A perception exists that teams from the southern hemisphere have dominated World Cups, claiming five of the six to date. But only one of the six previous tournaments has produced an all-southern final, when South Africa met New Zealand in 1995.
The tournament often serves to underline that the hemispheric foes play the game differently and perceive the rugby world in different ways.
According to the stereotype, teams from the north play a forward-orientated game based on set pieces, field position and goalkicking. Teams from the south favour a more ambitious style.
Yet South Africa failed to score a try in its last two matches in this season's Tri-Nations tournament, and France, from the north, was until recently admired for its flair. They may serve as exceptions to prove the rule.
Early matches at the Rugby World Cup between Wales and South Africa, England and Argentina, Australia and Italy and New Zealand and France may further help to determine whether geography does determine style.
England is held, more than any other team, to epitomize the northern vogue. Martin Johnson, current team manager and the captain of the England team kicked to victory at the 2003 World Cup by flyhalf Jonny Wilkinson, argues the style is pragmatic, not boring.
"We have a lot of exciting players," Johnson said. But, "finding a way to win is what World Cups are all about.
"If you talk about style, it is the team that can battle back and find a way to win a close game."
Commentators have seen the north-south differences to have various origins: in climate, in temperament and in demographics: in the fact rugby is a minor sport in most of the northern hemisphere and in England has its foothold in the upper class. In the south, and in New Zealand and South Africa especially, the sport is broader-based and cuts through social strata.
Again, those perceptions are challenged by modern trends. Since rugby became professional, club teams in the English premiership are as likely to contain players from Samoa as Sussex.
The schisms that truly divide the north and south make their presence felt, tectonically, in Dublin and at the boardroom table of the sport's governing body, the International Rugby Board. It is there that the forces shaping the modern game come together to form its landscape.
The representatives of the north and south don't always see eye to eye.
The perception remains in the south that the IRB, based in London until its shift to Dublin, has a northern outlook which makes it and either insensitive to or dismissive of the interests of the south.
Rugby's move to professionalism has not entirely managed to quell that view or to create a sense of common interest.
The southern hemisphere, often led by New Zealand and Australia, has taken a series of issues to the IRB recently and has not always emerged with solutions to their satisfaction.
Those have included approaches on issues such as revenue sharing from tests — particularly the revenues generated by end-of-year tours by southern teams to the northern hemisphere which generate substantial gate-takings for the hosts.
There have been moves to establish a global international season which have now faltered, and calls for a review of rugby's rules on player eligibility.
The eligibility rule, particularly, impacts on the Pacific Islands, which would appreciably gain in strength if players who had played most of their careers for a tier one nation were able to finish by playing tests for nations either of their birth or heritage.
Many players of Samoan, Fijian or Tongan heritage have played for the All Blacks and the Pacific nations argue, with support from New Zealand and Australia, that those players should be allowed to play later for their Pacific homelands.
The IRB only recently rebuffed the latest effort from the south to have the eligibility regulation watered down.
IRB chairman Bernard Lapasset of France said "we have a system that you cannot return to the original union if you have played for other countries in the world.
"That's the point we have at the moment and we think it's important that we maintain that point for the moment."
The IRB's ruling hardened the view that the world body does not fully understand the southern hemisphere and the strain on the Pacific. Samoa Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi, who is also chairman of the Samoan Rugby Union, attacked the IRB for what he says is its focus on the north.
"For six weeks now, we've been trying to raise 4.5 million tala ($3 million) to fully prepare our team for New Zealand," Tuilaepa told reporters "Samoa is a small and not a rich country.
"We've been going to the countryside, virtually begging businesses and grassroots people who don't have much to give anyway to contribute to our World Cup campaign. Many donated only $2 because that is all they have.
"This while teams like Wales, Scotland, England, France, Ireland, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa are virtually swimming in money. The rugby world is a very lopsided world in terms of resources and player-base."
0 comments:
Post a Comment