What now for NH rugby?

[TJAY]

You try running with the ball on a cold wet Saturday in Cumbria.

 

[jomjom]

At the risk of oversimplifying I did a quick analysis of the pool results based on the top 4 NH sides vs 4 SH sides (17 Sept world rankings)

NH SH
TF - 50 87
TA. - 15 16
PF - 498 670
PA - 235 210
PD - 263 460

Interestingly the difference is 37 tries @ 5 pts = 185 pts. Add that to SH PF and you get 683 PF.
So basically NH can defend as well as any SH side they just can't score tries.

The breakdown looks like this:-
View attachment 4047

For me the answer is simple. I know I keep mentioning it here but the writing is on the walls for me. Play faster, more attacking rugby. Thats it. Ive said it to my rugby head friends in real life and they all dismissed me saying "We just have different styles... one isnt better than the other... thats not our culture..." etc and all this crap but I feel this WC has proved my point. Remember the last day of this years 6N? Remember how some commentators were saying it was the greatest day in rugby (up this side anyways)? Why was that again? Because the last 3 teams who had a chance of winning on points difference went out and tried to score as many tries as humanely possible and they did just that. Wales and Ireland demolished Italy and Scotland respectively in high intensity fast paced matches and well France vs England if that wasnt the biggest, most entertaining try fest ever between two tier 1 nations then I dont know what will be. All those teams just went balls to the wall attack mode, and it was fantastic.

Its time to end kick bish bash rugby. South Africa can pull it off because they do it well and they have the ability to grind out a flairy try if needs be. But on a general level, Ive always treated it with suspicion and I feel justified in having done so. If Wales and/or Scotland had barely scraped their way into the semis lets be honest they would have not fared so well afterwards, and the idea that faster, more skilled rugby is superior to brute force smashing would still be on discussion.

I really love Schmidt but I really hope he ditches his conservative box kicking territory game. I hate to say it but I almost feel George Hook is right. Where is that flair that he brought to Leinsters glory!? I want to start playing the way the champs do. I want rugby thats more entertaining, more fluid and more try orientated. Lets be honest apart from the very last day this years 6N was crap and we all know it, everyone was saying it, and everyone was saying because northern rugby was dying in these endless territory ruck battles.

I hope the respective unions up north have a long, hard think about why 7 of the 8 world cups are going south of the equator and not resting humbly here in Europe.

And Im not saying we need to be carbon copies of southern teams and ok maybe playing style isnt the only factor but I think northern teams definitely need to open up their game more at the very least.

 

[Canadian_Rugger]

You try running with the ball on a cold wet Saturday in Cumbria.

Not saying it's easy, just saying that the way the game is played needs to change if they want to start taking down the giants. Truth be told, I'm not certain the Celtic sides pump out enough top flight players to every truly be competitive with the SH teams. England and France are definitely firing way below their potential though.

 

[OverGore]

The situation in France for instance, needs to change. Top 2 French teams, have foreign players aplenty, and no room for other French players.

yes for Toulon, but last year champs , Stade Francais had a majority of french youngsters coming out of SF rugby school.
For France, havin foreigners isnt a problem imo. Most of youngsters get an example of what they need to do, and what they need to learn from those SH foreigners. Plisson has a lot lot to learn from Morné Steyn for example.
Its all a matter of equilibrium between old and young players.

The main reason we hire foreigners is that top14 is an open league, with each year 2 going out, and 2 coming in. Wich, in a sport like rugby is an heresy on a financial level, as well on a physical level for players.
The pressure to not go down , and thus lose a 15 million euro investment you ll have to reduce then by half once in Prod2, eats the quality of formation and pushes owners to look for instant results, using experienced players instead of young guys.
Professional sport doesnt go along the french tradition of rugby.
Im not sayin that small 5000-10 000 people cities musnt have a top14 team, but on a economical point of view, those teams are destined to disapear.
You need an economical basis of fans in the area to make money , stadium benefits are way to short to be a guaranty for futur.

So ofc, switching from Club system to province system for the too small to live by themselves club, like biarritz or bayonne, would be the best idea.
But in France, amateur club system is the way, and sadly, it is due to fans, not even owners.

My dream is a closed league of 16 teams, so everybody is happy, divided in 2 pools of 8 teams.
Playoff would eventually have sense, and ofc u cross 1st of each pool with the 4th of the other etc.
No relegation ofc, less matches, more quality and youngsters, more time for EDF. And finally a real playoff.

