack of skill.”
Much the same sort of comment could have been made about Gloucester when they played the then Rabbits who later on the tour became the Wallabies in the first match of the 1908 Australian tour of the United Kingdom.
Aside from the Southern Hemisphere powers leading the way for rugby on the field (with 5 wins out of 6 in the Rugby World Cup tournament), they have also pioneered virtually every improvement in the game off the field.
In 1895, the Rugby Football Union (the English union) expelled the strong rugby counties of Lancashire and Yorkshire from the RFU because they wanted to pay their players, who were mainly miners, compensation for rugby injuries.
This injustice to the players led directly to the creation of the rugby league code, and destroyed rugby union’s strong chance of becoming the world football game.
It was the NSWRU in 1995 with its unilateral declaration that as far as it was concerned rugby was now a professional game that prompted the IRB to redress the 1895 decision and allow rugby union to become a dynamic world sport with a place (with Sevens Rugby) in the Olympics.
Many readers of The Roar with Northern Hemisphere allegiances get quite angry with me when I bring up all this history before the Spring Tours of the Southern Hemisphere rugby powers.
But there is a reason for continually re-stating this history.
The sad fact is that the reluctance of the Northern Hemisphere powers to embrace needed reforms in the laws and the way rugby is played has had a recent manifestation in the rejection of the IRB’s carefully designed and trialled experimental law variations (the ELVs).
It is up to the Northern Hemisphere teams in the coming Tests with their Southern Hemisphere rivals to demonstrate that at the Test level, the lack of the full ELVs regime is no impediment to them playing modern, attacking, skillful and successful rugby.
Mick Cleary, the experienced rugby writer for the (UK) Daily Telegraph, has stated in a recent article that it is time for the “European nations to front up.”
For Wales and Ireland, teams that are full of players who did well on the British and Irish Lions tour of South Africa, “there are no get out clauses.”
Cleary insists that “anything less than a clean sweep of victories would rate as a disappointment” for Wales and Ireland. Wales has three coaches who were involved in the Lions tour and there should be “some spin-off” from this.
As for Ireland, they are the Grand Slam Six Nations title holders, something that was last achieved by Ireland (in a Five Nations tournament) 61 years ago when the great five-eighths Jackie Kyle was at his mesmeric best. According to Cleary, Ireland “can’t afford to lapse now” if they want to be genuine contenders for the 2011 Rugby World Cup.
For England, Cleary insists that anything less than two victories out of the Tests against Australia, Argentina and New Zealand is unacceptable for their coach Martin Johnson. His position must be under threat if England, with its huge reservoir of players, can’t achieve a two-out-of-three result.
Cleary just accepts that Scotland, which wields far too much power within the IRB in my opinion, will probably lose all its matches to the touring sides.
England are greatly strengthened by the return of Jonny Wilkinson.
Wilkinson, like Morne Steyn for the Bulls (again in the Currie Cup final against the Cheetahs) and the Springboks, has the skills and the rugby nous of taking points, either through penalties, dropped goals and the occasional try, virtually every time his team is within goal-kicking distance of the opposition posts.
It was Wilkinson who turned around England’s fortunes in the 2007 Rugby World Cup.
The side was thrashed by South Africa in the pool round, when Wilkinson was out injured. When the champion returned, he kicked (literally) Australia out of the quarter-finals, France out of the semi-finals and then kept England in the tight final against against South Africa.
If Wilkinson is on his game, England have a chance against the Wallabies on Saturday. Hopefully, Robbie Deans will devise tactics to place the utmost pressure on England’s best player.
As for Wales against New Zealand, the All Blacks have not lost in Europe, aside from the quarter-final in the 2007 World Cup, since 2002. They haven’t lost to Wales since 1953.
There are two ways of looking at this run of wins. It has to come to an end, perhaps sooner rather than later? Or, the victories over Wales have become self-fulfilling prophecies for the All Blacks which are liable to continue for years to come.
My guess is (and a guess is a less confident assessment that a prediction) that Australia will defeat England on Saturday and then Ireland the week later. And the All Blacks will beat Wales and then England two weeks later.
If these results come through, then the bragging rights for yet another year will go once again to the Southern Hemisphere rugby powers. And sooner rather than later, these bragging rights will surely turn into real rights for the Southern Hemisphere in deciding the future course of the world rugby game, on and off the field.
Super 14 Tipping now live on The Roar. Join now.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(170)
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 2:31am | Report comment
What a progressive article about the coming games. Somebody needs to contact HMV because this record is broken.
Rowdy said | November 5th 2009 @ 2:36am | Report comment
I don’t suppose this meaningless, stupid and destructive NH – SH name-calling will go away in my lifetime, will it ?
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 2:39am | Report comment
No, you crazy, SA SH conservative bastard!
Only joking, Rowdy. Boring isn’t it?
sportym said | November 5th 2009 @ 3:04am | Report comment
Frankly who cares! This NH v SH stuff is irrelevant.
Given the Wallabies record this year and the press talking up the 1984 grand-slam, anything less then 3 wins for the wallabies will be totally unacceptable. Could are less about history of the game, what I expect is to see the wallabies winning again!
Corey said | January 29th 2010 @ 12:35pm (2 weeks ago) | Report comment
I would actually like to see a NH team (like the British and Irish Lions do) vs a SH team (imagine that- it would mostly only have South Africa and New Zealand, with a token Wallaby and Argentinian). It would be a great advertisement for the game.
Jay said | January 29th 2010 @ 1:19pm (2 weeks ago) | Report comment
Good idea. Lets play it under the expanded EVL’s here and existing rules there for a joke!
However, an ANZACs side was mentioned a couple of years ago to replicate the lions tours and practically, I think this will be possible given Aus and NZs geography, demographics and cultural history.
Rowdy said | November 5th 2009 @ 3:13am | Report comment
Boring yet strangely irritating, KO.
Sportym, it is meaningless outside of sports hacks up here and down there. Interesting that 3 wins is a pass for the Wallabies – we think it’s a minimum of 2 wins for England to get a pass mark.
I’m expecting a 10-13 point win for the Wallies followed by Rob Andrew saying not my fault guv and Johnno telling us that the England team was badly affected by injury. Even though I suspect that this XV is actually better than his first choice would be (and which we’ll presumably see again come 6N time).
6 years of poor selection, no discernible game plan, narrow losses hailed as We’re moving in the right direction.. I think I may start following football.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 3:31am | Report comment
I would be feeling more comfortable with England having had a warm-up game under their belt, Rowdy. I think the game will be close, with Australia having shown no backline cohesion whatsoever. I don’t think that the selection is spot on, but what can you do with nearly 30 injured players?
Colin N said | November 5th 2009 @ 4:22am | Report comment
“I don’t think that the selection is spot on, but what can you do with nearly 30 injured players?”
Who would you have picked KO?
Personally, I would have had Foden in at full-back with Monye on the wing instead of Banahan, and Tait on the bench instead of Erinle.
I also don’t rate Deacon, but is there anyone else? I wouldn’t start with Lawes straight away.
I would have started with Hartley, but I think a slight hamstring niggle means he’s on the bench.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 6:42am | Report comment
In an ideal world I would have Flatman at 1 and Borthwick not in the team, but from the EPS squad I would definitely have selected a different 22: Bell to start ahead of Wilson because a) Wilson hasn’t played much this season and b) Bell is huge man who is an excellent technical scrummager. I think that Robinson would struggle to gain any advantage off him. Also, what impact can Bell offer in the latter stages of the game? Conversely Wilson could offer real impact in the dying stages. Payne has reasonably soft hands so perhaps Johnson envisages a carrying front row.
Deacon should not be starting at 4, but considering injuries what other options are there given that Kennedy and Kay are both middle jumpers? Like you say Lawes deserves to be brought along modestly. I also have issues with the back row. Armitage is the form 7 but is still young. Moody has looked rejuvinated following his lay off and he is very experienced. It makes sense to play him with Croft and Crane, but I don’t like the balance. Payne, Deacon, Borthwick and Crane are all plodders who lack dynamism. They need to secure quick ball but I don’t think they’re capable of doing that. In light of that I think it would have made sense to have played Worlsley instead of Moody (and played Moody off the bench) and really looked to do a number on the Australian pack. At least Haskell offers power from the pine.
The backline looks exciting, but like the pack I am worried about the balance. Monye is not a fullback. His handling was shown to be suspect on the wing on the Lions tour and yet he is being selected to counter the Australian kicking game. Monye could either thrive due to the fact that the Australian kicking game has been erratic this year, or he could struggle under a succession of Giteau bombs. Further, of the entire back three none are first rate kickers. I also worry that Banahan’s lack of sprinters pace will be exposed. I would have preferred to see a player like Strettle.
