Europe is closing gap, says Welsh star Williams

You're just right, Nick - it's a crock of poo. Who started this whole Southern Hemisphere better than Northern Hemisphere thing anyway? It shouldn't ever be mentioned again. Think I'll go to bed now. I don't feel well.

These ratings are about team quality over time. WC is about performance in a tournament. The double points business has skewed the ratings (ie ratings at Dec 07 didn't accurately reflect relative qualities of the teams over the prior couple of years to that point). Take NZ as an example. Because they dropped out early, they didn't get double points that they would have if they had stayed in. In NZs case they had been best team in world, rated as such, and beaten SA in 2007. So they were rated first before WC. Then they crap out due to single bad performance (+rotation, +weak pool, +poor seleciton, +injury to 10s during game, whatever they should have beaten the French), and drop down to second because they miss double points opportunities from further wins, other teams get them. This year, like last year, they're the best team going around, and beat SA twice. I wouldn't say they're better than last year. It's last year's ratings (after WC) that are skewed. So they return to top of pile in ratings after this year. You could say the same about Wales (poor tournament relative to results before and since), and the reverse for Argies and England (good tornament relative to before and since). The ratings difference is skewed by WC results, which aren't, IMO, reflective of team developments. So, Wales look to be improving, but never deserved on form over whole of 2006/7 to be rated below Scotland and Fiji (6N will tell the tale a bit more), Aus also somewhat (although need consistency), Argies numbers dropping off whereas probably performing about the same (overrated after WC), rest about the same. And comparing hemispheres is a crock - who cares?

Nick - don't follow your logic. If NZ and Wales dropped out early - as you say - then they did an even better job in getting back to where they are now, because they only had normal points to do it in. In simple terms, if a team was getting 2 points for a win during WC, and then only 1 point afterwards, NZ getting to #1 spot on higher points than SA had last year after winning the WC is pretty good going if you ask me. Wales, similarly, went on to win the Six Nations Championship - and did okay in AIs - I'd call that an unusually good season/year.

Stats, eh? Clearly the double points at WC skewed the standings last year - ABs/Wales dropped out early relative to where they sit in the world pecking order, so they regain points this year (esp Wales) without having 'unusually good seasons' in other respects, Argies outperformed their usual status to reach semis, so are in freefall points wise, similarly England who probably outperformed their current status (albeit to a lesser degree). So, in summary, last years points were an abberation based on a couple of outstanding results (eg Argies v France to progress top of their group and therefore get to semi, the unmentionable in Cardiff preventing ABs progressing, Wales not getting out of their pool). Don't think they're a great benchmark to judge any improvement in anyone's game. Having said that, Wales are on the improve, Aus slightly, everyone else about the same IMO. So if Wales improving = NH catching SH, then I agree with S Williams. Except that lumping hemispheres together is all a bit crazy if you ask me.

Well NZ didn't do too bad either. Three teams from each hemisphere improved their rating and three disimproved. The gap between both SH and NH is closing based on IRB rankings, but SANZAR still remain top of the pile. The top 5 places all have lower ratings this year compared to last - except for #1 New Zealand who have improved despite more points being available last year because of WC - quite remarkable performance.

oh true sorry i must have missed your first paragraph :D...yep looks like Wales are the only ones.

That's right, Bailey4 - I said that Wales performance had contributed to NH improved overall rating substantially. and Argentina's poor performance had contributed substantially to decrease in SH figures. It's an indicator, nothing more.

ummm Pothale the only team thats improved dramatically is Wales, everyone else, not so much!

