Japan’s victory over South Africa gave World Rugby exactly the perception it wanted: that rugby is growing from strength-to-strength, and that tier two nations are advancing to the brink of the first rank.
The problem is of course, that this perception is illusory.
Let’s look at the other results so far: England 35-11 Fiji, Ireland 50-7 Canada, Wales 54-9 Uruguay, Australia 28-13 Fiji, France 38-11 Romania, New Zealand 58-11 Namibia, South Africa 46-6 Samoa, Australia 65-3 Uruguay, Scotland 39-16 USA, Ireland 44-10 Romania, France 41-18 Canada.
And after the freak result against South Africa, Japan were demolished by one of the weakest established teams, Scotland, 45-10.
These contests were grimly one-sided and tediously inevitable. That they weren’t thrashings is not significant: most of the minnows’ players are professional and so provide some kind of contest against often second XV established teams. Indeed, it could be said many of the minnow teams have gone backwards.
Several on show either beat established teams in previous tournaments or pushed them very close, and indeed it is the absence of the latter kind of to-the-wire match that sums up the nature of these contests. Depressingly comfortable victories for the big teams.
Why is this? How has global rugby failed to advance at all since professionalism?
Firstly, the professionalisation of minnow players gave an immediate and utterly superficial improvement to their national teams that allowed the IRB to claim advances had been made, when nothing apart from some regular training had been added. In recent World Cups some stronger performances due to professionalism have been claimed as evidence of expansion and growth, falsely.
Argentina may have joined the Rugby Championship, but the game has hardly grown there, and any improvement represents nothing more than the result of once amateurs plying a trade in professional Europe.
World Rugby, it would seem, have no meaningful strategy to expand the game whatsoever.
The occasional turnout of Canada for a whipping at the hands of Wales, or the four-yearly making up the numbers in World Cups, do not constitute growth.
Essentially, global rugby has got nowhere.
Into this picture the only bright spark comes in the shape of the Super Rugby expansion into Japan and Argentina. But why is Super Rugby doing World Rugby’s enterprising work?
World Rugby’s base-up ideas have failed. It has long been argued that a top-down model – such as that employed by Super Rugby – is a more effective method. World Rugby would have done far better to support the growth of Super Rugby around the globe than claiming a Canadian loss by less than 50 points is a step forward.
The new teams in Tokyo and Buenos Aires are the only advances made in global rugby this century.
Canada, Romania, Samoa, USA, Uruguay, Fiji, Georgia, Russia, Tonga, Namibia and the rest: for these, nothing has been done, and no plan lies in the future.
Nor for global rugby.
kingplaymaker
Roar Guru
No I never said that. I quite reasonably said that Canada or Romania should be capable of beating Italy or Scotland by now, not that Indonesia should be able to win the World Cup.
jeznez
Roar Guru
You are right, we should be angry until Indonesia win the World Cup.
Rob9
Roar Guru
Where is your evidence to suggest the game isn’t growing in these countries? You’ve heard from a few roarers here who have given you their stories from ground level that suggest serious inroads are actually being made. Despite your beliefs and so called ‘explanations’ for narrowing margins between the top and the bottom at RWC’s. The only evidence you’ve attempted to introduce in your article is the results of a number fixtures between minnows and established rugby nations. When you actually analyse this, you’ll see a marked improvement from RWC to RWC over the past 4 editions. You put this down to professionalism and you’re still yet to refute the fact that more players from more countries are now plying their trade in professional leagues than any time in history. This doesn’t happen by magic KPM. These professional clubs aren’t just going out and picking more of these players for ‘feel good stories’. They’re being picked up because rugby’s status continues to improve in these individual markets and they’re producing more players that are worthy of professional contracts.
Rob9
Roar Guru
Your view here is warped and ill-informed as has been pointed out more than once in the comments of your poorly scripted article.
kingplaymaker
Roar Guru
There's no doubt that the current schedule is a mockery of the minnow nations and minimises their chances of success quite brutally. An extra week would allow all the teams time to recover and prepare as the minnows are manifestly less able to do this than the strong nations. But guess who opposes this? The European clubs who refuse to lose a single week in four years and who's selfish priorities override the minnows. And guess who is dictated to by the European clubs and who puts their selfishness above the competitive chances of the minnows? 'World rugby'!!!
