Firstly, I'd just like to say that there are idiots in both the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemishpere, so I think it's fair to say that we can ignore the extremists in both cases. As it has been said and admitted to, the NH is playing infererior rugby and are playing with infereior players as a whole. But that is not to say that all NH teams and competitions should simply be ingnored.
To me I've never really understood the whole NH vs SH debate. Why are people so passionate about their hemisphere? I understand nationalism, but I'll be blunt, I'm not going to root for Australia under any circumstances.(In the case of the 2003 WC final, I simply couldn't watch). Obviously there are going to be neutral sides that you adopt for one reason or another, and teams that you despise, but I will not just blindly support a side because of it's geographical position.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE("Teh Mite")</div>
However, the top 8 HEC clubs would **** over any Super 14 franchise[/b]
You are completely dellusional if you truely believe that. You talk of SH ignorance and arrogance but that statement in and of itself makes you a complete and utter hypocrite. How could you possibly say that the Bulls, Crusaders, Blues, and Sharks would get ****** on? These are teams chalk full of international players.
Canterbury are the most successful and most talent laden proffessional franchise in any sport on the planet. Their starting lineup have all played for the All Blacks at some point in their careers, plus another two sitting on the bench. Then you can ignore the plethora of NZ U21 players that are also either in the squad or in the extended training squad. The number of AB's will drop by 4 with, Mauger, Senio, Gear and Jack leaving, but they will not be missed. Andy Ellis starts over Senio anyway, Ali Williams is transferring to Canterbury, and Mauger will easily be replaced by either Tim Batemen or Stephen Brett. Canterbury can beat you any way you want to play. You can't out muscle them and you can't outrun them.
The Blues also had 15 All Blacks in their squad and a ton of other talent individuals. My only problem with the Blues is you're not quite sure what you're going to get from them at any one game, but they are no slouches. They'll be even better with Nick Evans running the show this year.
The Bulls are a ferocious forward dominated squad, that is filled with Springboks. In the forwards they ahve the best lock, in Victor Matfield, the best No. 8 in Piere Spies and the best scrumhalf in Fourie Du Preez. They are a team that dominates the set piece. But they are not simply a 10 man team, they have some electric backs. That inculdes Habana and Ndungane out on the wings.
The Sharks are a bit flashier with some quality backs. Montgomery, Steyn, Pieterson, James and Pieneaar. I don't care who you are, you're going to have trouble trying to stop that backline. And the back does have a bit of beef, with Muller, Venter, BJ Botha and Smit.
These are just the top 4 teams, but there are a few more that would do far more than just roll over. Waikato could front up and with the direction of Stephen Donald could cause a lot of problems. For me, I don't think the Brumbies will be that good this year without Gregan and Larkam, but with them and Mortlock they were one of the best sides in the world.
I just don't know where you're getting your justifications for saying that the top 8 would **** all over the Super 14 because, well it just wouldn't happen.
To give you a rough idea how much better Premiership clubs are then the SH union owned franchises, I seem to recall the worst Premiership side last season, Northampton, have their junior academy (so basically a bunch of 17 year old kids) demolish a Waratahs 2nd string (including a lot of their now Aussie internationals) 24 - 6.[/b]
You're talking about the B side of a team that finished second last in the competition. How does that reflect the quality of the competition? Especially because it was in a one off game, where there is no video or familiarity with the opposition.