Hmmm - looks can be deceiving. Based on the above comparison from Danny, I've included the Top 12 seeded teams since they play regularly in World Cups and Italy are part of the 6 Nations. SH teams have dropped overall, and NH have improved overall - so gap is closing on this basis. Wales and Argentina's performance from each hemisphere have contributed to this substantially. NZ have a better #1 rating than Boks last year, despite Boks winning WC and getting double points. SH Teams O7 SH Teams 08 Diff NZ 89.59 92.68 +3.09 SA 90.81 89.45 -1.36 AUS 84.20 85.86 +1.66 ARG 87.42 81.56 -5.86 FIJ 75.88 75.24 -0.64 SAM 71.61 72.57 +0.96 Total -2.15 NH Teams 07 NH Teams 08 Diff WAL 74.17 81.03 +6.86 ENG 85.55 80.86 -4.69 FRA 80.32 79.49 -0.83 IRL 78.50 78.45 -0.50 SCO 76.73 76.76 +0.03 ITA 73.48 74.64 +1.16 Total +2.03

Closing the gap? Today's rankings: 1(1) NEW ZEALAND 92.68 2(2) SOUTH AFRICA 89.45 3(3) AUSTRALIA 85.86 4(4) ARGENTINA 81.56 5(5) WALES 81.03 6(6) ENGLAND 80.86 7(7) FRANCE 79.49 8(8) IRELAND 78.45 9(9) SCOTLAND 76.76 10(10) FIJI 75.24 10 Dec 07: (1) SOUTH AFRICA 90.81 2(2) NEW ZEALAND 89.59 3(3) ARGENTINA 87.42 4(4) ENGLAND 85.55 5(5) AUSTRALIA 84.20 6(6) FRANCE 80.32 7(7) IRELAND 78.50 8(8) SCOTLAND 76.73 9(9) FIJI 75.88 10(10) WALES 74.17 Looks like its widened over the past year more like!

Ok seriously i'm sick of this what if wales beat SA or what if France got their kicks over the fact of the matter is they both lost, and not only did they lose they lost to teams they would normally beat on their home ground!! Yes they might be catching up, but these SH teams are also improving esp Australia (minus the welsh game)...these NH have to be consistent every year to be able to call themselves a great force, but they're not if anything they're constantly up and down. This year has to go to Wales for their fantastic style of play, but you also have teams like SA, ABs and OZ who are very, very good at analysing each play from each team and using it to their advantage. Whether or not Wales or any other NH team can do that is yet to be seen...

Hmmm. I'll give you that.

pothale its no so much the fact that Wales were the only NH to beat a SH, its got something to do with their style of play - Wales play modern, attractive, attacking rugby, and they were a bit unlucky against the Boks.

Why just Wales? Why not Ireland or France? Because they lost to ABs? So did Wales. Ireland won their match against Argentina, ranked four places above them in the IRB rankings. Australia lost to ABs on this recent tour along with Home Nations. Austraia lost to Wales as well. And won against England comfortably. Most people accept but for Skrela's awful kicking, they would not have beaten France based on their performance. So where's this supposed gap meant to be between NH and SH? Or even just the three Tri-Nations countries? ABs are certainly ahead of everyone else. SA are possibly a close second, though the Scotland game showed their weak points. After that, it's up for grabs - Australia are not at the same level as those two. It's ABs and SA, and then everyone else fighting it out for the next 4-5 spots.

If the gap is in an enterprising and entertaining rugby context, the NH is still miles behind. Except Wales........could it be their "foreign" coach? Jools-USA

He is saying this either with tongue in cheek or he is incredibly naive. 1 FROM 11 against the Tri Nations is not closing the gap, if anything the gap is as wide as its ever been. Case in point, Clive Woodward said that he couldnt pick one Englishman to take a Springbok's place after the Twickenham debacle. Sambobly: South Africa have now won 6 games on the trot against England, do you by consistently mean occasionally? The face is that, playing at home, the 6 Nation sides were thumped by teams after a very long season and looking forward to a break.

"The gap is not that far apart between SH and NH if you actually include all the teams who play in the Top 12." I would suggest that it's only been in recent times that anyone would really even consider the 'other' SH teams in the Top 12 (with the possible exception of Argentina) to challenge top-level NH opposition. Such teams lack professional domestic competitions to develop (and attract) talent and international game time to allow their players to gel. They have rarely, if ever, really expected to maintain a high ranking, or to seriously challenge top-level opposition. They might be geographically situated in the Southern Hemisphere, but when someone refers to the 'gap between the SH and the NH', they mean 'between the Tri Nations teams and the Northern Hemisphere.' I highly doubt that Williams was thinking of Argentina and Fiji when expressing his opinion above.

