RATHBONE: Australian rugby lacks depth, but not for long

guys endgland has over 1 million Rugby players. France has 400,000, SA has over 600,000, USA has over 120,000, Australia has over 130,000, Ireland has over 150.000. Wales has over 65,000, NZ has 130,000. There are still more countries that have more rugby players than NZ yet we are the best. I think oz might have over 150,000 players now. The problem with ozzie is that they play far to robotic, which is a flow on from rugby league.

matthew, "NZ’s best and traditional opponents have always been the Springboks" what are you on about?! The bledisloe cup has far more weight of history behind it than the equivalent between NZ and Boks... And anyway, Boks were out of the scene for 20 years so.... I hate it when arrogant kiwis say that...

Thanks Jus de couchon, that is the biggest lol I have ever done.

As an expat Kiwi, I can get quite misty-eyed about what Polynesian/Melanesian rugby has contributed to the game as a whole, especially in this part of the world. I don't say whether it's superior to other ways of playing the game, but I think it's unique and worthy of recognition. I see Pacific Island rugby as two things - an offering to the Almighty, and the expression of a warrior culture. That warrior culture is expressed in the brutal hits of Matu'u, but also in the guile of Piri Weepu at his best. In Polynesian folklore the demi-god Maui, the trickster, is revered for his cunning. The Kiwi historian James Belich wrote about how Maori victories against the British were often the result of clever tactics rather than outright force - fortresses with false floors and warriors hiding beneath them, artillery trenches, etc. Genetics might play a role - it's no fun trying to tackle a guy with thighs like kauri trunks - but I would prefer to emphasise a culture of playing rugby with speed, power and bewildering flair. NZ rugby has benefited from combining that Polynesian flair with a dour, Scottish Protestant work ethic emanating mostly from the South Island. Sometimes you get the two strands combined in one player, and then you get Dan Carter. For these reasons, I like to think that, no matter how many NRL and AFL players arrive to swell the ranks of the Wallabies, the All Blacks as an outfit will always be pretty competitive.

Nice balance Tigranes

People know compelling rugby when they see it.

Nope. I don't think Aussies should think they would win by a long way if league players were available (let alone AFL players), but they would certainly be a lot stronger than they are now... a lot stronger, especially if it was AUS's national sport. It's not about numbers of players or population, it's about whether your best athletes play that sport. In NZ they do. In Aus they don't. I reckon NZ's are naturally gifted at rugby, my bet it that it would be about even overall.

The best Indian cricketers don't play in their national side. You first have to be in the right class.

RedBlock, You do know that the ABC is asking the WAFL, SANFL and Shute Shield for money to televise their competitions, right ? "Free" isnt cheap enough for second-tier competitions.

Small point GG, but it's mainly the coal miners who can afford to send their kids to private schools these days... ;)

Steve, unfortunately there is really no development to speak of in Victoria. Talented sports people can be born and raised anywhere. In the case of Lloyd Johannson and Ben Tapuai, they were both recognised as having great potential, provided scholarships to study at The Southport School and their rugby development began, in QLD. That's not to say that you don't get a passionate coach who moves to some of these lesser rugby areas and gets involved in the development of kids who then go on to do well. As we know, however, if they show the necessary potential, they will more often than not be provided a scholarship to a NSW or QLD GPS school and their rugby development will then continue, generally at an accelerated rate than would normally have occurred. This is not the case all the time but there are really only a hand full of exceptions.

NZ's best and traditional opponents have always been the Springboks.

liam, that thing with the hips would be only study that I've ever come across that indicates physiological differences between "racial" groups. There is no other science that says that black people are faster, stronger, taller, longer between the legs than white people. Busting out evolution as a catch-phrase doesn't help you in the slightest, because apart from a few very fringe groups, the level of interbreeding between "races", the timescales involved, and the lack of evolutionary pressure to adapt physically means that the differences between the "races" at a physiological level are nothing more than would be dictated by random chance. Explain to me in your theory, how did the Jews dominate basketball, when today they are stereotyped as weak nerds in the Woody Allen vein.

Carnivean, What would you say to ethiopian and kenyan long distance runners. is that a similar situation? similar factors? NO genetic advantage there? despite the studies that have proven that African athletes hips are set differently and have longer thighs which is better for running? if you believe in evolution you should also recognise that these things occur. odds are there are more competitive highjumpers in serbia or holland per capita than in china. why? because the people are taller. can't believe i had to write that down.

It's rubbish to call any group genetically gifted at a sport. Anyone taking that view on sport would have concluded that Jews were genetically designed to dominate basketball, as they did for several decades. Socio-economic drive (need to be get more money) and cultural factors (prestige) are a bigger determinate in a group dominating at a particular sport. A prime reason that NZ dominates rugby is because their culture creates an atmosphere where people are driven to succeed at rugby, because that is one of the pinnacles of that culture. In Australia there are other avenues that provide equal, or more likely greater pinnacles.

That figure indicates that NZ has almost twice the number of total RU players that Australia does, so it actually suggests the Wallabies are the ones who have punched above their weight, despite all the above from NZers. The other major powers tha Australia competes with have many more players than Australia. France 4x South Africa 7x England almost 30x Australia has compensated for this historically with coaching technique, much of it gleaned fron professional RL. RU is very vulnerable in Australia, particularly from AFL which is spending enormous money in its rich traditional heartlands. Rugby will need to find some player growth in traditionally non rugby playing AFL states or I would imagine long term it will really struggle.

Ian, Australian rugby needs to create momentum, critical mass. It doesn't have the money to pay development officers to go around to schools drumming up interest. Right now, attracting new players & fans to the game, has to be done on the paddock.

" How did AFL make a break on other codes with its national comp? Through the quality of the play on the field, & the stars that developed from these games." As far as the AFL goes, this is rubbish. The AFL put a break on the other codes by 1) Centralising administration, so that it was done for the good of the code, not of players, individual clubs or state associations 2) Making it clear that it could and would reject bad media deals 3) Centralising grounds to maximise attendances, including taking equity in these grounds 4) Ensuring expansion teams didnt fail 5) Expanding in depth once the national competition was established, via second sides in Perth, Adelaide, SE Qld and Sydney 6) Growing the code by establishing homes-away-from-home in secondary markets that dont quite justify a side. None of this had anything to do with anything on the paddock.

fair enough, although the communities i'm talking about dont have a great history of producing marathon runners, for example, do they. thats for a genetic reason but also because rugby is NZs biggest professional sport with the most opportunities. compare to any other sport, olympic or whatever, and opportunities are far smaller plus theres no-where near as much money.

Bellringer, How did rugby league State-Of-Origin establish its tradition & history? How did AFL make a break on other codes with its national comp? Through the quality of the play on the field, & the stars that developed from these games. I'm telling you - we need the Wallabies, Waratahs, Brumbies, Reds, Rebels & Force to play like never before. Or at least like back in the days of Loane, Shaw, Mclean, Ella, O'Connor & Campese in their pomp. The Brumbies-Reds game or Rebels-Brumbies game WON'T bring the fans. But games like the Chiefs-Bulls game & Crusaders-Highlanders game, WILL bring the fans.....