AndyS
Guest
Yep, that's my thoughts. Wonder what would happen if Japan came up with a schedule for 2019 that maximised recovery times for the minor teams and gave the top teams the short turn-arounds. In most respects it would be fairer and make more sense. It would certainly act to even the competition.
Up the Wahs
Roar Guru
Ha ha just checked up on this hilarious. Johnno mate I was doing the whole ABC thing and making the point that Wales is a class above Scotland and Italy where rugby doesn't resonate nearly as much. Wales literally just beat the host as Rob9 said and they have won 4 of the last 8 Six Nations plus were semi finalists last world cup.
kingplaymaker
Roar Guru
The Euro clubs have gradually picked up some more minnow players and professionalised them. Simple. Doesn't mean the game in the minnow countries themselves has grown.
kingplaymaker
Roar Guru
These are heart warming, sugary stories jeznez but as a say above, until a Canada or Romania has got to Italy or Scotland's level in the Six Nations I won't consider expansion effective. Certainly not after 20 years of professionalism. The day these pool matches are regularly win or lose contests instead of charades will be he day expansion has worked.
kingplaymaker
Roar Guru
Rob9 the playing numbers were already good. After 20 years of professionalism and organised work on it I would expect Canada, Romania, Georgia, U.S.A. to be at the level of Scotland or Italy and to be not only beating them regularly but also joining the tier one competitions. That they have not done so is a colossal failure of 'World Rugby'.
Matthew Skellett
Guest
Eliota was spot-on by the way of world rugby- the opaque, masonic gerry-mander of power . The colonialist attitude towards poor white, south american , asian and african countries. The blatant bias of many referees in the past even today (that means you Mr Joubert). The way NZ is allowed to bully and slag off referees with impunity while other countries are heavily fined and sanctioned for the same . Why no NZ player has been red-carded for moire than 40 years and no one is allowed to talk about it . Why the Haka is held as sacred by the IRB when any examination of History shows it to be a artificial construct that has gotten out of control much like the Bible .it's time for REAL reform of international rugby - vetoes must be destroyed for any honest attempt at a level-playing field for everybody and competition must be freed up and NOT be an Top-10 Nation incestious relationship every year .
Rob9
Roar Guru
The stats introduced above tell one side of the story- one that you haven't been able to effectively analyse. But these sorts of 'at the coal-face' accounts like jeznez's here should help shape your opinion moving forward KPM. Jeznez, sounds like you've got a really interesting and encouraging perspective.
Rob9
Roar Guru
Johnno, as the saying goes, you’ve picked up the ball and run with it... in the opposite direction. I was not saying that and neither was Edward I believe. Just get a grip. No doubt soccer is a huge sport on the Welsh landscape. As you say, they’re currently ranked in the top 10. I’ve got a Swedish mate whose soccer mad and he recently mentioned that they could move into the top 3 if some Euro qualifying results go their way. They’ve produced players like Craig Bellamy, Ryan Giggs and of course Gareth Bale. What Edward is saying and what I’d support is that Wales wouldn’t classify like Scotland as one hit wonders of sorts that moving forward will only have the odd purple patch here and there. As I’m sure you’re aware, Wales have a long and proud history in rugby. The only country with a population over 1 million that holds rugby at a similar or higher level is New Zealand. They’re currently ranked no. 2 in the world and this hasn’t come about by chance (Scotland’s highest ranking since they officially began in 2003 was 6th). At full strength Wales have a team that’s right up there. They’ve been rocked by injury but they still beat England at Twickers in a RWC group fixture. The bulk of their playing group is also still in their mid to late 20’s so they’ve got the playing resources to be very successful in the coming years including through to Japan in 2019. Wales have the potential to be a Rugby powerhouse into the future and as their recent 6N and 2011 RWC results suggest, that’s exactly what they are. Rugby’s presence in Wales and Scotland are quite different and despite the odd upset here and there, Scotland haven’t shown anywhere near as much potential as Wales have over the last decade and a half.