Payne, Thompson, Bell, L. Deacon, Borthwick, Croft, Worsley, Crane, P. Hodgson, Wilkinson, Monye, Geraghty, Hipkiss, Cueto, Foden
Hartley, Wilson, Lawes, Moody, Care, Goode, Tait
hayden said | November 5th 2009 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
What difference does it make if Armitage is young? If he’s the form 7, surely he should be in the side, on the bench at least. Why is it England seems averse to picking youngsters? I can think of many Kiwi players who were picked young, and went on to great things, often playing their best rugby in their younger years – BG Williams, Lomu, Kirwan, M Jones, McCaw, Carter etc.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 5:42pm | Report comment
How can England be averse to picking youngsters when Johnson has selected so many over the past season? Armitage is young and 7 is a key position. Croft and Crane are equally inexperienced thus a balance needs to be struck, hence the inclusion of Moody.
CraigB said | November 5th 2009 @ 6:51am | Report comment
KO everytime you mention the injury count it keeps getting bigger. The figure I have read is 21 out 60 squad members from both the England and Saxon squads. Imagine if that squad your entire professional pool of players…. Build a bridge mate we all have injuries
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:18am | Report comment
Build a bridge? Build a brain, mate. Australia has no injuries except Sharpe. SA has no injuries except Spies and Smith. Imagine if England spent 4 months in test camp, played the best players in the world regularly, played in the best tournaments in the world regularly and played the least debilitating amount of games per-season. Imagine that? Nobody in the world has a pool of 60 professional players to choose from except perhaps Argentina. Try this on for size:
Sheridan (32 caps), Mullan (uncapped), Wood (uncapped), Mears (34), Webber (uncapped), Vickery (73), White (51), Cole (uncapped), Shaw (52), Blaze (uncapped), Rees (15), Woods (uncapped), Easter (27), Narraway (7), Ellis (25), Flood (25), Cipriani (7), Vesty (2), Flutey (9), Turner-Hall (uncapped), Tindall (60), Waldouck (uncapped), D. Armitage (11), Morgan (2)… All from the previous EPS squads.
Not 27, but not 21 either. I read 26 and thus boosted the 26 to 27 in light of Tindall’s injury.
Harry said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:40am | Report comment
Enteratning reading Poms. Knives Out …. “Australia has no injuries except Sharpe”. Err not quite … Mortock, Barnes, a hhost of locks/second rows.
Rowdy … “6 years of poor selection, no discernible game plan, narrow losses hailed as We’re moving in the right direction..
Wallaby supporters know exactly how you feel. In fact quite a few Aus supporters have defected to following soccer … its only the true rugby supporters left. Players like Cross and Hynes are nowhere near previous Australian backs like Campes e and Horan.
Two poor sides, but heh it will still be a great contest. The Poms have home advantage which might tell.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:49am | Report comment
Right… Barnes.. my bad. Mortlock is on tour and fit. So that’s Barnes and Kimlin?
Bay35Pablo said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:01am | Report comment
Shepherd, Caldwell (OK, uncapped, but would be in there ahead of Dennis), Mortlock will miss the 1st two tests, Horne.
anopinion said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:03am | Report comment
Sharpe, Mortlock, Barnes and Horne.
Brett McKay said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:58am | Report comment
No injuries except Sharpe. And Barnes, and Mortlock. Plus the couple that weren’t selected to tour because of injury (Waugh, Sheppard, Cummins)
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:00am | Report comment
Mortlock is stil on tour. Barnes and Horne from the tourists, and Sharpe, Kimlin and Cummins prior to the tour. Shepard has been a long-term injury, no?
CraigB said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:10am | Report comment
Mortlock is on tour but still injured. Barnes,Sharpe, Kimlin,Waugh,Sheppard,Horne.
Dunning just come back from serious injury same with Kepu. As I said we all have injuries.
Vented Relief said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
Adam Freier, Sam Wykes…. the list goes on
Pete said | November 5th 2009 @ 12:40pm | Report comment
Its almost as if we’re trying to outdo each other in the ‘underdgo states” so whoever loses has an excuse. As Chopper would say “Harden up people” .
Thems the cards we’re dealt. Get behind the team and support them! No excuses…
Hermin said | November 5th 2009 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Graigb,
Don’t be silly my boy, SH teams are not allowed to have injuries and it can never be used as an excuse for an indifferent performance by a SH team.
I alluded to this point in another post afew days ago and was subjected to a torrent of ridiculous accusations and rubbish from the same Mr Knives Out,
Strangely he would not accept the ABs having 11 players out to injury in the June tests but expects us to take pity on the English who I assume is his team because they have a few injuries.
Funny that!
Everyteam has injuries but only the NH can use it as an excuse for failure
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 5:46pm | Report comment
Firstly I didn’t subject you to a torrent of anything. I simply stated that you were quite obviously Hemjay. Secondly you are Hemjay. That is abundantly clear from the same old nonsense you are trotting out months after a NZ defeat. I should also remind you that I have pointed out at various times that I am pro-NZ, and at no point did I gloat or jibe NZ following that loss. I should remind you further that France were missing nearly 10 players so please try and balance your mildly perverse obsession with a bit of accuracy and clarity. If you think that SA missing Smith and Spies and Australia missing Horne, Sharpe and Barnes is commensurate with the injuries hat England has then I would have to seriously question your intelligence.
Hermin said | November 5th 2009 @ 5:55pm | Report comment
The only thing abundantlky clear here Knives is your constant ranting and raving.
Seriously who do you think you are. I have no idea who you are accusing me of being. So heres the deal. Just run along and entertain yourself because I do not have time for obnoxious posters such as yourself.
Put up or shutup I think is the correct term.
The only one who needs their iintelligence questenioned here. Is the obnoxious cyber wannabe bully that is Knives out. How about you take a breather buddy and get off those paranoid pills. the world and the roar is not about Knives Out! Like you others are allowed opinions if you don’t like it suck it up and move along.
I look forward to your next post of self promotion and another pathetic attempt to accuse me of being someone else.
How about posting in your own nations threads and spin your theories there because its blatantly obvious they need all they help they can get!
Then again our rugby is better down in these parts and quite obviously so are the SH columns, why else would you be here so much?
Viscount Crouchback said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:50am | Report comment
Not sure how you work out that this XV is better than England’s first choice XV, Rowdy. Sheridan, Vickery (or White), Shaw, Easter, Armitage and Flutey would be nailed on certainties if fit. That’s six players – more than a third of the team. You can make a case for adding Tindall, Mears and Rees to that list, which makes nine players.
The point about the injuries is not that England don’t have capable chaps to come in – they do – but rather that most of those chaps will have never played together before. A lack of experience between combinations tends to be brutally exposed at any level of rugger, but especially at Test level. England’s 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13 have never played together. It’s laughably ignorant to expect them to be anything other than hit-and-miss.
Nick (KIA) said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:04am | Report comment
“6 years of poor selection, no discernible game plan, narrow losses hailed as We’re moving in the right direction.. I think I may start following football.”
Sorry, did you say you were a Wallabies or England fan? That statement would do for either…
Neil said | November 5th 2009 @ 3:21am | Report comment
Just substitute every reference to “southern hemisphere” with “an australian led and managed sanzar alliance” and i think we come close to actual motive behind this article.
tell me again where all our players go to earn proper money and see out their careers with stability and a future?
last i checked it wasn’t australia. i think the country’s with the most financial clout, stability and invested interest in the future of the sport should have the final say in the future of the sport. and once again, that certainly isn’t australia.
in fact, given the nature of this constant complaining about the quality of the game the rest of the world loves week in week out, i don’t think australia even has a future in the sport, let alone a divine right to decide it’s future.
Bay35Pablo said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:02am | Report comment
So why are we bothering with the arbitration about Melbourne v Kings. If Australia is in control?
Bill said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:17am | Report comment
Has there been any word on the date when the arbitration decision will be made public?
Neil said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:02pm | Report comment
I don’t refer to the current status quo with that statement, just John O’Neill’s vision.
Brendan said | November 5th 2009 @ 3:29am | Report comment
Great article Spiro and also necessary as rugby must be the only major world sport where the historically dominant teams have had little or no say on how the game should be played.
Spiro, you could also have mentioned the english referee who, in a game played in England in the late 19th or early 20th century, penalised the one side for throwing a cut out pass, apparently on the basis that it was un-sportsmanlike!!
Lee said | November 5th 2009 @ 5:15am | Report comment
Yes its the “laws” fault eh?
It’ so refreshing when teams get to play under the ELVs like they did in the Currie Cup final, Super 14 semi and final involving the Bulls, the British and Irish Lions tour, the Brisbane Australia-SA game…oh wait…those were played with the rules that clearly require “needed reforms”.
Maybe the state of the rugby has everything to do with: 1) the lack of quality players in the Aussie teams this year 2) the desire of teams to slow the ball down in their own 22 because they would rather give away 3 than 7 points.
