Since the start of professional rugby in 1996, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand have won 73 percent, 75 percent and 90 percent of their matches respectively against the traditional Five Nation teams.
If that is not dominating world rugby, then I misinterpret the terminology of world domination.
Against every one of France, England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland, these three Southern Hemisphere giants hold a superior record.
In the era of amateur rugby, Australia barely held on to a 53 percent success rate against their Five Nation opponents, but has since become a dominating force in world rugby.
The Wallabies’ turnaround from 53 percent to 75 percent is proof the professional era has been good to Australian rugby, even their dismal success rate of 17 percent against the British and Irish Lions in the amateur era has turned around to a 50 percent success rate in the professional era.
New Zealand has cemented their position at the top during the professional era by increasing their success rate by 7 percent from a “lowly” 83 percent, while South Africa has dropped 1 percent since the professional era began.
It would be prudent to look at the factors that would have assisted Australia in becoming so much more successful in comparison to the amateur era, but also why South Africa and New Zealand have managed to remain at the top.
During the week I was reading on a blog site where the discussion centred around why the Southern Hemisphere manages to be so dominant over their Northern Hemisphere rivals.
The usual genetics, diet, climate and other potential factors that might be responsible was mentioned, but one specific comment got me thinking.
“It’s all about attitude if you ask me,” one Northern Hemisphere commenter said. “In our stiff upper lip and keep everything fair and do not exclude the weaker people regime we live in now, we are always happy with the plucky performance. The southern countries are all of the attitude win at all costs, losing is nothing, I bet during the grass roots level at school or in the clubs they do not feel obliged to give the ‘little kid/or less talented kid’ a run out just to be fair.”
In spite of our diversities and individual needs as rugby unions, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa have one thing in common – we want to win, and we want to be the best.
There is no doubt in my mind that Super Rugby has been the catalyst that has not only improved Australian rugby, but also its depth in talent.
From a South African perspective, in spite of the internal politics in South Africa, Super Rugby has assisted us to remain in the higher echelon of rugby union, and similarly New Zealand has benefited from the SANZAR arrangement.
The simple truth is that without Super Rugby, New Zealand and Australian rugby players will not have a testing ground against big, physical Afrikaners which would teach them how to stand up to the forward dominated teams in world rugby.
Without Super Rugby, South Africa will not constantly play and be reminded that pace and space is a watchword for successful teams.
You can draw your own conclusions, but when you are honest with yourselves you will find that the SANZAR arrangement has been to the benefit of all three countries to remain top dogs.
The current renegotiation of the SANZAR agreement could have far reaching consequences for each of the three nations, and to me there are two key issues that will influence the outcome of these negotiations.
South Africa wants a sixth team. This is not a luxury or “added demand” or South Africa Rugby Union “throwing their toys”, it is a necessity from higher up which if accomplished will give SARU breathing space to continue their day to day business activities without interference.
Even though you may not live in South Africa and experience or understand the necessity to satisfy the requirement of South Africa politics, just accept it is a reality.
Money: whether it is the ARU, NZRU or a collective requirement from all three nations, the sustainability of Super Rugby needs revenue.
The constant need of SANZAR to expand markets and looking towards increasing the number of teams from outside SANZAR in my opinion is sporting suicide.
Super Rugby has kept us strong, bringing in teams from outside our three nations will only dilute the quality of the competition. Japan and America simply should not be on the radar if they cannot provide the quality Super Rugby demands.
The Pacific Islands simply do not have the market or potential revenue streams necessary to add value to Super Rugby. The fact that they are naturally talented rugby players is neither here nor there, unless SANZAR is prepared to fund a Pacific Island team. It shouldn’t be complicated at all, will SANZAR fund a team or not?
Argentina has now been included into the Rugby Championship, it is therefore logical that if any expansion is due to happen, the core of SANZAR should be intact. In other words, if Argentina has been selected as the nation with the potential to “rule” the rugby world with us, then if any expansion is on the cards it has to be Argentinian teams to be included into Super Rugby.
