• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Ideas to improve the standard of rugby in the NH

Macsen

Academy Player
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
69
Country Flag
Wales
Club or Nation
Scarlets
Here’s an idea I’ve been cooking up to improve the standard of rugby in the Northern Hemisphere:

First off, move the rugby season to summer so that it aligns with the southern hemisphere. Less foul weather will mean more exciting, running rugby than turgid battles in the mud.

Next, shut down the Celtic League, Aviva Premiership and Top 14 and establish a new, 15 team competition, along the lines of the Super Rugby championship.

You’ll have three conferences, one English conference, one French conference, and one Celtic conference (with two teams from Ireland, two from Wales and one from Scotland).

This would ensure that the very best players in the NH would be playing each other week in, week out.

Next, to increase the excitement, have every team in this league play their Super 14 equivalent at the end of the season. So the highest team in the NH league plays the highest team in the SH league, the lowest ranked plays the lowest ranked, etc.

Furthermore, scrap the Six Nations and the Rugby Championship. Introduce three leagues of six international teams, with promotion and relegation every year.

That would mean that some teams, like say Wales and Ireland, could be in and out of the top league, but it would also provide a way for international teams outside the Six Nations to climb up the ladder.

Just like that! Any thoughts? :)
 
What do you mean by standard? Do you want to change the style and play action based hard running rugby with the ball getting thrown all corners of the ground scoring lots of tries?
 
Not for me at all, moving rugby to Summer is a big no no in my opinion. Would wreck anything left in the whole "a game for all shapes and sizes" no more actual props. Also maybe it be more exciting for people who just want full rugby to be sevens I enjoy a good armwrestle also there is skill in it. Something that struck me was at the JWC group stages this year. When Wales played N.Z. in terrible conditions N.Z. who we're always told have the best basic skillset (in fairness they probably are) yet they couldn't get the ball from one side of the pitch to the other. However in the Ireland-England game on the same pitch which at this stage was simply mud both teams were able to play attacking rugby to a far greater degree.

Anyway I can see you've put a lot into this and I don't want to cut you in half but it's not for me.
 
Like SA are famed for? ;)
What Aus and NZ are famed for. You can try and change a 60 70 year style but don't think the supporters will be able to be patient for 10 years while you trying to do it with a lot of losses.

Anyways if you want to change your rugby for the better you implement it at the lower levels not at senior level. You start looking at the schools and start development there.
 
Last edited:
Next, shut down the Celtic League, Aviva Premiership and Top 14 and establish a new, 15 team competition, along the lines of the Super Rugby championship.

How would anyone decide which English and French clubs made the cut? Performance related, financial, support base? What happens to the rest of the sides who don't make it? I don't see England and France just giving up their separate leagues somehow.
 
Totally agree with Big Ginger......move to the summer and reduce the numbers would inevitably lead to basketball rugby so beloved of the TV concious SH "supporters" and take away, even further, the principle that rugby is a game for everyone and all shapes and sizes.

Take away the "tribal" support of the individual clubs and try to turn them into merged franchises would probably see the death of rugby as a top spectator sport in the NH rather than enhance the skills of those taking part.

The Twickenham international crowd would indeed love the changes that you are suggesting but then they are not representative any more of the usual supporters of the game as they increasingly find it more difficult to gain access to tickets and/or get fed up with the football/spectacle fans who are paying for those tickets and lowering the standards!!
 
How would anyone decide which English and French clubs made the cut? Performance related, financial, support base? What happens to the rest of the sides who don't make it? I don't see England and France just giving up their separate leagues somehow.

I dont even see the Celtic sides agreeing either, what 2 welsh teams for example? Tbf 3 can compete the other is getting there slowly (Dragons) and by that I mean really slowly. Same applies to the Irish, would likely be Munster + Leinster but Ulster won't be happy.It also applies to Scotland xD

A super15 Or whatever in the NH wont work, unless its all the teams from the leagues combined (will never happen).


As for moving to Summer, I dont think the Pro12/Aviva/Top14 should be in the summer, however leagues like the Welsh prem it could benefit.
 
Here's an idea I've been cooking up to improve the standard of rugby in the Northern Hemisphere:

First off, move the rugby season to summer so that it aligns with the southern hemisphere. Less foul weather will mean more exciting, running rugby than turgid battles in the mud.

Next, shut down the Celtic League, Aviva Premiership and Top 14 and establish a new, 15 team competition, along the lines of the Super Rugby championship.