Actually good point, I have one law change that would result in more tries – the introduction of a new card – mayb the blue card – that carries a 5 minute sin bin, it is to be handed out to any player who commits a professional foul in the aim of preventing the opposition attacking continuity in their own 22. 2 whites = yellow so therefore any player who gets 4 white cards gets a red.
fred said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:03am | Report comment
yeah and a rainbow card to go with your tuti-fruti idea and more LBW DECISIONS.
LEAGUE AND AFL WILL BE ECSTASIZING
Lee said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:17am | Report comment
Uh..yeah sorry figured Aussies wouldn’t go for it. There team would constantly be playing with 14 or less….
You’re right much simpler to change every other law – thats the aim eh? The more law changes the better???
Pete said | November 5th 2009 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
“Aussies wouldn’t go for it” we do very well in games when there are only 13 on the field…
Lee said | November 5th 2009 @ 2:17pm | Report comment
Haha good call…but what if the opposition had 15?
Bay35Pablo said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:03am | Report comment
That’s Spiro’s point. The Home Nations need to show they can play with similar enterprise under the new old laws.
Lee said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:31am | Report comment
Why?? If that is the style of rugby they chose to play, where is it written that they have to play what Aus/NZ view as “real” rugby.
Besides this constant moaning that the north doesn’t play entertaining rugby is rubbish – watch the Lions tour, watch the Ireland-Wales 6 Nations game, or France or even England sometimes. They are all capable of playing “real” rugby they just don’t think it is the be all and end all like the Australasians do. (Will choose to ignore the fact tha if the Aussies ever won a game through penalties I very much doubt that Spiro would write an article saying they should have taken the loss).
Rugby has many different styles (like many other games) to label one as being better or more in the spirit of the game than the other, quite frankly shows an arrogance.
Lee said | November 5th 2009 @ 5:58am | Report comment
Just a quick follow up about the ELVs…..
Here are the results of the Super 14 for the last 2 years(excluding semi finals and finals)…
2009 2008
Points scored 4042 4000
BP 4 tries 58 46
BP -7 48 36
Tries 498 483
As you can see 2008 with the ELVs yielded fewer points, fewer tries, and fewer Bonus Points.
When you look at the range of competition points Top of table – bottom of table. The range ofr 2008 was 40 and the range for 2009 was 34, perhaps indicating a closer competition…
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 6:45am | Report comment
Incidentally, I recall working out that if one took the ELV 3N and worked out the average amount of tries scored per game the figure is around 4.23 (or something similar – this is off the top of my head), and that the amount of tries scored per game from 00-08 (excluding the conditioning 07 3N) is basically the same at 4.2 (or something).
Vented Relief said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:37am | Report comment
So what are you trying to say? That in 2009 the players and coaches had become accustomed to the ELVs and had started opening up the game?
Lee said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:45am | Report comment
Hardly when in 2009 the game was not played under the ELVs. What I am saying is that the constant complaining that the reason there are so many penalties in the game and that it is boring is because the north didn’t accept the ELVs is pure nonsense..
From the figures it looks as if running rugby is in fact possible under either set of rules – but I wouldn’t expect the facts to get in the way of any agendas.
What I would like to see is the stats for the use of the up and under with the ELVs(specifically no kicking out on the full when the ball was passed back into the 22) compared to without.
Vented Relief said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:05pm | Report comment
Lee your argument makes no sense. The ELVs were applied for both the 2008 and 2009 seasons in Super 14.
Lee said | November 6th 2009 @ 5:03am | Report comment
For the 2009 season the sanction ELVs were dropped as well as a few others.
The sanction ELVs are the main ELVs that were not trialed in the Northern Hemisphere(they did trial others) and the ones that you assume Spiro is the most upset about losing as these directly effect the number of penalties/free kicks.
These sanction ELVs were supposed to free up the game and cause more tries when according to the stats they did not.
pothale said | November 6th 2009 @ 5:11am | Report comment
The sanction ELVs were trialled in the NH – by both Scotland and France. And they likely voted for them as well. Ireland, England and Wales didn’t. SA didn’t want to vote for them either, but got ‘persuaded’ by their Australasian partners to vote for them.
I’d have voted for the sanctions too if they got rid of the bloody 22 rule instead – drives me crackers.
Lee said | November 6th 2009 @ 5:39am | Report comment
Yip Pothale the 22m rule drives me crazy but to me it is the lesser of 2 evils. IN saying that it is the primary reason for some many up and unders, if this ELV was removed, players could kick to touch. The opposition would get a lineout about half way to attack from and knowing that a mid field bomb could be passed back into the 22 and booted out, they would then be more inclined to keep the ball in hand.
The sanctions ELVs turned the game I like into a helter skelter no structure game that involved 30 players running around like headless chickens. And as the stats show contributed in no way to more tries and probably more scrums – which in turn leads to more time restting scrums etc.
vinay verma said | November 5th 2009 @ 6:22am | Report comment
I see a comment here that ” countries with the most financial clout should have the final say” These countries presumably are France,England and Japan. In the case of cricket it has happened with India having the final say. This is not in my opinion the best thing for the game,its traditions and culture. Money should not be the determining factor. It is important but it can be short sighted.
The North South debate is tedious and only highlights administrators with egos and power-centric agendas. Get more recently retired players in positions of administrative power in all sports and the games will be better for it.
Robbo said | November 6th 2009 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
Vinay – don’t believe the hype. The Japanese Rugby Union has bugger all financial clout.
For all this talk about them being the next rugby Super power the average Japanese couldn’t differentiate Rugby from American football.
vinay verma said | November 6th 2009 @ 2:58pm | Report comment
Robbo, I did say that financial clout was the last thing that should determine the direction. It doesn’t follow that money is always right. Stanford proved that with Cricket.I am not well versed in the History of Rugby but unless you nourish talent at the grass roots you cant have a strong National Team. Culture,tradition and respect for the History of the game have to be taught from an early age. How many young schoolboys actually know who Ken Catchpole or Mark Loane were? John Thornett anyone?
Pippinu said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:12am | Report comment
Spiro
As you intimate – a few will not thank you for airing the dirty linen again – but another terrific article.
Some of these records (in terms of the time that has elapsed since various countries were able to chalk up a win over others) are so gobsmackingly and outrageously long that one is entitled to ask themselves: could that be right??
Surely, somone in the NH will one day wake up and proclaim out loud: I say my good fellows, let us bring this sort of public humiliation to an end – or at the very least, this sort of realisation: “ Ne c’est pas possible! ”
The return of Wilkinson reminds me of some other famous returns of legendary heroes:
1. Maradona returning to the Argentine national team to single handedly take them into the 1994 World Cup (his 5th time as a member of a WC squad)
2. Langer being recalled by Bennett from England to save an SOO series (which I think he managed to do)
3. Jesus arising from the dead to save the world (I’m not sure if this one was a success or not – only time will tell).
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:21am | Report comment
Australians… a wonderful talent for melodrama. Must be all that Fosters, makes then sentimental I suppose. Reminds me of that other Australian hero/genius Dick McGruther.
Lindommer said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:54am | Report comment
KO, no one in Australia drinks Foster’s these days. Get up to date, mate.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:57am | Report comment
Just bathe in it instead do they, followed by a quick game of knifey-spoony?
Brett McKay said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:03am | Report comment
Even better than bathe in it Knives, we export it!!
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:05am | Report comment
Not to me you bloody don’t! I’m certainly not falling for that new ‘extra cold’ trick either.
Pete said | November 5th 2009 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
…we export it…after we have bathed in it
fox said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:09am | Report comment
We send you our expired beer – and rugby players.
pothale said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:13am | Report comment
And we send you back re-packaged ELVs – fair exchange of duds, I suppose.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 5:47pm | Report comment
Not to Europe you don’t send your players. Nobody wants them.
Rusty said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:08am | Report comment
except the only place Fosters is actually drunk in copious amounts is the UK..you would battle to find it in Australia and then even more to find an Aussie drinking it…. for some reason those cans from ASDA taste so much better than local version
Lee said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:21am | Report comment
Not to mention, Jonah Lomu returning to International Rugby in 2011 to lead the ABs to the WC….
Pippinu said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:51am | Report comment
Now that might take the proverbial cake!!!! (with apologies to Jesus)
Viscount Crouchback said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:42am | Report comment
Spiro, this persistent colonial chippiness of yours is frightfully dull. Move on, old scout.
Rickety Knees said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:45am | Report comment
Great article Spiro!
Firestarter Bob said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:04am | Report comment
Huh Spiro??
“It was the NSWRU in 1995 with its unilateral declaration that as far as it was concerned rugby was now a professional game that prompted the IRB to redress the 1895 decision and allow rugby union to become a dynamic world sport with a place (with Sevens Rugby) in the Olympics.”
