Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
Why the southern hemisphere are better than the northern hemisphere?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Phlegm &amp; Poise" data-source="post: 325847" data-attributes="member: 42637"><p>The short answer is simple, New Zealand.</p><p></p><p>Ignoring World Cup wins, they are the number 1 side in the world and have been since more or less ever. I'm not saying South Africa and Australia aren't major players or anything, but realistically they've not produced the consistency of class of the All Blacks. For all that South Africa are strong now, we've seen some pretty shambolic Bok teams tour our shores over the years, and Australia the same. At the moment we're in a period where SA are a pretty hefty unit, but no more so than England have been in the past, and I'd certainly class the French as being on a similar level throughout history. The only stand-out nation are the ABs, aside from that we are all subject to peaks and troughs. Whilst it might look as if SH rugger is indestructable right now, just wait a few years for the Bok side to fade and for England to re-emerge from this grim slumber. Of course, even if that occurs the North can only really claim parity, due to the fact that you can guarantee that the other world class side will be the pesky New Zealanders. At least we'll stop moaning about the Guinness Premiership though.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Phlegm & Poise, post: 325847, member: 42637"] The short answer is simple, New Zealand. Ignoring World Cup wins, they are the number 1 side in the world and have been since more or less ever. I'm not saying South Africa and Australia aren't major players or anything, but realistically they've not produced the consistency of class of the All Blacks. For all that South Africa are strong now, we've seen some pretty shambolic Bok teams tour our shores over the years, and Australia the same. At the moment we're in a period where SA are a pretty hefty unit, but no more so than England have been in the past, and I'd certainly class the French as being on a similar level throughout history. The only stand-out nation are the ABs, aside from that we are all subject to peaks and troughs. Whilst it might look as if SH rugger is indestructable right now, just wait a few years for the Bok side to fade and for England to re-emerge from this grim slumber. Of course, even if that occurs the North can only really claim parity, due to the fact that you can guarantee that the other world class side will be the pesky New Zealanders. At least we'll stop moaning about the Guinness Premiership though. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
International Test Matches
Why the southern hemisphere are better than the northern hemisphere?
Top