You'll have three conferences, one English conference, one French conference, and one Celtic conference (with two teams from Ireland, two from Wales and one from Scotland).

This would ensure that the very best players in the NH would be playing each other week in, week out.

Next, to increase the excitement, have every team in this league play their Super 14 equivalent at the end of the season. So the highest team in the NH league plays the highest team in the SH league, the lowest ranked plays the lowest ranked, etc.

Furthermore, scrap the Six Nations and the Rugby Championship. Introduce three leagues of six international teams, with promotion and relegation every year.

That would mean that some teams, like say Wales and Ireland, could be in and out of the top league, but it would also provide a way for international teams outside the Six Nations to climb up the ladder.

Just like that! Any thoughts? :)

Was thinking about giving these idea's a chance but decided you are clinically wrong and this shouldn't even been given the time of day
 
A flat no from me. If you take tha All Blacks out of the arguement. The divide between the rest of the teams is not a massive gap.

Merging East Midlands clubs Tigers and Saints would be as popular as a tripe flavoured lollipop.
 
A flat no from me. If you take tha All Blacks out of the arguement. The divide between the rest of the teams is not a massive gap. Merging East Midlands clubs Tigers and Saints would be as popular as a tripe flavoured lollipop.
6 World Cup Trophies = SH

2 2 2 = 6 - AB = 4

1 World Cup = NH 1 0 0 0 0 0 = 1 - England = 0

Nope not big at all

Take away SA from NZ record and watch them win ratio hit the high eighties.
 
Last edited:
6 World Cup Trophies = SH

2 2 2 = 6 - AB = 4

1 World Cup = NH 1 0 0 0 0 0 = 1 - England = 0

Nope not big at all

Yep or you could say that in 7 finals. NH teams have been in six of those. SA have only been in two finals to be fare they missed a few comps. England and France three finals with France being in the top four six times only matched by New Zealand. Stats are what you make them, but thank you for the math lesson.
 
Last edited:
Improving the coaching is key. By that I mean all coaching all the way up so players pick up good habits and drop the bad habits.

The fact is the SH teams were always a few years ahead of NH teams. They're far more innovative and always looking to try new things.
 
Improving the coaching is key.
This.

The passing skills of northern hemisphere clubs are generally terrible. As a Leinster fan, I pay particular attention to their style of play. They defend really narrowly offering buckets of space to outside wingers in the full knowledge that teams probably aren't skillful enough to exploit the space - only the Ospreys seem good enough to take advantage of it.

For standards to improve at senior level, the ground work must be laid at age grade rugby. In Ireland, I'd scrap the JCT and Medallion Cup competitions (under 16) and only keep the SCT competitions (under 19). At lower ages, introduce more tip/tag rugby and sevens tournaments. Concentrate on improving players skills (passing off both hands, offloading etc) at underage level and you won't have a bunch of gym monkeys who are big and have no other talent when it comes to adult rugby.

At pro level, I'd like to see more cooperation between the provinces at the start of each season. If, for example, Munster have a great maul, why can't the IRFU (as paymasters) gleam information off them as to how it's achieved.? Likewise if Ulster have a powerful rucking game, Connacht a top defence or Leinster a quality passing game, how they do it should be shared for the overall benefit of Irish rugby.Laa

Lastly, I agree with the original poster that a European league is the way forward in the long term. My proposal would be a bigger league however. As is there are too many low quality games. A more streamlined European league would address the quality problem, be better for TV (in my opinion) and reduce player fatigue.
 
For me I find this really interesting, the response from some people I think is really odd. People automatically took the suggestion to move NH rugby to the summer to make stupid digs at 'basketball rugby' like in the SH. For all the criticisms of defense that SH teams get, they always seem to concede less points than NH teams in internationals and it is justified by NH clubs are better than SH clubs (which because they never meet is always a convenient answer). I don't see why it would change as a game for all shapes and sizes, no reason has been offered why that would change. South African teams generally have good conditions through out the season, yet I think you'll find Gio Aplon is some what different in size from Coenie Oosthuizen.

Saying New Zealand v Wales U20 was an example of Wales having more skill is very laughable for several reasons. The first being that this U20 team was the worst we've had in years. The 2011, 2010, 2009 would have put 40+ point on Wales, even in those conditions. The other reason it's stupid is that it wasn't even our best team and we beat Wales by 30 points in the semi final. The other dumb reason is that it was a terrible pitch and you'd never get a professional pitch for a first class game in that condition. The difference in skill between New Zealand and any NH team is pretty massive and I'm not trying to beat our own horn, simply saying that there is something wrong with NH rugby which values physical conditioning over basic skill sets.