“IRB to redress the 1895 decision”.
So the rugby divide is no more?
All is forgiven, please come home.
stuff happens said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:06am | Report comment
As someone who’s lived in Australia for many years I find Spiro’s article embarrassing. Cultural cringe is still alive and well with some Australians, although thankfully they are a dying race. Exactly what disadvantages the SH nations have because of the NH has never been clear to me.I mean what’s the problem? Twickenham & Cardiff will be packed with hoarse spectators loving the occasion and willing their teams to win.Good natured banter before and after the games in the car parks and pubs.TV audiences in millions. I mean hellooo! It doesn’t get too much better than this – even for a Welshman, and we, disgracefully, have not managed to beat the All Blacks since 1953! Maybe as Neil says it’s about power & money being ‘over there’.Well,you’d think Spiro would be used to it by now.Sad
All together now:’Land of hope and glory’…..
Viscount Crouchback said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:27am | Report comment
Jolly well said.
Pippinu said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
I dont’ think you have used the expression “cultural cringe” in its proper context.
pothale said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:09am | Report comment
The term Home Union derives from the term Home Nations which describes the four nations of the UK – England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Historically, it used to describe the whole island of Ireland when England controlled Ireland before it gained its independence in 1920.
Contrary to Spiro’s interpretation that it confers some sort of proprietary and benevolent hold over rugby, it in fact is a derived political term that confers a proprietary and benevolent hold over countries, including now a foreign one – Ireland. It’s antiquated and inaccurate, so Spiro might lead by example in dropping it from his vernacular – though Viscount might object.
(It’s a bit like referring to the Northern Hemisphere as if it was only populated and guided by British writers and the RFU or using the UK to refer to Ireland and Great Britain and its various teams, players and unions as a lot of Australasian writers and commentators do.)
Talking of British writers, I wonder does the ‘veteran British rugby journalist, John Hopkins’ that Spiro refers to, fall into the category of ’senior British rugby writers’? If so, we probably shouldn’t take what he says too seriously since Hopkins is likely to be part of the S. Jones-led cabal who brought down the ELVs as Spiro has claimed repeatedly. Hopkins said that Gloucester’s play in comparison to Australia was “honest endeavoiur, plodding play and a lack of skill.”
Spiro believes this description applies to British and Irish rugby ‘most of the time’.
If one sets aside the natural response that using a second-string, third from bottom, premiership team as a metaphor and exemplar for NH rugby is a bit sneaky and weak, one can understand how it was seized upon as useful grist to the Zavos mill in advancing his argument.
Though I suspect Hopkins might be a man after Spiro’s own heart as he went on to write in his match report on the Gloucester v Australia match that : “What was immediately evident and became more so the longer the game went on was that the Australia XV were full of running, inventive, quick and superb at the breakdown. Though at times the visiting team looked out of touch, time and again a Gloucester player lumbered into the contact area to be met by two Australians who robbed him of the ball and recycled it in the blinking of an eye.”
Clearly no ELV problems at the breakdown area for Australia then.
I would have thought that Spiro would surely have mentioned or quoted this high praise from a senior rugby writer until I realised it would not serve the purpose of the article he was writing, and its sub-agenda that the full-ELvs have not been implemented, and implicitly, the game is poorer purely as a result of NH/British meddling. As it has been since 1895, when the RFU accidentally created rugby league in a fit of pique about money.
I suspect many rugby fans in Australia must have mini-shrines built to the RFU for their interfering with Lancashire and Yorkshire miners (if you’ll pardon the expression) and thus creating their wonderful game that is rugby league – and a hugely more popular game in Australia than the one played by the languishing Wallabies. Much like many Irish homes had a picture of JFK next to the picture of the Pope over their fireplace in the sixties and seventies, I suspect Australian league fans probably have little pics of the RFU crest nestling on their hairy chests as they go to bed at night, mumbling their prayers and thanking the heavens for the 13-man game from the English union. (I can’t even begin to think what the men do.)
A final thought – if by the slightest chance the plodding Irish and British rugby teams win any of their games against the superior, exciting and expansive play of the teams from the Southern Hemisphere rugby powers (though I note only Australia and New Zealand are referenced in this context) – what will Spiro say then?
I fear the worst.
Prepare to batten down the hatches.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:14am | Report comment
Oh that’s very good. Very good indeed. Just one point – I suspect that Spiro references this fellow Hopkins because he himself did not actually partake in the viewing of the aforementioned game of rugby union. Imagine that? Next he’ll be telling us that Australia played what was in front of them. Both events would definitely be unusual.
Viscount Crouchback said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:25am | Report comment
What on earth are you jabbering on about, Pothale? It has nothing to do with politics – only a Celt of the classically chippy variety could possibly think such a thing. The Home Unions is a perfectly straightforward term used to express the fact that rugger originated in our islands. Britain and Ireland is the “Home” of rugger. This will remain true regardless of how many cups the Home Nations do (or do not) win. Indeed, it is precisely this immutable historical fact which so gets the goat of colonial writers like Spiro, since they know very well that history will always taunt them.
pothale said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:38am | Report comment
VC – I did add the rider that ‘Viscount might object’.
The term Home in my view is a classic British piece of terminology that’s been used in political, geopolitical and latterly sporting environments and has been since the 12th century. I’m sure you’re aware that sport and politics have heavily borrowed from each other’s lexicons over the decades.
Home Counties,Home Nations, Home Rule, Home Unions, Home Countries, etc, etc.
No need for apoplexy, old chap, as you might say yourself.
Viscount Crouchback said | November 5th 2009 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Classically British? By jove, what horror! Batten down the hatches and shut one’s children’s ears to such insidious “British terminology”! Really, what piffle. It is perfectlly natural for a person from our islands to refer to them as “Home” since, well, they are home for us. Equally, our islands are also home to rugger and soccer. No amount of trendy, post-modern, Anglophobic revisionism can change these facts.
Furthermore, one should note that the chaps at the IRFU are perfectly delighted to operate under the Home Nations umbrella. A dear friend of the Crouchback family was one Dan Daly – heard the name? – and he held no truck with the type of silly nonsense espoused by you. Most genuine Irish rugger types cherish their links to the other Home Unions. Witness the IRFU’s desire to invite England to open the new Lansdowne Road (albeit sadly the RFU could not accept) and witness Blackrock College’s decision to invite a few English schools along to their big anniversary celebrations last week.
I understand your tendency to harp on differences, Pothale, but I think it inappropriate in a rugger context. The sport of rugby has always emphasised what our islands have in common; not what divides us.
pothale said | November 5th 2009 @ 9:25am | Report comment
VC – I take the sentiment expressed in your last para and agree with it absolutely.
And I agree on the opening Test match for the new Lansdowne Road – only one team should have been invited to open it – the same one that said ‘well at least we turned up’ – a phrase that has always resonated with me and affirmed what is so good about English values and sportsmanship. A date should have been found to accommodate England.
If I tend to ‘harp on differences’, as you put it, then it’s done with the best intentions. However, I’ll retract the comment about suggesting the term Home Unions be dropped – you’re right about its unifying purpose in rugby.
Viscount Crouchback said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:03am | Report comment
Superb stuff, old bean.
P.S. I completely absolve the IRFU (and, in truth, the RFU) over the Lansdowne opening. The IRFU was super keen to invite England for precisely the reason you mention – at least we turn up – but it became a logistical mess: the English have played so many Autumn matches in recent years that the clubs were not prepared to countenance an extra match next time around. An RFU acceptance would have led to WWIII and the very real possibility of turning up to play the fixture with Championship players. Not ideal for such a momentous occasion. The RFU therefore had to (very) reluctantly decline the invitation. A pity, but the World Champions will be worthy guests and I’m sure we’ll witness a cracker.
pothale said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:03am | Report comment
Something tells me that when England walk onto Lansdowne Road in 2011 for their 6 Nations match, there’ll be something special.
Interesting story in the Telegraph from last year about John Pullin, the captain on the day, who received from former Irish players a piece of crystal with his famous words inscribed on it after the inaugural Croker match.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/kevinpietersen/3703094/Kevin-Pietersen-prepares-for-his-finest-hour.html
PastHisBest said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:52am | Report comment
“It is perfectlly natural for a person from our islands to refer to them as “Home”
Except VC, that they are referred to consistently as ‘the’ home unions, etc. Not ‘my’, or ‘our’.
That, oh titled one, is indeed condescending.
MrE said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:52am | Report comment
I remember as a little kid in the 60s hearing native born Ausralians refering to England as ‘home’.
I remember feeling a little puzzled by it – but now I recognise it as just a natural cultural carry over, which has long since been forgotten – same with knighthoods etc.
I am guessing Spiro would have used it here to keep the post count ticking along nicely !
Pippinu said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:38am | Report comment
I vote for the Catholic-Celtic interpretation.