Due to the distances involved between the participating nations, travel is a large part of the expenses incurred to running Super Rugby. The only solution is closed conferences, but it has been discussed before, and I do not want to go into the detail of that.
Australia cannot expand any further, and it has nothing to do with the fact that the Force and Rebels have been perennial under achievers, it has to do with simple numbers.
Currently in the French Top 14, of the 512 professionally contracted players, 242 are foreigners, in other words, French rugby cannot sustain 14 professional teams with their own players, so the solution for their club owners is to buy success.
Australia needs to guard against that, their success in international rugby depends upon them having five Super Rugby teams developing five squads of Australian players.
Luring foreign players to their shores is only a short term solution and that is where the requirement for a semi-professional third-tier has become a necessity.
South Africa might not be able to provide six top class teams, but in a closed conference the weaker teams will not qualify for a second round of play-offs and therefore not dilute the quality of the second round robin of matches. Similarly only the top teams from Australia and New Zealand will qualify.
The benefit of a second round robin by the top three teams of each nation will once again provide us with top class, fast paced and Test match quality rugby.
I know there are already many thoughts to discuss here, but if I may, my final point comes back to the money, the salaries and the revenues.
SANZAR will never compete with Europe when it comes to finance, yes Australia may have one of the largest GDPs in the world, and may be an economic leader. But the reality is a very small percentage of the GDP goes to rugby union.
Why try to compete with something you cannot? Why try to bankrupt your unions to attempt to keep the best players?
How many more foreign players can France contract when they are already pretty close to 50 percent?
The strength of SANZAR is Super Rugby, the development of our own talent, the depth of our player resources and the pride and hunger we have to succeed.
Let the Europeans and Japanese clubs pay our players big sums of money, but let us do what makes our rugby strong, develop, expose and build experienced squads.
That is where our strength lies, and if our players want to leave, have a backup, have two, in fact have 10 backups for every position, because that is the only way we can remain at the top.
To summarise, SANZAR needs to be prudent in their future plans. They need to realise the quality of Super Rugby does not lie outside our borders, the need to ever increase revenue to enable us to compete with Europe and Japan is a futile exercise.
The necessity for all three nations (plus Argentina) to have their top teams compete against one another (and not only in a play-off series) is what benefits us as we learn from each other.
New Zealand will not benefit from playing 90 percent of their matches against Australia, as the physicality of South Africa will be missed.
South Africa will not benefit from playing 90 percent of their matches against Argentina as their styles are too similar.
Australia is not going to benefit from Super Rugby if half their teams are riddled with foreign players, it simply does not aid development.
Australia will be the only winner if a two conference system is approved.
Ultimately SANZAR is the custodian of our rugby talent, and they must protect the core values of our rugby. Compromise and level headed thinking is a requirement.
Just my two cents worth.
Bakkies
Guest
Australian coaches that coached in Ireland in recent years or are still here: - Les Kiss. - Laurie Fisher. - Billy Millard. - Matt Williams. - Jim Williams. - Alan Gaffney. - Tony McGahan. - Matt O'Connor. - Michael Chieka. - David Knox. - Gary Ella. Ryan Constable still has a significant influence in Ulster Rugby. Manages a decent number of their players and commentates for BBC NI. There are Australian coaches in Junior and Senior club Rugby to so the Aussie influence goes beyond the pro game. ''And I have have an Irish ex pat friend who confirmed what I said about Rugby’s status in his homeland, so my comments weren’t unfounded. Nevertheless, its good to hear that it has a good profile although 8% sports attendance is not that much. As you probably know there are some'' The key word is expat. The playing population is still small compared to other sports but Rugby is popular and also an important economic driver. Clubs have grown in GAA Gaeltacht (Irish speaking) areas. Kerry the most successful GAA football county now has 8 Rugby clubs including 2 in the Gaeltachts. Mini and Youth Rugby rugby numbers are significant drivers in Rugby clubs here. Despite the recession stadiums have good attendances and in places like Limerick HEC weekends are very important to the local economy. A few million euro is added to the local economy when the big matches are on in town. RTÉ tv gets close to the 1,000,000 mark for big Six Nations and RWC matches. That is excellent considering that the matches are also televised on the BBC and in regards to the RWC on UK channels like UTV (ITV). As for the 8% stat that was published in 2003. The support base particularly in Leinster has grown since then. Connacht has grown their season ticket holders from 500 to around the 4,000 mark in the space of a couple of seasons. Thomond Park's capacity certainly wasn't 26,000 back in 2003 and Leinster were playing in Donnybrook rather than the 18,000 capacity RDS their current home ground that they have outgrown. Celtic League round robin matches against Munster weren't played in Lansdowne Road. Ireland had qualified for the 2002 FIFA World Cup that would have effected the soccer figures as Ireland is a nation of bandwagonners.
