- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
A number of the posters on Spiro’s article earlier in the week discussed various reasons for the Southern Hemisphere’s rugby dominance and potential reasons the Northern Hemisphere lags behind.
Preparation time seems to be one of the common reasons; the fact South Africa, New Zealand and Australia’s national squads spend more time together than any other national squad.
I would suggest this could have some merit and cannot be discarded.
Some suggested we look at the Rugby World Cup as a better indicator as that is the only time when all teams have equal opportunity to prepare for a tournament.
I thought that would be rather telling.
During World Cups:
New Zealand have played 23 Tests against their Six Nation rivals, winning 21 of their matches. Only France have managed any wins over New Zealand, in 1999 and 2007.
South Africa have played seven matches against their Six Nation rivals, winning six of their matches. Only England in 2003 managed a win over South Africa.
Interestingly, South Africa are yet to play Italy and Ireland in the World Cup.
Australia have played 19 matches against their Six Nation rivals, winning 13 of their matches.
England have won three from five, while Wales, Ireland and France have each managed a solitary win over Australia.
Inside World Cups, New Zealand, South Africa and Australia have a 91%, 86% and 68% win rate against the Six Nation teams respectively.
Outside Worlds Cups, and during the same period, New Zealand, South Africa and Australia have an 88%, 71% and 76% win rate respectively, excluding Italy.
When you look at these results, then the theory of preparation falls flat.
Australia may fall from 76% to 68% in World Cups, but South Africa actually improve on their win rate from 71% to 86% and New Zealand, well, they remain formidable either way.
England and France remain the two most formidable teams from Europe.
Inside World Cups, England and France both have a 33% win rate against their Southern Hemisphere counterparts.
Outside of World Cups, England and France have a 34% and 31% win rate respectively over their Southern Hemisphere counterparts.
Again, the results are not any different from their results inside World Cups.
What is the reason for the dominance of the Southern Hemisphere giants over the Northern Hemisphere then?
Are we simply more competitive minded? I would think not.
Are we more suited to contact sport? Again, I would think not.
I think there is one reason and one reason only. Our priorities are geared towards our respective national teams, where their priorities are geared towards their professional clubs.
We complete (well used to) one competition at a time.
Domestic rugby, Super Rugby and Test rugby are focused on during a specific slot in the rugby calendar, whereas theirs is more a mixed bag.
I personally find it rather difficult to follow a specific tournament in Europe, as nothing is segmented into easily digestible boxes.
New Zealand of course have central contracting, which gives them an edge over everyone.
The ARU provides ‘top ups’ to their most important players.
South Africa doesn’t have any of those ‘added’ structures, but their set-up aims towards their national team.
There is of course another theory, which impacts on the exposure of their club players.
In South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, our best players are pooled in five teams. In Europe, specifically England and France, their best players are pooled in 12 and 14 teams respectively, but when it comes to the Heineken Cup, only half their teams qualify to compete in the toughest tournament in Europe.
Imagine half your best players were excluded from Super Rugby? They would not get to compete week in and week out against top teams.
If you want to improve your game you need to compete with the best available week in and week out.
The reality is half the players from France and England do not get the opportunity to compete in the top competition in Europe.
Once those players are selected, based on their performances in their respective domestic competitions, the step up for them is greater than that of players having had the opportunity to compete against only top teams in the Heineken cup.
Whether that step is only marginal or greater is debatable, but a factor nevertheless.
New Zealand is the undisputed top team in world rugby, and has been for a long time. The fact that they have talented players is only one factor of why they are the best.
The more you put in, the more you will get out, and New Zealand is forever looking at what they can do more or better for their national team.
South Africa and Australia lag behind them for those reasons, but the rest of the rugby world lag behind much further.
At the end of the day, It has everything to do with priorities, and ultimately makes the biggest difference.
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.