Carnage. It’s an emotive word. But that’s what I fear could be a distinct possibility during this year’s World Cup.
Not among the fans necessarily – through gorging themselves on a feast of fromage, vin rouge, foie gras and 49 rugby games in 43 days could play havoc with a fan’s waistline and sleeping patterns. Going cold turkey and lying down in a darkened room for a few hours should sort that out.
It’s the physical welfare of some of the players I fear for on account of them having to take part in what are, purely and simply, mismatches.
Mismatches, of course, occur in all sports. But only in rugby union and, to a lesser extent it’s half-sibling, rugby league, are mismatches of the physical kind permitted.
Unfortunately there are plenty scheduled for this World Cup. By way of an example, look no further than the tournament’s second Saturday when the All Blacks tackle Portugal in Lyon.
That the result of this encounter between the raging tournament favourite (4/7) and the World Cup’s biggest ever underdog (10,000/1) is a foregone conclusion is not the issue.
The real issue, and a very worrying one at that, is the prospect of the most powerful pack in world rugby scrummaging against the inexperienced and physically weaker amateurs who would have just come off a bruising encounter with an improving Scottish outfit.
This is not to suggest, of course, that the All Blacks will adopt an over-physical approach or the Portuguese will allow sand to be kicked in their faces.
But the bottom-line is that the very nature of these confrontations make it a dangerous business for even the most experienced and physically prepared players let alone for these world cup virgins.
When scrums go wrong, as they quite often do, there is a real danger of a player suffering a life changing spinal injury. Ben Darwin anchored the Australian scrum in 2003 before a collapsed scrum ended his career. The sportsmanship of his kiwi adversary, Kees Meeuws, and excellent medical care probably saved Ben from becoming a quadraplegic. Though still just a puppy in prop years Ben will be commentating this world cup for Australian TV knowing he dodged a bullet.
The IRB have recently introduced rules to help combat this problem and it seems to be helping but this is not the only danger area. The ‘tackle area’ seems to be getting more and more hazardous – Look at what happened to Brian O’Driscoll on the ill fated Lions tour of 2005. The 1995 World Cup was also blighted by such an occurrence when Ivory Coast winger, Max Brito, was and sentenced to spend the rest of his life in a wheelchair after being paralysed in their pool match versus Tonga. The tragedy occurred when Brito was tackled and then crushed by the players in the ensuing ruck. It could be considered a ‘freak’ accident but these ‘freak’ accidents are becoming more commonplace every year and whilst they are not restricted to ‘mismatched’ players it certainly raises the probability of such an accident.
Dr Syd Millar, retiring IRB Chairman, commented recently that the tournament should probably go back to its’ original format of 16 teams. It makes sense – we don’t have 20 competitive teams currently playing international rugby and it would be a hell of a lot safer for those part time rugby players who have to confront highly paid, finely tuned, full time professionals. They don’t have to miss out on their life’s dream of playing in a world cup either if a second tier tournament were to run parallel to the top tier championship as has been suggested. These ‘minnows’ add a certain mystique to the tournament as we are not used of seeing them on the big stage but it has to be weighed up against the physical risks and wellbeing of those involved. And how much benefit is there really in watching sides getting beaten by 100+ points?
Daniel Herbert
- Wallaby 1994-2002; 67 tests for Australia
- World Cup winner 1999
- Retired 2004 as a result of a neck injury sustained whilst playing in France
Peter L
Guest
I think the minnows must be allowed entry to the RWC, but between RWCs they must have access to resources and games that will progress them and improve their chances at the next cup. That is, they need to have the ability to play top tier and tier two nations in some way. Perhaps each tier one nation should need to send a coach to a minnow for a season, culminating with a short tour where they play the top S14/6N team for the year, perhaps the winners of the local comp (NPC, Currie Cup, ARC et al) and with a test finale against the tier 1s themselves. Certainly the minnows contribute to the funds pool for each cup, it seems only fair they should benefit beyond the comp itself.
joe blow
Guest
Chris Beck said, "I wonder if Spiro might share his thoughts on this topic." Try this: http://www.theroar.com.au/2007/08/28/spiro-zavos-on-the-rugby-world-cup-3/
Chris Beck
Guest
I wonder if Spiro might share his thoughts on this topic.