 

[Hulkster]

Any effective limitation on foreign players would be illegal under EU law.

Another small reason to leave.

Vote leave!

A bit ridiculous that England won't pick players who move overseas, but will allow clubs to stuff their squads full of foreigners. The quid pro quo of saying you can't go abroad, should surely be that you will get priority at home.

Oh, and stop kicking the ball away.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

Frankly, what France, England, Wales, Scotland and Italy do doesn't bother me. I'm primarily interested in where Irish rugby goes from here.

1. Don't panic! There's a lot good with the Irish structure. Put Paul O'Connell, Sean O'Brien, Peter O'Mahoney and Jonny Sexton into the Ireland team yesterday and the result could have been very different (full credit to Argentina though, they were magnificent to watch and full value for their win). The Irish system needs tweaking, not an overhaul.

2. We must improve the skills of our players. The passing ability of a lot of our players isn't good enough. A running game where players attack space must be promoted over the kick first and bash into opponents philosophy which prevails.

3. A controversial one but talent but be better distributed amongst the provinces. What good is it that Mike Ross, Tadhg Furlong and Marty Moore are vying to play at 3 for Leinster when Munster are struggling for a competent tighthead? How doesn it benefit Irish rugby that Dave Foley had to wait until he was 26 for a run of games with Munster when all of the other provinces could have started him? The more quality players getting game time every week, the better it is for the national team.

4. Share coaching ideas. If Ulster have a particularly good maul, it's imperative that it's secrets are shared with the other provinces. If Connacht are mass producing centres, let the other provinces know how. If Leinster have agreat multi phase attack, share the details how with the other provinces. The betterment of the national team is more important than the betterment of the individual provinces.

5. More power to David Nucifora and Joe Schmidt. Ian Madigan was Leinster's backup 10 last season behind a non-Ireland qualified journeyman. Three months later, he's starting a World Cup quarter final. Such a situation should not be allowed happen again. If the Ireland coach and director of rugby want more game time for a certain player in a given position within reason, they should get their wish.

 

[wertas]

I think that PSA was absolutely pathetic clown and Lievremont was much better coach. At least France had one grand slam (if I remember correctly), beat New Zealand and were finalist in 2011. What did PSA achieve? 4th place during four years at Six Nations? Please correct me, if I am wrong (which could be the case).

Selection of players for the national team is/was the problem and the coach, not Top 14 and quantity of foreign players.
E.g. benching Parra for no particular reason. Ignoring Trinc-Duc. Starting Michalak. Fofana on the wing. Giving a cap to Kockot. The list goes on and on.
Seriously, is it is about Top 14 and all foreigners? I'd agree if France has just 31 currently selected players, but they left out probably up to 10 players who are better than currently selected

 

[Ospreylian]

Kind of off topic, but did anyone see this yet? Made me laugh. Good to see some Northern Hemi players already venting their frustrations back in club rugby.

 

[jomjom]

Haha that is brilliant and brutally honest. Glad hes making a little light out of the situation. Sure tis just sport at the end of the day

 

[Hulkster]

Japan won more games against Rugby Championship sides than the entire 6 Nations combines at the world cup.

 

[munstermuffin]

Frankly, what France, England, Wales, Scotland and Italy do doesn't bother me. I'm primarily interested in where Irish rugby goes from here.

1. Don't panic! There's a lot good with the Irish structure. Put Paul O'Connell, Sean O'Brien, Peter O'Mahoney and Jonny Sexton into the Ireland team yesterday and the result could have been very different (full credit to Argentina though, they were magnificent to watch and full value for their win). The Irish system needs tweaking, not an overhaul.

2. We must improve the skills of our players. The passing ability of a lot of our players isn't good enough. A running game where players attack space must be promoted over the kick first and bash into opponents philosophy which prevails.

3. A controversial one but talent but be better distributed amongst the provinces. What good is it that Mike Ross, Tadhg Furlong and Marty Moore are vying to play at 3 for Leinster when Munster are struggling for a competent tighthead? How doesn it benefit Irish rugby that Dave Foley had to wait until he was 26 for a run of games with Munster when all of the other provinces could have started him? The more quality players getting game time every week, the better it is for the national team.