There’s no doubt in my mind that the expression “home unions” derives from the socio-politcal-historic expression: “home countries” which meant precisely what pothale said.
Now there might be a good argument for retaining the expression home unions to refer to the original four rugby playing nations (before France made it five) – and that’s an argument for others to have – but it is right to acknowledge the true source of the expression – it just hasn’t arisen in a complete vacuum.
King of the Gorganites said | November 5th 2009 @ 12:12pm | Report comment
Pothale,
Just a quick not about Irish independence…..Ireland (excluding the occupired counties) gained its independence in 1921-1922, and didnt become a republic until 1949.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:09am | Report comment
‘except the only place Fosters is actually drunk in copious amounts is the UK..you would battle to find it in Australia and then even more to find an Aussie drinking it…. for some reason those cans from ASDA taste so much better than local version’
That’s because all the Australian barmen in Britain water it down with tap water and their urine.
PastHisBest said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:54am | Report comment
All in good fun KO.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 5:49pm | Report comment
Until you have a pint of the amber nectar. That’s no fun at all.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:18am | Report comment
‘Mortlock is on tour but still injured. Barnes,Sharpe, Kimlin,Waugh,Sheppard,Horne.
Dunning just come back from serious injury same with Kepu. As I said we all have injuries.’
Actually what you are saying is that Australia has lost two players whilst touring and in camp and lost a few 3rd rate players prior to camp and the 3N. What you are also saying is that Australia has 3 players: Mortlock, Dunning and Kepu, who aren’t actually injured at all. Wow. Haven’t you suffered. That is one immense injury list. Deans will be lucky to even find 15 players to pull on that sexy Gold jersey this Saturday.
Rodney McDonell said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:30am | Report comment
Rugby of either code never had a chance to become the “World Game”. Soccer was a head of rugby from the start. The strength in soccer is it’s simple rules. Theres no kid anywhere who has not kicked a soccer ball and though, yer i can play soccer.
That’s not the same for either rugby code. Theres is a little more involved and thats an obsticle for children.
Pippinu said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:40am | Report comment
Why is this post sitting on this thread? Is it responding to something someone said? Or were you just wanting to get that off your chest?
PastHisBest said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:57am | Report comment
“Soccer was a head of rugby…”
What exactly does this mean Rodders??
“Theres no kid anywhere who has not kicked a soccer ball and though, yer i can play soccer.”
Another incomprehensible gem…
AndyRoo said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Rodney
You should have posted that here instead
http://www.theroar.com.au/2009/11/04/the-last-word-on-the-code-wars/
You might win $10
Pippinu said | November 5th 2009 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:33am | Report comment
‘Adam Freier, Sam Wykes…. the list goes on’
If the list could go on then it would and you would have named more players. Neither Freier nor Wykes would have made the Australian squad, which is why the list of missing English players is directly lifted from their EPS squad. What a ludicrously coarse attempt at comparison.
Vented Relief said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:52am | Report comment
Hmm, and you mentioned 9 uncapped players from the england squad why? England has always picked ridiculously large squads full of players who will never even play for their country. A bit of reality is needed here.
BTW I think you’re being a bit harsh to Adam Freier, particularly considering Australia has toured with only two hookers, and are already feeling the pinch from it with Cowan having to throw into the lineout yesterday for petes sake! He was in the 43 man Wallaby squad and most assuredly would have been picked to add to his 16 wallaby caps, but for his injury.
Colin N said | November 5th 2009 @ 9:00am | Report comment
“Hmm, and you mentioned 9 uncapped players from the england squad why? ”
Because, they were either in the Saxons or EPS squads. Also, Mullan and Wood would have been close to a call-up if they were fit and on form, as they are both very talented. Dan Cole less so, but with the injuries we’ve had in that position, you never know, especially as the coahces think he’s talented enough to be in one of the squads. Waldouck could have been called up for Tindall, until he fratured a cheekbone against Gloucester.
Blaze was in the EPS and Turner-Hall was very close to the England squad and may well have played had it not been for injury.
Finally, Webbar could have been given the nod for the bench had it not been for injury.
It was a stupid question, but I hope I’ve answered it for you.
Terry Kidd said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:51am | Report comment
Bugger the injury list on both sides … we play with what we have and get on with it.
Ko and Pothale, sorry guys but as soon as I derived the gist of Spiro’s article I made a bet with myself that one of you two would be the first to comment. Lo and behold it was KO by a couple of lengths !!!
I’m not having a dig here guys, just a good deep chuckle because I could literally feel the indignation from here …. Brisbane.
Cheers, and best of luck to all our teams in the next few weeks.
pothale said | November 5th 2009 @ 9:34am | Report comment
We take it in turns to give the off-the-top-of head response and then the more considered one. And then VC chips in and gives out to both of us. Or rather admonishes us, as only he can.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 5:52pm | Report comment
It’s the time difference, Terry. That and a boring sense of indignation – you’re right. Must be that uptight English manner. Damn you stereotype! Damn you to hell.
All jokes aside and all things considered I’m actually really looking forward to the game. Good luck to you and your boys. No hard feelings… when England wins 41-17… (I had a dream.)
Damo said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:03am | Report comment
With you there Terry. Knives is out to prove his injury list is much more massive than ours. This Wallaby fan is greatly encouraged by this indignation.
BTW name calling Spiro because you disagree with his piece does not sway this 5th generation Australian of Anglo-Celtic heritage. Just deal with the facts so we all can learn something. Spiro made sense to me.
Viscount Crouchback said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Come on, old scout, harping on about stuff that happened in 1895 as a way of beating the Home Unions about the head in 2009 strikes me as absurd behaviour.
There’s too much reflexive Anglophobia in Spiros’s writings. One suspects that he’s become so conditioned to seeing the English/British as gin-swilling, reactionary buffons that he filters events to accord with his own prejudices. This is not unusual behaviour in Australia, of course.
The position of the RFU is actually very straightforward: they are prepared to make whatever reforms are necessary to achieve a better game, but they wish to do so in a prudent and measured manner which preserves the basic ethos of the game. They are not comfortable with ripping up the rule book and hoping for the best (which, in essence, is what the ELVs amounted to).
O’Neill and his acolytes in the media need to stop acting like spoilt chldren who have been denied their sweeties, and start coming up with some modest, sensible ideas for reform that can achieve consensus in the near future. Practically everyone in the world now agrees that the breakdown is a mess: this is a perfect opportunity for the Australians to come up with a targeted solution. If the ARU can tone down its utopianism, then it might just be surprised at the level of support it finds in the north. But if, instead, it persists with hare-brained schemes that involve drastic alterations to whole swathes of the game (e.g. the rolling maul) then the north will continue to show a deaf ear.
MrE said | November 5th 2009 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
. . . … Que ! ??
Bay35Pablo said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:55am | Report comment
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Mmmmph (wakes up, looks around)
(Yawn ……)
… zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
pothale said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:05am | Report comment
You only like the books with pictures in them, Pablo?
Temba said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:06am | Report comment
I am glad Spiro’ has changed targets from the saffas to the Northern hemisphere.
It’s a tough job getting the Brits to fire… us poor Saffies get worked up way to fast.
I didn’t mind the snake-bytes, they are 60% fosters!
PastHisBest said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:13am | Report comment
Only until next June/July Temba…
ohtani's jacket said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:41am | Report comment
Jerry’s gonna kill ‘em on the weekend. We can’t lose.
Pothale said | November 5th 2009 @ 12:21pm | Report comment
Thanks. I knew that when I wrote 1920.
AndyRoo said | November 5th 2009 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
I don’t see what all the negative fuss was about. This article would come out every couple of days before the old Wallaby tours to the NH.
It’s tradition and a dam fine one.
Why else would I care if Scotland beat South Africa or such.
kingplaymaker said | November 5th 2009 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
Spiro Wilkinson hasn’t been playing well for several years.
He played terribly in the world cup, kicking badly out of hand and with an awful record at kicking for goal, but had a profound PSYCHOLOGICAL effect on the team which helped them through. SImply by being there he boosted everyone’s confidence. It doesn’t mean he played well.
In the following six nations he played so badly the whole country was calling for him to be dropped.
It could be that he has recovered his long-lost form and will play well this weekend, but if he does it will be the first time for many moons.
The idea he’s England’s best player is extraordinary…on the other hand the players Johnson chooses are so bad even that might be true!
As you said recently that you read all the posts, I’ll tell you that the best wings in England are Lesley Vainikolo and James Simpson-Daniel and the best centre Matthew Tait, hoping you’ll understand this. None are anywhere near the team.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 5:55pm | Report comment
Oh… I see you’re still persevering with this Vainikolo chat. I can understand your regard for Tait, despite the fact he is playing very poorly but I would have thought you’d have dropped the Volcano in much the same way you decided that AAC wasn’t all that bad. Come on man.