In Brief
Guest
Sorry this article is rubbish. Many of the matches mentioned were not one sided at all, and the scores don't reflect how the matches went Canada was unlucky not to beat Italy for example. If anything you should be complaining about the scheduling and the refereeing, not the quality of the matches. particularly after Georgia's heroic efforts today.
Johnno
Guest
Im not talking about the past. Are you saying Soccer in Wales now is not considered equal there national-sport as rugby? I reckon your being pedantic+petty if you say otherwise. Okay so they beat the hosts, Scotland have beaten England before in the 6-nations -yep they have a good recent 6-nations records yep. But realistically, Netherlands beat Denmark/Sweden more often than the 2-scandinavians beat the Dutch. But in soccer you can still lump Denmark/Sweden/Russia in with Netherlands, the same way you can lump Italy/Scotland in with Irleand/Wales they are there even in the same standard/same level. Italy/Scotland is a Tier 1 rugby nation, just like Ireland/Wales despite losing to them most of the time. Just like Danes/Swedes/Russians, lose to Dutch most of time, there still in the same level as them, you know what I mean, don't be petty Rob 9. Uzbekistan/Saudi Arabia also are in the same level as the socceroos despite losing most of the time to them.
Eddard
Roar Guru
In the US Super Rugby might not be the best way to go about it, though it would help Australian rugby if they were part of it and it did okay there (simply because the broadcast deals are pooled and it's a SANZAR owned competition). And it might be an easier way to grow the game quickly at a commercial level than a brand new domestic league that would probably take decades to build up to scale. End game could be a separate American Super Rugby conference / championship, with the top teams then playing in a global playoff series with the best from other conferences / championships. Rugby does have to play to its strengths, and one of its biggest strengths is the global nature of the game. In Australia it'd never get anywhere trying to replicate the NRL or AFL now, it's simply too far behind. But it can leverage the growing international strength of the game to attract greater revenues. And that can then filter through both to the grassroots, and also to the players. And if Rugby ends up providing more professional opportunity for players, and higher paying opportunities for top players, then that would help it attract the best talent. And with Super Rugby we at least have a vehicle to keep world class players and teams on Australian soil.
nickoldschool
Roar Guru
Eliota Fuimaono-Sapolu's interview with L'Equipe (English version) http://www.lequipe.fr/Rugby/Actualites/Eliota-fuimaono-sapolu-they-are-deliberately-ripping-us-off/593606?xtref=http%3A%2F%2Fm.nzherald.co.nz%2Fsport%2Fnews%2Farticle.cfm%C2%A4c_id%C2%A74%24objectid%C2%A711520284?xtref=http://m.facebook.com/&
Rob9
Guest
No Johnno, that's not what he's saying. Read this format: I wouldn’t lump the Welsh in with the Scots and Italians seeing as: A. Rugby is their national sport B. They’ve beaten the hosts C. the amount of six nations they’ve won 4 in the last ten years
jeznez
Roar Guru
Sorry KP. You are off base mate. Rob9's stats and recent results from the likes of Japan and Argentina show that the gap is narrowing. HK have for the first time formed a professional squad for their national XV which is built on players playing here in the local league. They've taken great steps with the re-structure of their Premier League and Championship Leagues to continue to allow the expats to play and help the locals develop. I've been on the ground in HK and Singapore and have recent experience through touring of rugby in Indonesia, Philippines, Cambodia and Korea. Rugby is developing nicely across Asia and WR are doing a great job. I've also toured Argentina and seen/played in Buenos Aires Mendoza, I came home from tour mightily impressed by the state of Argentine rugby. I've got a complete opposite view from you with regard to recent performances of the next tiers of rugby nations and my experience from living in and visiting some of these nations.
Johnno
Guest
Rob9 How have I? Ed is saying, Wales care more about rugby considerably than soccer? And I don't think that's true. I think there even, and are both "A" sports in popularity and care factor in Wales.