4. Share coaching ideas. If Ulster have a particularly good maul, it's imperative that it's secrets are shared with the other provinces. If Connacht are mass producing centres, let the other provinces know how. If Leinster have agreat multi phase attack, share the details how with the other provinces. The betterment of the national team is more important than the betterment of the individual provinces.

5. More power to David Nucifora and Joe Schmidt. Ian Madigan was Leinster's backup 10 last season behind a non-Ireland qualified journeyman. Three months later, he's starting a World Cup quarter final. Such a situation should not be allowed happen again. If the Ireland coach and director of rugby want more game time for a certain player in a given position within reason, they should get their wish.

Just on these.

Point 2 I've heard something similar and it's correct. A player even a prop should be demanded for high skill. It was said in a conversation that the skills of all players should be elite regardless of position which I don't think we demand just yet.

Point 3 your 100% correct. After December BJ Botha will be gone as things stand and Archer had surgery so John Ryan will possibly be out TH prop unless Cronin swaps across. I doubt we will see Ross much more for Ireland regardless and well he owes us nothing.

4. Is an interesting point which if it happened would be good but it's hard to see it. Like for example Foley/Cullen's job is to beat other. Would they tell other the way they'd do it.

5. Again you've a point but at what point does the interference from national team in province stop. Like its a messy scenario in some ways.

 

[LukeFitzgerald]

I don't think the situation is as bad as it's made out to be.

A Welsh team missing half their team gave Australia a good crack and then conceded a 75th minute try to South Africa.
An Irish team missing their key players and leaders in positions where we don't have great depth (especially at 10), had a great chance to beat Argentina but a lot of events didn't go into their way and Argentina were immense.
Scotland..... that is all.
The privatisation of French clubs has crippled their national team and having a terrible coach who won't select their best players doesn't help either.

I do think that there is a gap between the NH and SH, but not as great a chasm as most think there is. There was a great chance for there to be 3 NH teams in the semis but it wasn't to be. We do have to change our attitude and philosophy on attack, in terms of investing more money in the 7s circuit (especially in Ireland). I don't get the problems people have with placing an emphasis on the breakdown and set piece. If you don't have these key components of your game spot on, you will get mauled.

 

[Isengard]

Spot on!

I wouldn't say it was a disaster as there are fine lines at this level.
Wales were blighted by injury and had we not lost so many players could easily have won the group and even the WC
Ireland started disastrously yesterday, had they not they could well have won and progressed to the semi, knock out rugby is so much harder when you end up chasing the game.
Scotland fair play yesterday was the one big game I felt they had in them ,so unlucky.
France had nowhere to go when they had to start chasing the game and will be better with a coach who picks on form players, so come 5 nations I would expect a big improvement.
Italy seem to be going through a transition at the moment with a lot of older players reaching the end, so will probably take a year or two to show any marked improvement.
Georgia deserve a place at the top table in Europe, vastly improved.
Romania fair play to them and their magnificent coach.
England certainly in media terms have learnt nothing from the debacle of 2011, in playing terms need to change coaches and captain and the stupid non English based player rule.

In terms of school reports i would award as follows -:

Wales B+
Ireland B
Scotland B-
France C-
Italy D
England C-
Georgia B
Romania C+

Completely agree. Let's not go mad and write off NH rugby.

There are many reasons why the NH did not do well. My thoughts for what they are worth:

- England did do poorly but that was no shock to those of us who have long called for a decent coaching team. Predictable if you know a bit about the game and didn't get drawn in by the media hype. England under Lancaster with those selections and tactics would have taken a miracle to win this WC. They won't win the next either if no serious changes are made. Agreed little was learned from 2011, the main lesson of which was "get a decent coaching team with real experience and a winning record".

- Wales were crippled by injury. With all due respect getting out of the group was incredible given the state of the squad.

- Ireland clearly could not deal with the loss of O'Connell and Sexton. It seems to have knocked the stuffing out of them. Even a half strength Ireland could and should have easily dealt with Argentina, who are solid but hardly world-beaters. Ireland were the better team but seemed to crumble under the pressure and had a horrible game.

- Scotland played brilliantly and were hugely unlucky.

- Conditions (dry and pretty warm) have produced pitches unlike you would expect. If there had been pouring rain, sleet and a strong wind at Twickenham yesterday Scotland would have won. Conditions and crucially the firm ground have unexpectedly favoured the SH teams.