Colin N said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:40pm | Report comment
“He played terribly in the world cup, kicking badly out of hand and with an awful record at kicking for goal, but had a profound PSYCHOLOGICAL effect on the team which helped them through. SImply by being there he boosted everyone’s confidence. It doesn’t mean he played well.”
Actually. I’ve rewatched all of the France and Australia games and Wilkinson was excellent (a bit sad I know, but being a student, it gives you someting to do). His distibution, decision making and kicking out of hand was superb for a player who was struggling with injury during that world cup.
He suffered with his kicking at goal in the Australia match, but that part of his game recovered superblyfor the rest of the world cup.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 11:48pm | Report comment
Why would we even bother? I fall for it every time.
kingplaymaker said | November 6th 2009 @ 2:06am | Report comment
Colin his kicking at goal was bad all World Cup, as was his kicking out of hand. He used to be a great kicking fly-half, but not for several years.
Knives Out said | November 6th 2009 @ 2:34am | Report comment
What were Wilkinson’s goal kicking percentages per game during the WC? Actually, since you’ve noted that Wilkinson has been a bad kicker for several years at what point did his kicking become bad? What year? How many games has he played since that year and what have his goal kicking stats been per game during that period?
Colin N said | November 6th 2009 @ 2:45am | Report comment
“Colin his kicking at goal was bad all World Cup, as was his kicking out of hand”
Then that could negate the notion that England were a negative side in effect.
Many have said, and I agree with them, that England got to a World cup final playing negative, 10 man rugby (the Australia game being the exception). For that to happen, England needed to have a good kicking game, which Wilkinson and Catt provided, and obiously a good pack.
In terms of Wilkinson’s goalkicking, it was poor against Australia, but I think he only missed one against France and scored a 40 metre drop goal.
kingplaymaker said | November 6th 2009 @ 6:41am | Report comment
Colin I’m the first to say that for years Wilkinson was the best kicking fly-half in the world. It’s just he hasn’t been that way for a while. If England are going to play a kicking game on saturday and he’s discovered his form from a few years back, then great.
Craig said | November 5th 2009 @ 4:19pm | Report comment
Spiro,
The chip on your shoulder extends beyond your distain for the Springboks it seems.
They are called the home nations because that is what they are; the Home Nations. England is the home of rugby union, no? At the times of all those tours you mentioned (NZ 1905, SA 1906, Aus 1908) were the countries not all under the English crown? Hence the name, Home Nations.
And yes, thank you for your less than insightful piece of journalism by pointing out that the SH teams are more successful than the NH teams. I think all NH fans will admit this. It discredits the spirit of the game that we SH countries continue to bring this up.
Now, you have answered the question as to why the NH have so much power and say in the game. Money. The game went professional in 1995 as you pointed out. NH has more money than SH. It’s that simple.
When you watch a club game played in any of the Home Nations or France, the stadiums are jam packed. People will sit through pouring rain and happily watch a 6-3 victory. And they will return next week.
Why? Passion. Something both Australian fans and players have lost.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 6:21pm | Report comment
Lol, you certainly do a good impression of Hemjay… Hermin. You’re radio rental, mate. Lol. Next you’ll be telling us that nobody else is allowed an opinion and that Ireland have never beaten NZ.
Hermin said | November 6th 2009 @ 5:39am | Report comment
Juvenile obnoxious little man who seriously is paranoid.
Not sure what Ireland has to do with anything here Knives Out are you sporting for a fight?
Grow up buddy you really are outdoing yourself
pothale said | November 6th 2009 @ 5:51am | Report comment
Well you see Ireland have never beaten NZ in rugby, so that’s really important to point out for certain NZ fans because they like to get the point across that they’ve always beaten or drawn with Ireland and as a result Ireland have never beaten NZ in rugby which is quite a feat really for Ireland to have achieved, in never managing to defeat them either by close margins or sometimes by large margins, and sometimes a draw, but Ireland have never managed to defeat NZ – the All Blacks that is – in the game of rugby which is a very startling statictics when you consider all the other countries that have managed to beat New Zealand, except for Scotland of course. they’ve never managed to beat NZ either which is an even more extraordinary thing and is worth repeating a lot in posts as well, so that’s really important to point out for certain NZ fans because they like to get the point across that they’ve always beaten or drawn with Ireland and as a result Ireland have never beaten NZ in rugby which is quite a feat really for Ireland to have achieved, in never managing to defeat them either by close margins or sometimes by large margins, and sometimes a draw, for certain NZ fans because they like to get the point across that they’ve always beaten or drawn with Ireland and as a result Ireland have never beaten NZ in rugby which is quite a feat really for Ireland to have achieved.
So in summary, I’d just to summarise on behalf of Hemjay that Ireland have never beaten New Zealand, which is not the same as New Zealand have always beaten Ireland. They haven’t. In fact, it’s probably more accurate to say that New Zealand have failed to beat Ireland all the time – a record that Ireland are very proud of obviously.
mcxd said | November 6th 2009 @ 6:35am | Report comment
awful statistic. NZ should hang their heads in shame.
Knives Out said | November 6th 2009 @ 9:27am | Report comment
You complete me, Pothale…
OldManEmu said | November 6th 2009 @ 9:34am | Report comment
Hilarious………but stop the fight, its not fair. In a battle of wits Hermin/Hemjay/QC is seriously unarmed.
I wonder what Hemjay does for a living – care to share Hemjay, or should I say Hermin?
Parisien said | November 7th 2009 @ 7:01am | Report comment
In what sense exactly KO?
Go_the_Wannabe's said | November 5th 2009 @ 6:44pm | Report comment
Hey Spiro,
Do you think Dingo/the Wannabe’s/O’Neill ever read these blogs?
Have you ever had any feedback? Do they take any public opinion on board or do they dismiss public opinion as the gripes and grumbles of armchair critics who’ve never played international rugby, let alone coached it?
I’m sure all the fellow Roarers would like to know if our efforts are falling on deaf ears or not!
Go_the_Wannabe's said | November 6th 2009 @ 9:15am | Report comment
Hey Spiro,
Don’t worry about it mate.
Deans just answered my question this morning.
Gits and Cooper will swap at 10 early in the game, giving most of us what we have been calling for all along.
2 Dads back at 15. Brilliant.
Ioane at 13. Superb.
All’s well with the world, there is a god (Unless we lose of course, then we’ll find a way to blame Dingo).
mcxd said | November 5th 2009 @ 6:46pm | Report comment
Spiro do you have a hornets nest out the back of yours to throw stuff at when you dont have an article to write ?
Rob said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:31pm | Report comment
All you lads carping in the backyard, I’m drawing the drapes and watching the game – Spiro glides past you rabble with only fleeting regard, he is onto those lickspittles – well done mate. What a congregation of beligerantly self focused brats, “now off you (colonial ) lads go, up there and charge those Turks, there’s good lads, while we have a cup of tea and a cucumber sandwich.”
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:45pm | Report comment
I’m guessing that the O’Jays were never that popular in Australia.
pothale said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:45pm | Report comment
Could you repeat that in English, please?
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 8:34pm | Report comment
Ok. I’m guessing that the O’Jays were never that popular in Australia.
OldManEmu said | November 7th 2009 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
One of the great reasons for the Roar is to read Pothale and Knives Out – although it is difficult to figure sometime who is the straight man and who is telling the jokes.
pothale said | November 7th 2009 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
OME – we’re totally serious on here all the time.
We’re just greatly misunderstood Northerners.
Terry Kidd said | November 5th 2009 @ 7:54pm | Report comment
I’ve just read thru the entire lot of posts again …. yeah, tis a quiet night at home and the wife has nothing to say …. and all I can say is that Spiro has wound us all up again …. just like he does every couple of weeks or so. Think about it guys, who is wriggling on who’s hook?
Paley said | November 5th 2009 @ 9:15pm | Report comment
“In 1895, the Rugby Football Union (the English union) expelled the strong rugby counties of Lancashire and Yorkshire from the RFU because they wanted to pay their players, who were mainly miners, compensation for rugby injuries.”
That is just nonsense
Paley said | November 5th 2009 @ 9:23pm | Report comment
Why do union writers feel the need to just make up the history of the split in 1895? There is a perfectly adequate, perfectly real version of events so why not use that instead of just making stuff up?
TommyM said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:15pm | Report comment
Wallabies lineup announced. FINALLY a bit of boldness from Deans.
