As the SH soars the NH evens out

buck65

Good to see the likes of Georgia and Romania improving from the last world cups, Italy have made great strides on recent years so much so that they are a real threat to Scotland. Wales and England are probably a short step up and Ireland ...well probably have fallen in line with these guys despite beating all the 6 nations teams except France repeatedly in the past 4 years. France are still the standard bearers in the NH but really we have no team to put it upto the S Africas N Zealands and to a lesser extent Australia except France now.
All very interesting...?

Snickers Man

Who's "we"?

Since when did one's loyalty depend on which hemisphere one is born in?

That's a lot of balls.

marco_polo

Snickers Man wrote:

Who's "we"?

Since when did one's loyalty depend on which hemisphere one is born in?

That's a lot of balls.

Disagree completely. How could you support anyone who comes from a hemisphere where the water swirls down the plug hole the wrong way .

Something fishy about that methinks .

Snickers Man

marco_polo wrote:

Disagree completely. How could you support anyone who comes from a hemisphere where the water swirls down the plug hole the wrong way .

Methinks you don't watch Mythbusters. That water down the plughole myth is another load of balls.

It doesn't happen that way.

buck65

''we'' as in us in the NH thats who read the ****ing post.
Who said I was supporting anybody, I'm just making an observation about the gap growing and the levelling out (maybe backstep) that is being experienced in the northern hemisphere. In rugby terms the SH and NH teams are always being compared in general terms that's what I'm saying here. So **** off snickers man unless you have something to contribute.

Pinetree Boy

Snickers Man wrote:

Who's "we"?

Since when did one's loyalty depend on which hemisphere one is born in?

For once I agree with Snickers. The SH/NH thing is a point of reference-it is certainly not for me a motivation for support. I would never support Aussie or SA against anyone.

marco_polo

Snickers Man wrote:

Methinks you don't watch Mythbusters. That water down the plughole myth is another load of balls.

It doesn't happen that way.

Eh It was a joke btw.

Thanks for the science lesson though, I think you are probably ready for the next step up to proper Science programs now.

Pinetree Boy wrote:

For once I agree with Snickers. The SH/NH thing is a point of reference-it is certainly not for me a motivation for support. I would never support Aussie or SA against anyone.

To be fair I think that is the OP was using it as a point of reference. The NH / SH divide is fairly basic terminology to use when talking about the state of world rugby. Nowhere in the orignal post did I see any suggestion to buy a Union Jack and start supporting England, he just made what I think is a perfectly valid point about the 6N teams ("we" - are a 6N nations team after all?) being miles behind where the 3N sides are at.

I have heard certain commentators blaming the timing of the tournament, which may have had a small negative impact in terms of preparations. However the major factor is that the 6N teams have either declined in quality or have stagnated (I think it is the latter moreso) while the 3N teams have continued to improved immensly as have the minnows. Since professionalism NH teams have caught up for the most part in terms of conditioning and physicallity but in terms of basic skill levels they remain light years behind the SH nations.

jkehoe101

Pinetree Boy wrote:

Since when did one's loyalty depend on which hemisphere one is born in?

For once I agree with Snickers. The SH/NH thing is a point of reference-it is certainly not for me a motivation for support. I would never support Aussie or SA against anyone.

but NZ yes ?

---

edited later

ok just saw you're FROM NZ..though you were a local. That makes sense now..........

jkehoe101

Snickers Man wrote:

Who's "we"?

Since when did one's loyalty depend on which hemisphere one is born in?

That's a lot of balls.

there are endless discussions (considerably less in the last few weeks ) that the NH game was better than the SH, the 6N is better than 3N, Ireland is better than SA, Auss etc etc etc etc ect

Erin Go Brath

jkehoe101 wrote:

there are endless discussions (considerably less in the last few weeks ) that the NH game was better than the SH, the 6N is better than 3N, Ireland is better than SA, Auss etc etc etc etc ect

Don't think anybody in their right mind thought the NH game is superior to the SH, even before the tournament. The 3N's is a far better quality than the 6N's. NZ hammering Scotland, SA hammering England, OZ beating Wales well etc etc proves that theory. Our 6N's whilst a beloved competition on these shores, contains mediocre teams.

Sad to say, but a look at the 3N's tells us which team is shaping up well to win the comp. England bucked that trend in the last WC, but normal service is resumed in 07.

Snickers Man wrote:

Who's "we"?

Since when did one's loyalty depend on which hemisphere one is born in?

That's a lot of balls.

GO NORTHERN HEMISPHERE WE LOVE YOU!!!

Danie Gerber

It is a diffucult conundrum for me.. I'm all for te SH, but I hate to see Oz and the AB's win...

At te same time, I do think the SH are superior. Can't tell you how many arguments I've been in about how the 6N and Heineken Cup are supposedly so much better than the 3N and Super 14... Mickey Mouse rugby is what George Hook called the Super 14 once... And Gerry Thornley last year wrote the 3N are a pointless training exercise and that the participants won't survive if they competed in the 6N with it's much tougher schedule...

In a way the world cup is just that, a combined 6N, 3N and Argentina competition to see who's the best and I think the SH shades it don't you?

CJhaughey

My personal opinion FWIW is that it comes down to skill levels, here in the NH teams are obsessed with Power rugby and the ultimate example of that is the Guinness premiership.
This is fine if you like that type of one dimensional rugby and (very) occassionally this will produce results in a global sense.
BUT for this type of attritional rugby to produce consistent results you need two ingredients a) an extremely powerful pack , and b) an extraordinary kicker
such as JW in his pomp.
This is why the English team has fallen so far in the pecking order they have a reasonable pack and an average kicker which has resulted in them being held scoreless in the South Africa game.
To a lesser degree all the NH teams have bought into this mindset probably due to the tactic being successful against teams with a weaker pack.
France used to value skilled running rugby against pure brawn but in the last few years since Laporte took over the team has had many changes and has not really settled.
The 3 SH countries that play in the Super 14 have developed skills within the competition that are fantastic to watch, but on occasion the emphasis on forward based play has been neglected leading to situations where NZ and AUS were being bullied in internationals primarily because of lack of proper scrummaging technique.
However with the re-emergence of the Pack in NZ the emphasis has been on every member of the team being able to handle the ball equally well.
GT has his opinion and the 6N is possibly a more gruelling competition but all that means is that the countries with a higher number of reserve players will come through better, ie France and England.
I still think that the SA vs NZ 3N match this year was one of the toughest matches I have seen to date.