- Refs have tended (as ever) to give the rub of the green to the SH teams, no bias or anything silly. I'll tried to say what I think here without impugning anyone. I don't for one second think they're biased, I just think there is a subconscious issue. I think there is a general perception of the superiority of SH rugby: superior handling, running game, speed to the breakdown, etc which means refs without meaning to tend to allow more leeway. For example the AB get away with a lot more offside at the breakdown than other teams, I think it's because the ref will assume they are quicker and more aware so might be able to get to the 9 say quicker than a NH player and hence be less liable to penalise. I can't really explain it but it is there, certainly the rub of the green has seemed to favour the SH, for example I saw three likely yellows for Australia yesterday (a neck roll at a ruck - missed, the passage where they gave away several penalties in their red zone and were clearly killing the ball and the late 'tackle' on Hogg at the end). None given. Hooper was inexplicably not sanctioned for his kamikaze charge into Brown in the England game. Yet Maitland gets a yellow for that? Again I'm not for one second suggesting any cheating or bias just some kind of subconscious effect. It's only marginal to results (except Joubert's boo-boo, less said the better!) but you could easily make a case that Barnes was incredibly harsh on Wales in the first half and they struggled after that with the gas running out and being unable to just hold SA off. Scotland could easily have won barring that penalty call. It's very fine lines.

Rewind a year and lots would have assumed Australia were vanishingly unlikely to get through the group, coach had quit, 7 losses in a row, in a shambles, going to play in unfriendly weather conditions, etc. There were serious questions over SA with their defeat to Argentina and poor all round performances. Both those teams have snuck into the semis in reality and it could easily be Wales-NZ and Ireland-Australia. No real need to panic. England have had the worst cup for any number of reasons and are the only NH team which for me need serious action to be taken, but they've needed it for 12 years and have utterly failed to grasp the nettle so I'm not holding my breath.

 

[barthelemy]

Interesting subject


I think first that speaking of northern Hemisphere as a whole is a bit of a mistake, there is defo different situations in the NH..as there is in the SH.




I would separate NH in 2 groups :


1) England, France


2) Ireland, Wales, scotland and italy




England and France have a proper championship with clubs and with relegation systems for the ones that are at the bottom of the league at the end of the season


Ireland, Scotland and Wales are a different kind and copy more the province system that is in place in the southern hemisphere.


The province system is defo the best system as it is meant to feed the national teams and we can see this with the quite good result of Ireland, Wales and Scotland during this world cup (objectively, brought to the number of rugby players and population, Wales and Ireland are doing extremely well, I know wales and Irish fans would like more but still, great results overall compare to where they are coming from).

As well the province system does not have a relegation system so clubs can focus on other things than trying to save themselves going down in a lower division.


On the paper, with the number of licensed rugby players, France and England should be ahead of everybody but they have chronic issues to make the national team and their clubs work together. And I do not see it really changing soon. Clubs have the money and the power, they have no reasons to let the players they are paying play more for the national team. Still I think england is working a bit better than France at that level, thanks to a richer federation and an english pragmatism.


Now, if we talk about SH and NH, clearly the SH is largely ahead in terms of national team result, this is not new and there is no doubt about this. In RWC and even more in summer and autumn tours, they have the best results.


It is certainly down for a part of a certain rugby culture that favours the movement over than the sheer force phases like scrums or other phases but I think it is more down to the fact that there are much less matches to play in Super rugby (it is a mix between a cup and a championship) and other national cups in the southern hemisphere. The southern hemisphere players will focus on fewer games and will be able to play with an higher intensity because they have fewer matches along the season. There are surely also different ways in the south, NZ for example has a huge focus on the national team, all their players will have a contract with their federation and this is the federation that will drive the upbringing of the player, not so much the province (or franchise).


NH is far from being able to compete against such focused organization, I'm surprised that nobody is never underlining properly the unfairness of the world rugby at that level. a country like NZ has a huge advantage over any of their competitors in terms of organizaion and preparation (because Rugby is huge there and they have organized themselves very well, kuddos to them). Australia and South Africa have fewer matches like NZ but they are not as focused as NZ about the national team (it stays very important obviously but in Australia for example, rugby union is not as big as a lot of other sports and South Africa have more clubs and other divisions, more internal divisions I would say).