15. Adam Ashley-Cooper (Brumbies)
14. Peter Hynes (Queensland Reds)
13. Digby Ioane (Queensland Reds)
12. Quade Cooper (Queensland Reds)
11. Drew Mitchell (NSW Waratahs)
10. Matt Giteau (Brumbies)
9. Will Genia (Queensland Reds)
8. Wycliff Palu (NSW Waratahs)
7. George Smith (Brumbies)
6. Rocky Elsom (Brumbies, captain)
5. Mark Chisholm (Brumbies)
4. James Horwill (Queensland Reds)
3. Ben Alexander (Brumbies)
2. Stephen Moore (Brumbies)
1. Benn Robinson (NSW Waratahs)
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:29pm | Report comment
That’s an interesting team. Methinks that Deans has missed a trick by not playing AAC in the centres to target Wilkinson and Geraghty’s understanding, and Geraghty’s defence. I’m glad that Mitchell is on the wing.
TommyM said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:33pm | Report comment
If you saw anything of Ioane in this year’s S14, trust me- Geraghty is going to more than have his hands full. Ioane made the most run metres of any player in the competition despite only playing 10 games.
Knives Out said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:44pm | Report comment
I saw basically all of this seasons S14, but I don’t think those statistics are relevant to test rugby. Ioane is a very good athlete and is dynamic, but AAC is incredibly hard to contain. Having a playmaker at 12 (Cooper) will suit Geraghty, as opposed to AAC trucking the ball up time and time again.
TommyM said | November 5th 2009 @ 10:19pm | Report comment
Mind you- still has the 10-12 jerseys wrong way around in my opinion. Really looking forward to seeing Digby getting heaps of ball at 13 and Cooper throwing it wide to the wings. Here’s hoping that Giteau does NOT do what he promised during the week and take it the line himself too much. Suspect we’ll see Pocock on for Palu early if we’ve got dominance in the loose.
kingplaymaker said | November 6th 2009 @ 6:44am | Report comment
Tommy I expect Giteau and Cooper will swap positions for much of the match.
In that case the Australian midfield would start to look really deadly (shame about the wings).
Mr cheese said | November 6th 2009 @ 3:53am | Report comment
Isn’t the main problem here that Spiro believes that Rugby could have become the world’s leading code of “football” if the split hadn’t happened at the George Hotel, Huddersfield.
Rubbish, of course. Spiro knows very well that Rugby cannot lay a glove on Football. It is that simple. I like the occasional Rugby Union match, but you have to be realistic: Football is just much bigger than Rugby. Nothing Rugby could have done would have stopped the growth of Football.
In the north of England, Rugby Union as a spectator sport is virtually non-existent. RL isn’t all that big either. You have to be a little more modest, Spiro, and accept that ( with or without the ELVs ), Rugby cannot and could not come close to Football.
Terry Kidd said | November 6th 2009 @ 5:49am | Report comment
Hermin, do you mind a comment from a neutral?
In your tit for tat posts with Knives Out it is actually you who is looking a little obnoxious. Judging from the language used in the posts that I see from both of you, then Hermin you are decideedly in 2nd place.
Here is a tip …. just give your opinion, don’t allow yourself to get personal. Cheers,
Hermin said | November 6th 2009 @ 5:55am | Report comment
Terry Kid,
So you say I’ll give you a little advice and update this is not just from this thread but many threads where I have had to put up with this guy ranting and raving. If you knew anything of the history you will clearly see that it is he KO who began all the name calling and accusations. So I would say to you refrain from commenting on something you know little about!!
Also if you did read you will see once again I am been subjecgted to his wild accusations in this thread alone.
So your telling me he has free reign to throw accusations yet I can not respond is that what your saying Terry?
Knives Out said | November 6th 2009 @ 9:24am | Report comment
Lol, Hermin aka Hemjay aka Mttmkl… how many times has Ireland beaten NZ? Btw, are you going to apologise for falsely accusing me of ignoring the fact that NZ had players missing when France beat them?
Terry Kidd said | November 6th 2009 @ 6:07am | Report comment
Lol, Pothale …. absolutely brilliant !!!!!
Hermin – Mate, I am aware. I too read all the posts on most of the threads. I’m not going to argue with you. I just offered some advice which is that of the two of you, your language is the more intemperate.
Cheers,
Knives Out said | November 6th 2009 @ 9:25am | Report comment
Terry, feel free to call me a butthead if you think it’s necessary.
bob said | November 6th 2009 @ 6:35am | Report comment
Perhaps the NH/SH rugby argument would end if people like Spiro, who have no game time, have never tackled, rucked, mauled or scrummaged, didn’t think they had some sacred right to meddle in the laws. There can be no other sport where the actual players are so messed around and dictated to by the journo’s, fans, and administrators. I’m not saying you have to play to have a say, but… you have to play to have a signifcant say… all you hear is uninformed, non and never were participants, asking for simpler this, quicker that… if they’d shut up in the first place the IRB would have left rucking in place at the breakdown and we’d have had faster ball etc etc. And the constant harping on about what happened 100 years ago is just dull, dull, dull… and very cheap journalism.
Terry Kidd said | November 6th 2009 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Lol KO, don’t worry mate if I think that you have made a butthead type comment I will let you know my opinion …. and the reverse applies also.
I am probably your typical antipodean convict descendant who does not take things too seriously unless they become personal …. I just ahppen to love rugby, the Wallabies and the Tahs in that order and I’m willing to read, discuss and opine on any rugby subject. By the way, I have English, Welsh, Irish and German ancestors but am out and out Aussie and have visited NZ and SA but have yet to get to Argentina and I still play Golden Oldies.
I love the banter waged on this site by all us SH types, whether Wallas, Kiwis or Saffers and NH types whether Pom, Welsh or Irish …. nobility or peasant (included for Viscount Crouchback).
Knives Out said | November 6th 2009 @ 10:01am | Report comment
Good for you, Terry. I’m probably your typical English Londoner who takes things far too seriously and responds with whining and sarcasm. Bloody stereotypical genes.
MarkR said | November 6th 2009 @ 9:43am | Report comment
Gents, congratulations, I just realised why I enjoy this forum so much. Facts & wit with a hefty dose of irony & a light sprinkling of boll**ks.
Now back to the rugby questions – KO/Pothale, how do you see the Welsh team going against NZ ? Have they got the forward power to use that excellent backline of theirs ?
Also, anyone taking bets on the Wallaby/England forward battle..specifically the scrum ?
Terry Kidd said | November 6th 2009 @ 9:46am | Report comment
MarkR …. Wallaby scrum to be slightly dominant with Moore at No2 but to be entirely dominant with TPN at No2 …. there is far more shove with Palu at 8 also.
MarkR said | November 6th 2009 @ 9:57am | Report comment
Initeresting, liked Palu last Sat, he did very well when the Wallaby scrum got hammered.
I was also interested to notice the difference in the reffing btwn the NZ SA game & the NZ Oz game at scrum time. In the last SA game if the scrum went down but the ball was at the back the ref let it go, whereas the Ockers seem to get reff’d a lot tighter at scrum time. I’ll be interested to see if this remains the case for the NH tour.
Lee said | November 6th 2009 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Did you see the last BC game? The ref let everything in the scrums go, even if they collapsed and teh ball was at the back he just let it play on. Very very lax.
Go_the_Wannabe's said | November 6th 2009 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
And rightly so……who wants to see scrums set all day long?
What does it matter if the scrum collapses after the ball has been fed? (Except near the line of course).
It’ll be another penalty shooting contest on the weekend, or as fellow roarer Doug calls it “Whistle Ball”.
How true it is.
Terry Kidd said | November 6th 2009 @ 10:05am | Report comment
Gee KO, another myth debunked. I had guessed that you were probably a southerner, maybe from the Bath area.
Knives Out said | November 7th 2009 @ 12:29am | Report comment
Not on you nelly. I’m no bumpkin. I’m a geezer, me. South London, mate… et cetera, et cetera. C’or blimey and all that.
pothale said | November 6th 2009 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Mark R, the fact that Woodcock and Jones are missing from their respective teams and there’s two newbies standing in makes for an interesting scrum time, No doubt KO knows more than me on this aspect of the teams. I hope to see some good running from both backlines, if their forwards are at relative parity.
Knives Out said | November 7th 2009 @ 1:00am | Report comment
I’m not sure how the Wales v NZ scrum battle will play out, Pothale. Of Woodock, Jenkins, Tialata and Jones probably only Jones is a truly consistently powerhouse scrummager. Woodcock is a technician, Tialata is erratic and apparently Jenkins is a reluctant tight merchant. Neither Woodcock or Jenkins have out and out ruined opponents but both consistently do well through guile and nous. Therefore, the absence of Woodcock v Jones will be a loss for the purists.
Crockett and James will never be considered greats and both have question marks over them. I recall that whilst Crockett has always been on the edges of the NZ squad Hansen publicly questioned his core strength, which always struck me as a bit of a public dressing down. Crockett probably stands on the wrong side of tall for a loosehead but I doubt James will be able to gain much purchase off him. James is a journeyman club player at loosehead who has never managed to usurp Duncan Jones from the 1 jersey at the Ospreys and yet now he is being given the Wales 3 jersey, all on the basis of less than three hours of tighthead scrummaging at franchise level. Less than three hours in which James got taken to the cleaners so badly that he was even given a special receipt to remind him not to try it again.
