OPINION – Due to the nature of sports World Cups, there will always be countries that struggle when they come up against the top nations. With the exception of football which is a sport that can at times be a lottery, if you’re going to have a global tournament that pits the best against the rest, there are always going to be blow-outs. However, as the popularity of rugby expands globally, the governing bodies should be doing more to ensure that these teams are exposed to higher levels of rugby throughout the season that will in turn play a part in improving their overall quality.
The 2011 Rugby World Cup in New Zealand was a great spectacle but was not without it’s blow-outs which arguably detracted from the feel-good nature of the tournament. New Zealand’s 83-7 victory over Japan and South Africa’s 87-0 victory over Namibia were two of a number of results that highlighted the giant chasm between test nations. And one can’t help but think that neither Japan or Namibia would have benefited from the encounters that take place once in a blue moon.
Despite the All Blacks playing against Japan in Tokyo on their way to Europe for the end of season tour, World Rugby has arguably done little to go about closing the gap between rugby nations, especially between the top five and the bottom five nations in the first 20 ranked teams – teams that will come up against each other at this month’s Rugby World Cup.
Short of implementing a football-like qualification method, significantly cheapening the value of international matches by playing England against minnow nations like San Marino – a mitigating factor for England’s largely disinterested population in their football qualifiers, the question is what can World Rugby do to change the status quo?
Many will look at Japan’s inclusion in the Super Rugby tournament in the Southern Hemisphere and think that it’s an effort to address the inequality in the rugby world. However there are few that would agree that the deal was more about fostering their development as a rugby nation than it was about the financial benefit that their inclusion would bring to the tournament. Instead, the answer to how this chasm can be addressed lies in how the Italians and Argentinians were introduced into the two largest international tournaments in the world.
Despite holding the most wooden spoons in the 6 Nations since their inclusion in 2000, Italy have shown great improvement and are no longer easy beats on the international scene, especially at their home of rugby Stadio Olimpico. Their improvement has been fostered in two ways with the first being the relatively free movement of rugby players across Europe allowing Italian players to developed against and alongside hardened internationals, resulting in a broader talent base.
The second aspect (and the key to ‘planting the rugby seed’) is that by consistently playing games against the likes of France, England and Ireland, the sport was exposed to younger generations in Italy which resulted in a more popular game. This means that not only does Italy’s rugby get better, but Italian rugby would be reinforced by a wave of young talent coming through the system and identifying more with their Italian heritage because of the opportunity to play in the 6 Nations. This change in their sporting body has been evidenced by their victories against France and Ireland in the 2013 tournament.
As for the Southern Hemisphere, the Pumas’ recent 37-25 victory over South Africa in Durban epitomises how far they have come as a rugby playing Nation over the last two decades. Despite the first four years of their inclusion in the Rugby Championship in 2012 being very similar to Italy’s first four years in the 6 Nations (having won just 2 of 21 matches), consistently matching up against the world’s best sides has seen them become a very real threat to the all of the Six Nations sides at this year’s World Cup. Placing third at the 2007 Rugby World Cup is indicative of their rugby history and as we enter this year’s World Cup, who knows how far they could go on the back of their good form.
Argentina and Italy are two very good examples of how exposure to higher levels of rugby can improve a squad. And while the transition wouldn’t be as simple for teams such as Japan, Russia and Namibia as the funding for these rugby governing bodies is not there because of the lack of grassroots action, World Rugby has the ability to ‘plant the seed’ with the inclusion of these countries to play more frequently against teams from the likes of England and New Zealand.
It’s important that the ‘minnow’ nations establish a regular understanding and gain experience of playing at that level as opposed to only playing these teams once every four years and being blown off the park. If there’s no interest from the bigger test nations and World Rugby to get involved in this, then there’s no point in having these teams at the Rugby World Cup.