I personally think a move to summer would create a better specticle, distance itself from a football OR rugby culture which I think partly holds rugby in Europe back. That's about all I agree with from the original post. I'd quite like a global calender but's about as far as I'd go.

I like the leagues in the NH. I think the Heineken Cup is an ideal format and I like the different leagues involved (Rabo Pro 12 needs to be taken more seriously though, as it's a bit of a joke). It can't work in NZ as there isn't the oppertunities for privatisation, but I think it works (I'd cut down the number of club game though as I think it's just one other factor why NH teams perform poorly against the SH, which have higher intensity matches but fewer a year, which is better preperation for tests). I thin clubs seem to have a commercial culture which creates a fan base that designated franchises couldn't match, and many clubs already have a hundred years of history and extremely wealthy backers which would not support a franchise.

Would hate to see the 6 nations join the Rugby Championship. With 4 teams it should still be very competitive but with six you'd struggle and the travel would be murder.
 
Yup Coaching is where it's at... if you want players to improve you need coaches to improve first.
 
For me I find this really interesting, the response from some people I think is really odd. People automatically took the suggestion to move NH rugby to the summer to make stupid digs at 'basketball rugby' like in the SH. For all the criticisms of defense that SH teams get, they always seem to concede less points than NH teams in internationals and it is justified by NH clubs are better than SH clubs (which because they never meet is always a convenient answer). I don't see why it would change as a game for all shapes and sizes, no reason has been offered why that would change. South African teams generally have good conditions through out the season, yet I think you'll find Gio Aplon is some what different in size from Coenie Oosthuizen.

Saying New Zealand v Wales U20 was an example of Wales having more skill is very laughable for several reasons. The first being that this U20 team was the worst we've had in years. The 2011, 2010, 2009 would have put 40+ point on Wales, even in those conditions. The other reason it's stupid is that it wasn't even our best team and we beat Wales by 30 points in the semi final. The other dumb reason is that it was a terrible pitch and you'd never get a professional pitch for a first class game in that condition. The difference in skill between New Zealand and any NH team is pretty massive and I'm not trying to beat our own horn, simply saying that there is something wrong with NH rugby which values physical conditioning over basic skill sets.

I personally think a move to summer would create a better specticle, distance itself from a football OR rugby culture which I think partly holds rugby in Europe back. That's about all I agree with from the original post. I'd quite like a global calender but's about as far as I'd go.

I like the leagues in the NH. I think the Heineken Cup is an ideal format and I like the different leagues involved (Rabo Pro 12 needs to be taken more seriously though, as it's a bit of a joke). It can't work in NZ as there isn't the oppertunities for privatisation, but I think it works (I'd cut down the number of club game though as I think it's just one other factor why NH teams perform poorly against the SH, which have higher intensity matches but fewer a year, which is better preperation for tests). I thin clubs seem to have a commercial culture which creates a fan base that designated franchises couldn't match, and many clubs already have a hundred years of history and extremely wealthy backers which would not support a franchise.

Would hate to see the 6 nations join the Rugby Championship. With 4 teams it should still be very competitive but with six you'd struggle and the travel would be murder.

That is not at all what I said.
 
Thank you for all the replies; I'll try to deal with some of the individual objections.

Not for me at all, moving rugby to Summer is a big no no in my opinion. Would wreck anything left in the whole "a game for all shapes and sizes" no more actual props. Also maybe it be more exciting for people who just want full rugby to be sevens I enjoy a good armwrestle also there is skill in it.

I don't believe moving to summer would change it being a 'game for all shapes and sizes'. As we see SH teams that play in relatively good conditions all year round, such as South Africa and Australia, still have plenty of props. SA are actually known for their forward orientated play even though they play on dry, dusty pitches most of the time!

Also remember that playing in the summer wouldn't actually mean sunny weather and dry pitches. It's summer now and it's been ******* down across Ireland and the UK for more than a month. But playing in summer would mean there are less turgid, slow matches. There would still be arm-wrestling, just not so much mudwrestling.

How would anyone decide which English and French clubs made the cut? Performance related, financial, support base? What happens to the rest of the sides who don't make it? I don't see England and France just giving up their separate leagues somehow.

