Ok so this gap...

Between the SH and NH, its a popular topic and many already have refered to the fact Scotland are the only northerners to have won this summer. But lets face it even those scottish victories do not really indicate a closing of the gap given the nature of the oz lineup in that nidweek game. However, is it just me or are these games much closer than in recent years? We cant escape the fact that Ireland, Wales and England are all 2-nil down and have lost their series but with the exception of the first Ire vs NZ test all of the other results were in doubt going into the last 10 mins.

Now its clear that the SH still have an edge but perhaps not as pronounced as it has been, I think there is some cause for optimism for the final weekend of the summer tours and even more for the AI's later this year.

The 'gap' doesn't really exist....and if it does it's definately closing but until we start actually winning games down there we can't really back this up. It won't be long I don't think before england and wales start doing this.

Ireland I think have just blown their best and only chance.

For what its worth, I think wales would beat SA and I think england would be beating australia....think the respective srtengths of each team is more suited to each other's opponents..

ultra wrote:I think wales would beat SA and I think england would be beating australia....think the respective srtengths of each team is more suited to each other's opponents..

I think England may well have a chance to beat Australia, but Aus is will still be the favourites in my opinion. Wales in my opinion have some sort of mental illness. They should have beaten us in the last 5 games and still they couldn't. I don't think Wales will beat SA, even if they are the stronger, faster team. Because lets face it, in the World Cup they were the stronger, faster team when they met SA and still couldn't do it. In my opinion, Wales should have been in the final - maybe even win the whole thing. That's what I expected, but it didn't turn out to be like that.

I think this is better answered in a weeks time. my impressions from this weekend is that its pretty competitive at the moment.

Completely agree. On the SH side Oz are without very key players, NZ and particularly SA are in the initial stages of rebuild after the world cup in terms of replacing long term players and both have new coaches. So you would expect to have some drop off in performance while they sort the new framework.
But other than that. To come down and only have one test from 7 against the top 3 to blow out does say a lot for the NH quality of rugby.
Agree there are some good times ahead.

blackcanelion wrote:I think this is better answered in a weeks time. my impressions from this weekend is that its pretty competitive at the moment.

I actually don't think there is a gap at the moment. We in the SH have home ground advantage and you still push us close.

The IRB rankings suggest a gap mind you. NH have done better than I thought they would.

The problem we have after this series though, is that we don't know how wales would go against the ABs/SA etc, so we'll get a lot of speculation as to NH/SH relative strengths. We'll know better in the AIs.

We lost to SA by 1 point and proceeded to butcher 2 relatively simple kicks. How much of a gulf is that?

If the welsh couldn't even dominate this AUS pack then they would have zero chance against SA. Zero.

It was in the forwards where Wales have lost this series.. they failed to front up and dominate (where everyone thought they would).

SA is without Bekker, Schalk (captain elect), Vermuleun all in the forwards. Imagine the beasting ENG would have got with those 3 back... freightening really.

Gatland may have had a big impact on the tour... I don't doubt this for a second... but Wales have been disappointing, their backs did very well in the last test, kept them in the game.

Next week will sort everything out when Wales win by more than 10 points and we can all claim the agregate win....

At least the NH champions should finish up the top ranked NH side as we lost to the 2nd place team whilst England only lost to the 3rd place team.

2ndtimeround wrote:Next week will sort everything out when Wales win by more than 10 points and we can all claim the agregate win....

At least the NH champions should finish up the top ranked NH side as we lost to the 2nd place team whilst England only lost to the 3rd place team.

And only one team came close to beating the 1st place team. But they don't count of course coz they is Irish and therefore substandard players

Look out there's a Fly in the ointment

Taylorman, I understand and you are completely justified in beliving the SH will increase the gap again by the autumn because you generally do.

I for one hope the NH nations can maintain the level of competition they have shown so far this summer and follow it up in the autumn. These summer tours have been much more enjoyable to watch than normal and that should be a good thing for every spectator.

SecretFly wrote:

2ndtimeround wrote:Next week will sort everything out when Wales win by more than 10 points and we can all claim the agregate win....

At least the NH champions should finish up the top ranked NH side as we lost to the 2nd place team whilst England only lost to the 3rd place team.

And only one team came close to beating the 1st place team. But they don't count of course coz they is Irish and therefore substandard players

And only one team beat the 2nd rated..no hold on..any team - so Scotland are officially the worlds best (or something like that)

Riskysports wrote:
And only one team beat the 2nd rated..no hold on..any team - so Scotland are officially the worlds best (or something like that)

No no...hold on, don't lose the run of yourself. You beat that team so it doesn't count. This is only the world's best teams that have been beaten by the world's best teams ranking system we're discussing.

2ndtimeround wrote:Next week will sort everything out when Wales win by more than 10 points and we can all claim the agregate win....

At least the NH champions should finish up the top ranked NH side as we lost to the 2nd place team whilst England only lost to the 3rd place team.

Your second sentence is right Wales are now fourth and England fifth inthe rankings out today , every cloud has a silver lining

Let me explain my issue with the gap.


The gap between my teeth isn't big enough to accommodate a whole toothpick, it is frustrating when you have pieces of meet stuck between them and you just can't get it out.

biltongbek wrote:Let me explain my issue with the gap.


The gap between my teeth isn't big enough to accommodate a whole toothpick, it is frustrating when you have pieces of meet stuck between them and you just can't get it out.

Are you becoming a messer, biltong?????????????? We'll have none of that gobbledeegook stuff from you, sir. Enough of that from the Irish crowd! Keep to the stats! Now, tell me is a team who have been beaten by number 1 side in the world better than the side who have been beaten by the number 2 side in the world? Because all I hear is that the side that were beaten by the number 2 side is by definition the best side still in Europe. These are important issues and need numbers to make substantial judgements on.

SecretFly wrote:

biltongbek wrote:