Chris Beck
Guest
As an American, I certainly don't want to see the Eagles get smashed. But while we've only got a handful of professional players, we're up against teams filled with professionals. I've said before that I feel the IRB has failed the minnows. When Syd Millar talks about cutting the number of teams from 20 to 16, I shake my head. Does anybody believe the IRB will do a better job with the minnows if they allows 16 teams in the next RWC as opposed to the current 20?
Joe blow
Guest
Harking back to the 2003 RWC results is quite interesting. In Australia's Pool A games the Wallabies walloped Romania 90-8 and then obliterated Namibia 142-0. Neither of these two losing teams' players sustained any serious injury (from memory). And in 1999 didn't the All Blacks run up 150 points to nil against a minnow, and again no one was seriously injured? In a sense perhaps 'mismatches' are the safer matches because the professional team has nothing to prove by exhibiting superior brute strength against a far inferior opponent. These matches also usually take on an air of being 'exhibition matches' rather than true contests of strength and skill. As we know it'll be little more than a training run for the Men in Black and the Portuguese will be thankful for a first-class rugby lesson. Fingers crossed there are no serious injuries on either side. For stats from RWCs 1999 & 2003 try these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Rugby_World_Cup#First_Round http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Rugby_World_Cup
matty
Guest
Interesting thought Mitch - although the problem is that Scotland's scrum is just as powerful as most of the top teams so it doesn't deal with Dan's issue. But really, why the paternalism??? We have all played in games where we have been overmatched before - I remember playing against the Australian Armed Forces in an under 21 comp and their tighthead was as wide as our entire front row. I got a bath in at hooker, but survived and, as the cliche goes, it made me stronger. As pointed out, scrum injuries can happen between the most skilled of exponents - all the strength training available to the modern professional couldn't prevent the injuries to Ben Darwin and Brian O'D. This is a risk which I (yes, me, not you) get decide everytime I run onto the field. Sorry Dan, you sound like my mother. And who are we to deny some guy from Portugal what may otherwise be the pinnacle of his rugby career, playing against the All Blacks in the RWC? This is an eletist view which doesn't belong in an egalatarian sport that has prided itself for accomodating all comers. Why shouldn't a brillian up and comer be denied his spot in the limelight of the biggest stage because he was born in Lisbon not Brisbane? And how else are these teams going to get exposure to develop? I would hazard a guess that if Portugal had a choice of playing just one game - a sure 100+ loss to NZ (nice patronising assumption again) and a competitive game against Namibia - well, which game would you rather tell your grandkids about? I always liked the idea of a tournament structured like the Hong Kong 7s - with a round robin, then playoffs for cup, plate, shield (and jug). That way - in the first round, the up and comers get their shot at the big guys - then in the playoffs, we get more, more evenly matched, games.
Mitch
Guest
This is always a tough issue. I am sure if you asked any of the competitors in the "mismatched" sides what they thought, I am sure they would tell you they are chomping at the bit just to run onto the same field as the bigger more professional sides. And really, as much as I respect Daniel Herbert (one of my all time favourite Wallabies), I think this is something that brings the beauty and aura to big sporting events such as the Olympics, Rugby World cup and to a lesser extent the Football World Cup (i say lesser extent because it isnt as 'mismatched'). But in saying all this, I tend to agree with the second tier competition running at the same time. And maybe the top two sides from this could play against, say the 7th and 8th, sides in the bigger competition to give them a chance to compete on a larger stage, and quite possibley make a quarter final... or even just compete against a side such as Wales, Ireland or even Argentina... Does that seem plausible guys? Dunno... Lets say the winner would be Georgia, or Uruguay. That could mean they play Scotland... Long shot, but still, not over the top mismatched...