If you ask me, the reffing at the breakdown did more to close the gap than anything the NH sides did on the field, but they've got to believe they're closing the gap if they're to win Tests, so it's the right attitude to take. The Welsh Union signing on for more Tests against the SH sides is the right thing to go, though it takes a little of the spectacle out of playing up North if you get the same match-up every tour.

It hasn't taken Gatland too long to imprint himself on the Wales team. Not surprisingly they were after Wayne Smith at the Ospreys because, like the players, the methods and techniques of the SH coaches are at another level also. But, I believe Gatland and Edwards have done well to extract more out of the Welsh player base, but will struggle to make any further improvements. They're riding a bit of a wave at the moment and will be found out by the time 2011 rolls around. England with strengthen over the next couple of seasons as the go about blooding the current batch of youngsters and turn them into hardened and experienced big game winners. But I don't know if they'll be good enough by 2011, maybe 2015 for the like of Ciprianni, Care, Armitage etc. I think that they might still be a little green by 2011 and will instead form the core of an older 2015 side, boulstered by the emergence of more youthful age grade talent over the next 5 years. Ireland have some great talent and are once again looking dangerous with their new breed of youngsters. But they seem a little preoccupied at present with buying in foreign talent to fill their provincial gaps. With foreigners like Elsom, Nacewa etc taking up spots they might struggle with injuries and individual form issues like WC2007. Italy will be the real point of interest for mine. Mallet is a great coach and does what has to be done, much like Gatland. If they can get some more competitive competition for their club sides, possibly in the Celtic league, then they will close the gap more than anyone else. But it will be too late for WC2011. As for the SH teams, the Wallabies will be up another level next year, once Deans gets a real chance to imprint himself on the side. The Boks will continue to be a mystery under De Villiers, but I can't see them being any weaker than this year and it may just turn out that he actually has a plan? The AB's will only get stronger as they add depth and experience to their core squad. Player like Hayman and McAlister will return and the new guns like Kahui, Read, Messam, Boric, Elliot and MacIntosh will grow as they get a couple of seasons of Super rugby under their belts. Not to mention the young talent who are about to break onto the Pro scene over the next two years, like Slade, Kirkpatrick, Crotty, Braid, Guildford etc. These guys totally outshone every player they faced a the U20 WC including many English kids who are now getting game time at club level (Turner-Hall, Benjamin, Cato etc). The NPC and Super Rugby is still a better breeding ground for top level talent and International rugby. If the Argies can get a regular slot in the Tri-Nations then it will be a likely bet that they will improve out of sight and become a 4th SH giant.

The gap is not that far apart between SH and NH if you actually include all the teams who play in the Top 12. Argentina lost to France and Ireland this tour, Australia lost to Wales and SA narrowly beat Wales - they didn't play Ireland. England has served to seemingly drop the overall standard because of their appalling losses. France and Ireland are still doing okay - Aus were lucky against France and they know it. Come to think of it, they were somewhat lucky against Italy too. I didn't see that much of a gap in play except between the Springbok performance against England, and NZ's clean sweep of Ireland and UK. Pacific Islanders were thrashed by England/France, but did well against Italy. Wales are over-hyped at the moment - particularly - and surprisingly - by SH media and bloggers. Their performance in 6 Nations will give a better sense of how they are performing. Ireland and France are up there with them. They have some new blood coming through that - once it's settled will give these teams a stronger dimension. The gradual reduction in the quality of the S14 will continue to impact on the development of the Sanzar nations who will arrive in poorer state at the next RWC. The exodus of foreign players will also impact as the miniscule viewing audiences will inevtiably see the TV companies putting less and less into the game. The gap will close and open up again in favour of NH again over the next few years with perhaps only NZ maintaining their current status.