Ben.S
Roar Guru
One Australian coach who has left Leicester Tigers to take over Leinster (Matt O'Connor). 3 of the 4 head coaches are from NZ: Munster (Rob Penney); Ulster (Mark Anscombe); Connacht (Pat Lam). Only Australian player in Ireland I can think of is Tom Court too.
Rhys Maiden
Roar Pro
Where are NZ getting their 3 teams from? I don't see any real point in diluting teams just for the sake of expansion.
Ian
Roar Pro
Bakkies, I accept your opinion as you would obviously know better since you live in Ireland. I just know how tough it is for Rugby to make an impact in the Aus non-Rugby (League or Union) playing states of Western Australia, Tasmania, South Australia and Victoria that are dominated by AFL. The Melbourne Rebels & Western Force S15 and Melbourne Storm RL teams have to import the majority of their players from either Queensland, NSW, ACT or overseas with very few if any locals making the grade. And I have have an Irish ex pat friend who confirmed what I said about Rugby's status in his homeland, so my comments weren't unfounded. Nevertheless, its good to hear that it has a good profile although 8% sports attendance is not that much. As you probably know there are some very strong traditional links between Ireland and Australia. If I am not mistaken there are some Australian coaches managing Irish teams. Anyways the World Rugby Family needs to have the game grow from strength to strength in Ireland and everywhere else its played.
fredstone
Guest
Maybe Saru has the right idea. I think we've done everything we could for 0Z, it's now time to help the Argies.
Bakkies
Guest
Rugby may not have the player numbers of the other sports but in regards to the professional game it's a bit ignorant to say that the sport doesn't have a high profile and has a struggle to become a part of the mainstream. Low profile and non mainstream sports don't have weekly league (Pro 12) coverage on ''FTA'' (you pay a tv licence here), generate sponsorship (without large Irish fan support and sponsorship the Pro12 would be doomed), fill the largest sports stadiums in the country for provincial/club matches (HEC and Pro 12), have the significant attendance averages for both competitions.
Cheers frdstone. Mate we have been helping Namibia and Zimbabwe for a long time as well. Their participation in Craven weeks, vodacom etc has no alterior motives either. So I think it is safe to say the inclusion of Argentina is just a case of more of the same. SA rugby has always had a close bond with Argentina.
Bakkies I am thinking in the lines of finance mostly due to their size of population.
ScrumJunkie
Guest
Last thing Australia needs is props playing in their teams that can't play for the wallabies. We are thin on props as it is. If anything we should double their salaries. So every fat teenager with no fear in the country wants to play for the wallabies.
ScrumJunkie
Guest
Maybe you should just watch NRL, then you won't have to suffer through your country's anthem.
Ben.S
Roar Guru
The answer is England and France.
Bakkies
Guest
Thanks for the captain obvious of the week. The All Ireland Championship which is what matters runs from the end of the Rugby season to two weeks after the next one starts so there is barely a clash. Rugby gets regular column spaces, tv interviews, players do tv commercials, players get featured in gossip magazine front covers, comprehensive FTA coverage (including womens and under 20s). If that's not high profile than I am not here.