It is a truly bizarre selection from Gatland. Whilst Jenkins is no Euan Murray he has good experience of playing tighthead, and could have formed a 1-3 combination with Duncan Jones (54 caps), thus giving the Welsh front row a real dash of experience: Jones (54), Rees (30), Jenkins (68). I sincerely believe that E.L. Roberts was the best option to attack/offer a bulwark against the NZ scrum and the taller, slim Crockett, but Gatland seems to have opted out of that selection in favour of making public utterances about the quality of the GP, and thereby implying that all Welsh players should be playing in Wales. This politicking could come back to haunt him with the much maligned Craig Mitchell as backup for the 3 jersey.
An interesting side note is that Crockett will have Eaton scrummaging behind him, and James will have A.W. Jones scrummaging behind him. Both are 5s but Jones seems to be making that common mistake of trying make people believe that he is a 4 lock. It was made abundantly clear on the Lions tour that whilst a very gifted young and enthusiastic middle jumper he is by no means the enforcer to solidify a scrum. His combination with Charteris will not only affect the scrummage, but also the lineout (moreso in the absence of J. Thomas). Jones will have to jump at 4. Potentially, therefore, it could be a long night at the set piece for Wales. Perhaps Gatland is seeking a fast and loose brand, but we all know that the piano has to be constructed before the ivores are given a good finger jabbing. This intriguing selection has allowed Henry the luxury of resting Donnelly (who provides a good option from the bench) and giving Eaton a run out. Eaton also has the luxury of playing with Brad Thorn – a true enforcer. Their pairing has a better balance to it than Jones and Charteris.
The hooking battle should be interesting. During the Lions tour Matthew Rees developed from a player who struggled at the lineout, and often overplayed his hand as a carrier into a responsible (except for his attempted punch on B. du Plessis in the first test) and reliable middle man. Hore has always been reliable (except for the occasional lineout yip), and is a real workhorse. Both players exert a lot of influence on the breakdown and are your typical, nuggety, stocky hookers. It should be a good battle. Hopefully for Wales Rees can kick on and progress more and Hore can offer his usual committed, strong presence.
Last but not least we have the tussle between Jenkins and Tialata. Tialata is a monster but not a particularly intimidating monster. Regardless, he is a bulky option and should be able to suck up what Jenkins has to offer. At least if the NZ front five struggle – which I think is unlikely – Henry can call on Donnelly to shore things up. Ultimately the NZ front five has a better balance to it. The changes made to the Welsh front five appear purely cosmetic and I would expect a lot of wheeling and collapses to occur during the match, with NZ to have a lineout dominance.
Gee whizz.. I haven’t even looked at the back rows or the bench..
pothale said | November 7th 2009 @ 2:11am | Report comment
Top class stuff, KO, as per usual. For someone so relatively young (it is your birthday this week?), your knowledge and insight is always welcome.
Now if you could just get rid of that English sterotype you carry around with you, you might turn out to be a decent bloke, despite Hermin’s plaintive bleats.
BTW, you going to either of the other two matches at Twickenham?
Knives Out said | November 7th 2009 @ 2:40am | Report comment
Don’t make me blush, Pothale. Everybody has a hobby. Besides, what was I meant to do at university? Study or spend hours searching out rugby info so as to help me hand over my student loan to Paddy Power?
It was my birthday yesterday. Thank you for your wishes on another thread.
I had a ticket for the Australia ticket but had to sell it as I am off to Germania vere all ze Germans live so I can vatch David Haye beat ze granny out of Valuev. I might go to the NZ test but I’m not actually a huge fan of live rugby. My eyesight isn’t fantastic but I refuse to wear contact lenses or my glasses. Too much tends to happen in rugby whereas with sports like football or boxing what you see is all you need to see.
Hermin’s probably right – I am a jam roll, but then so are most people. It’s where you figure in the overall table of jam rolls that counts, IMO.
I see Horan’s injured. Good news for Ireland. Kidney has to play Healy now, which I suspect he was going to do anyway.
pothale said | November 7th 2009 @ 3:20am | Report comment
You’re a jam roll? I thought you were English, now you’re telling me you’re Polish, as most people are? Very confusing, you sarf Londoners.
Leaving aside your dicky mince pies, next time I’m in London over the next two weeks, if you’re up for a pint whilst watching a match in Patrick’s or somewhere and hurling abuse at the SH blokes, let me know.
Horan’s injury sounds like more than just run of the mill injury – it’s a head one, and noises I’m hearing is that it’s not good. Am sorry for the guy.
Healy and Court are likely to feature in matchday 22. Flannery may also be out for first game and Kearney is another possible injury against Australia which would be a shame. O’Leary and a couple of others are carrying knocks but that’s it.
MarkR said | November 9th 2009 @ 8:25am | Report comment
KO – Congrats for picking the better one to go to – I hope like hell Fox replay the Valuev Haye fight over here as I’ve been wanting to see a boxer take out one of those giants for a while.
Wix said | November 6th 2009 @ 3:11pm | Report comment
It is extremely difficult to forecast results of International rugby games, because rugby in both hemispheres has become a smash and grab game where the biggest and the fittest is more likely to determine the result. If smash and grab isn’t the focus then kick and chase will be. Either way, true rugby skills have been subordinated to the point where they all but vanished. The Tokyo Bledislsoe was a good example of how the malaise has infected even the previuosly fabulous All Blacks.
This is the sad state of the game today, as I see it.
In the late 80’s, early 90’s when Rugby League was in a similar state of decline, they worked out the changes needed to reverse the trend, and produced an actractive again game, which now packs ‘em in. (Mind you, I would not blame anyone saying that ’six play the balls and one kick’ is skilful and attractive.) But the punters have voted with their feet, big time. And they have undoubtedly attracted hordes of ’swinging voters’ away from our game (which used to be played in heaven)
So I call upon those with influence, such as our very own Spiro, to launch a campaign to get John O’Sleepy O’Niel and his merry band of rugby luminaries to do ’something’. They could start at home with the Wallabies, and then move ‘uptown’ to our colleagues in NZ and SA, and maybe later the IRB might even sit up and take notice.
I have intentionally not offered any ideas, in the hope of attractiing some feedback from those who may be closer to the game.
MarkR said | November 9th 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
Wix – have you SEEN teh skill level of teh recent test, whether BL, or Bledisloe, yes defence is tighter but the players are doing things that 20 yrs ago none of tehm would have even attempted.
MarkR said | November 6th 2009 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
Pothale, I reckon you’re going to see some good running anyway even if the forwards aren’t at parity. The respective teams breakdowns palys will be itneresting as I;’ve been seriously impressed by the Bok & AB counter rucking in the TN games. Williams on Jane should be interesting, or is he up against Guilford (pretty sure he’s a left wing). All will be revealed on Sun am & the bragging rights will be sealed in the first 2 weeks I reckon.
Now, serious question, Kilkeny or Guiness, I can only get the cans over here & you seriously don’t want to know how cold the Ockers serve their Guiness & how badly they pour it……
MarkR said | November 6th 2009 @ 3:14pm | Report comment
& GTW – I don’t want to see them reset all day, I just want teh ref to police the put in & the drive properly. If te scrum goes down when teh balls at the back & the scrums static they should just call for the ball to be cleared.
pothale said | November 6th 2009 @ 11:56pm | Report comment
No contest – Guinness. Kilkenny is a derivative of Smithwicks (you don’t pronounce the W which gave a lot of people outside Ireland problems, so they changed the name and made it slightly stronger). I used to drink it when I were a lad, but moved across to the dark side when I got sense and wanted to avoid the cruel hangovers after a night literally on the beer.
Guinness is poured badly all over the world, the New Yorkers and parts of London are the worst offenders – throw it into the glass and hand it out. Yeuch.
Am not sure about Williams and whether he’s lost his sparkle – he got it together in the final Lions match, but Ospreys have not been singing from the same hymn sheet so far this season.
Knives Out said | November 7th 2009 @ 2:46am | Report comment
‘Guinness is poured badly all over the world, the New Yorkers and parts of London are the worst offenders – throw it into the glass and hand it out. Yeuch.’
Don’t forget the comedy logo in the foam: “No logo in the foam, mate.”
Parisien said | November 7th 2009 @ 7:12am | Report comment
At last something we can agree upon. Might I humbly suggest you can get a decent pint of Guinness poured in the Irish pubs of Paris: The Quiet Man, The Green Linnet, Kitty O’ Shea’s, the James Joyce, The Coolin’, and Finnegans Wake, just to mention a few of my favourites…
Its a quiet Friday night pre-match…