Well the decision would have to be a financial and geographical one. There's no point basing it on performance since the makeup of the teams would probably change completely before the start of the competition. The teams that don't make it would continue to play in their respective leagues, just like the Air New Zealand Cup, Currie Cup, etc., and become feeder cup for the regional Super 15 sides.

Take away the "tribal" support of the individual clubs and try to turn them into merged franchises would probably see the death of rugby as a top spectator sport in the NH rather than enhance the skills of those taking part.

This has already been tried to some extent in Wales when the new regional clubs were created for the Celtic League. It's true that some refused to support the new teams, but the results speak for themselves – 3 Grand Slams and a WC semi-final, after three decades of limited or no success. They were controversial to begin with but the regions have long since won their place.

I dont even see the Celtic sides agreeing either, what 2 welsh teams for example? Tbf 3 can compete the other is getting there slowly (Dragons) and by that I mean really slowly. Same applies to the Irish, would likely be Munster + Leinster but Ulster won't be happy.It also applies to Scotland xD

It would have to be a western region against an eastern region, or Scarlets + Ospreys, and Cardiff + Newport. Of course you could just create new clubs and have these clubs remain in a Celtic league and become feeder clubs for the Super 15 sides. The other countries can figure it out for themselves.

A flat no from me. If you take tha All Blacks out of the arguement. The divide between the rest of the teams is not a massive gap.

The matches this summer suggest the gap is closing but it will be interesting to see if this continues or if it's just a blip because the SH sides are in rebuilding mode after the World Cup.

England in the early 2000s aside we've had over a hundred years of SH dominance. Narrow losses and a tie don't make much of a dent in that record. The NH needs to take drastic action if it wants to raise the standard and compete regularly against the SH teams. The SH international players play at a higher standard because they play against the best week in week out, not a few times a year in the Heineken Cup. Europe needs a top quality league rather than the comparatively low (and diluted) quality we see in the divided Celtic, English and French premier leagues. :)

Would hate to see the 6 nations join the Rugby Championship. With 4 teams it should still be very competitive but with six you'd struggle and the travel would be murder.

Most NH and SH teams play each other at least once, if not twice, a year anyway. The only difference is that the summer and autumn matches would actually count for something.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how much I buy into this massive divide stuff. I know SH posters will go on about the fact that they've won far more World Cups, but it's a pretty irrelevant statistic considering that we concern ourselves with the present and not the relative strengths of the two provinces back in 1987. What we can base our opinions on is the recent set of international tours and possibly the World Cup 9 months ago. It's pretty clear that the SH is ahead, but not by all that much.

In the World Cup Ireland were able to turn over Australia, Wales were extremely competitive against South Africa, England beat Argentina and a French side in turmoil lost by a point to the All Blacks in Auckland. On that evidence there isn't a massive gap in standards between the two hemispheres.

In the recent set of tours Wales lost their series in Australia, but a look at the score lines in the games indicates how close they were. Indeed, they will no doubt feel that they left the last two games behind. In terms of talent I don't think there's that much between the two sides at all and home advantage eventually swung in for the Aussies. Oh, and the Welsh are massive bottlers.

England got a draw in South Africa and two relatively close losses. Certainly none of those results would shame any side in world rugby. What makes this more impressive in a sense is that this England side is neither a particularly impressive one nor the best they could put out. They'll be disappointed not to come away with a win, but the were competitive.

Ireland obviously got blown out of the water, but Ireland's problems are something for another day and certainly not representative of Northern hemisphere rugby as a whole. It's probably not best to go into the Argentina tours either, considering that they didn't put out anything near a full strength squad. Scotland managed a win in Australia too.

On the evidence of that I'd say the gap isn't so wide as to necessitate a radical overhaul of the way rugby is played in the NH. As has been said earlier in the thread, it's under age coaching that needs work and we are starting to see the benefits of the increased efforts in that field. At the U20 World Cup Northern Hemisphere sides were extremely competitive, notably Ireland and Wales. Lots of reason for optimism here.
 
^ The probelm is, people are pointing out 'getting close' in terms of narrow losses; which really isn't the attitude to be having.

I think if NH teams actually stopped being lazy and cultivate own talent within their area; instead of overpaying and outbidding SH rugby unions for their players, then they might actually have something.

In any sport, the best teams GROW and cultivate their players through the draft or trhough scouting. Even big market teams rarely win by buying players. And of they do, it isn't sustainable for long-term success.
 

Latest posts

Top