Bakkies
Guest
Ben has some good points. When two fit squads from Europe and the south are playing in a RWC match since 2003 there have been more upsets and even matches. Scotland even beat Australia away last year. That wouldn't have happened between 1996 and 2000. Which is the time frame I mentioned in an earlier post. Munster, Ulster and Leinster are limited to 4 plus 1 project in their squads. The squads are quiet large compared to Super Rugby teams. There are also regular A team fixtures.
In Brief
Guest
I have to agree with Sailosi. The whle jingoism associated with rugby union, including anthems is getting a bit dull. Far more exciting to see a high level club or provincial competition with players represented from around the world. No country has done more to spread rugby union worldwide than France, perhaps an example we could consider?
In Brief
Guest
The lack of logical and rational forethought in Ben.S's comments is reminiscent of an intellectual laziness which belittles the influence and traditions of the home nations, of which he claims representation. It is sad to read such diatribe from a pundit on this site on such a monotonouso regularity. Would it be too preposterous for us to ask for a little more decorum, somewhat more sensitivity, and a little less candour in Mr Ben. S's contributions?
Ian
Roar Pro
Gaelic football is the most popular sport in Ireland in terms of match attendance, and in 2003 accounted for 34% of total sports attendances at events in the Republic of Ireland, followed by hurling at 23%, soccer at 16% and rugby at 8%,[2] and Initiative's ViewerTrack study measuring 2005 sports audiences showed the sport's highest-profile match, the All-Ireland Football Final, to be the most watched event of the nation's sporting year.[3] Soccer is the most played team sport in Ireland. Swimming, golf, aerobics, cycling, Gaelic football and billiards/snooker are the other sporting activities with the highest levels of playing participation in the Republic of Ireland.[1] Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_in_Ireland The International Rules Series is a senior men's international rules football competition between the Australia international rules football team (selected by the Australian Football League) and the Ireland international rules football team (selected by the Gaelic Athletic Association). The series is played twice every three years in October and November after the completion of the AFL Grand Final and the All-Ireland Football Final which are both traditionally played in late September. The matches are played using a set of compromise rules decided upon by both the two governing bodies; known formally as International rules football. While the International Rules Series matches use some rules from Australian rules football, the field, ball and uniforms of both teams are all from Gaelic football. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Rules_Series
fredstone
Guest
Good article BB. One or two cents from my side, this issue seems to centre around the inclusion of Argentine teams, which for all intents and purposes would mean that Aus and NZ give up their position of power. SARU seems to be saying to OZ it's time to stand on your own two feet, or we'll be leaving and taking our revenue with us, see if NZ will be supporting you then. Then there's the issue of player salaries which SA is subsidising to a degree, which is the reason for Tew's statement, he knows he's in a mature market with nowhere to go. As much as I would like to believe SARU has been assisting Argentina out of the goodness of their hearts, I'm sure there's some alterior political motive. Their has been a growing feeling in SA that Aus is leeching, but at the same time not doing anything to develope the game at grass roots and increase their exposure. Hence an exploration of another market to ensure larger revenue streams and to balance power.
fredstone
Guest
His mind is made up, don't confuse him with the facts
Bakkies
Guest
Bit ignorant to say Rugby doesn't have a high profile in Ireland. A lot of the Munster and Connacht bred players aren't from an elite background. It's the only fully professional team sport in the country that keeps it's best players at home. Big schools will always be key part of the development pathway regardless of the specific country. Unlike Australia it's not afraid to look for outside help.
Bakkies
Guest
Super 12 wasn't competitive though. The saffie teams apart from the Sharks were mostly a joke and it was mostly three sides dividing the titles between them (Brumbies, Blues, Crusaders). The Reds and Chiefs never won titles in that era. Super 14 saw a shift towards the SA teams that brought an evenness to the competition.