I think we won't never be able to compete agaisnt the southern Hemisphere..or we would need a revolution and maybe a competition like the super rugby in Europe (IT won't never happen due to the cultural differences that exist between the french , the british and the irish). the clubs in France and England will refuse this, they are making too much money out of TV rights and sponsorship to let their treasure escape their hands.


The only real moments where we are able to compete a tiny bit are world cups because of the preparation time that is kind of equal for every team (even though it is not entirely true, SH teams have worked since 4 years in a quite healthy environment, which is not the case for NH team like England or France).


When an english team have an incredible generation of players (like dallaglio, Johnston and Wilkinson + a proper coach like woodward), they are able to compete and to be world champion on one event..However if England and France have an average generation and some crappy coaches, they get trashed and do not do better than the 10th ranked world team. Ireland has a formidable generation of players and coach, as Wales, and they are doing pretty well for what they could hope objectively speaking.


Anyway, we would need big changes to be able to compete with SH, we would need to change the way we play rugby (Scrums should not be used as a way to have penalties but more like a base to launch an attack for example) and we would need to change our organization and put on the side the different private interest that are paraziting our rugby.


For now, as the situation stands, we will need an incredible mix of favourable events to be able to win such a competition.


Lets start the work now !

 

[FrenchFan]

The situation in France for instance, needs to change. Top 2 French teams, have foreign players aplenty, and no room for other French players.

Wow the French rugby experts are out again.

If the union want a competitive national team, it's plain and simple: they should contract the internationals directly. It's the only radical solution they know they have. They have known that for several decades but never got their finger out.

The clubs will not bend backwards for the union again. Not a chance. And the foreigners in the league are not going away any time soon. And players quotas are illegal under French and European labour laws. It's not my opinion. It's the law. FFr knows it. LNR knows it. The big clubs that employ lawyers know it.

So you can park that one once and for all.

 

[Hulkster]

Everyone is placing a lot of blame on the club/league systems for the NH failures, but it's worth remembering the SH teams were still the strongest, and comfortably so, before professionalism and the current league systems came into being.

 

[wayevs]

Honestly I don't think we are far off the level of Australia, South Africa and Argentina, Wales run both Australia and South Africa close and probably should of won at least one of those games on another day, Scotland 99percent should of beaten Australia . its not as disastrous as we may think , theres bound to be an over reaction because for the first time no northern hemp team made it through to the semi but sometimes thats the way it goes in sport ..NZ however are just streets ahead of anybody else in the world and that just because they have a conveyer belt of talent, right up from grass roots level , they have the perfect system in place hence why they are the best in the world.

 

[barthelemy]

Wow the French rugby experts are out again.

If the union want a competitive national team, it's plain and simple: they should contract the internationals directly. It's the only radical solution they know they have. They have known that for several decades but never got their finger out.

The clubs will not bend backwards for the union again. Not a chance. And the foreigners in the league are not going away any time soon. And players quotas are illegal under French and European labour laws. It's not my opinion. It's the law. FFr knows it. LNR knows it. The big clubs that employ lawyers know it.

So you can park that one once and for all.

The French federation needs money to do this and they do not have this money, this is not a valid argument. Go to look for the federation budget and you will understand. this is why the first thing is to find some money and 1 of the first step is to build a stadium like Twickenham and make some profits out of it.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I guess this is the nail in the coffin for "defences win world cups". As I said, defence is important but if you put so much emphasis on it that your attacking game vanishes then it just a slow, painful slide to defeat. Englands defence in the last 6N was a bit more sloppy but the attacking game improved hugely. We then abandoned all that going into the world cup and crashed out in the pool. The Wales game was the real teller, we were clearly playing to not lose in that game and win by the smallest margin we could get away with. It backfired.

 

[barthelemy]

Everyone is placing a lot of blame on the club/league systems for the NH failures, but it's worth remembering the SH teams were still the strongest, and comfortably so, before professionalism and the current league systems came into being.

Yeah there is a bit of argument here but still not really convincing. Wales and Ireland who has this sort of system in place are doing much better than France or England in terms of results these last years. This is an argument in favour of the province systems.

I'm not saying that there is not a better culture of rugby in the SH, there is certainly and it plays maybe a 5% part in the domination of the SH but the 95% percent are down to the province system, the place of the national team in that system and the fewer number of matches that the southern players are playing along the year. Even more the international southern players that are highly protected through contract clauses.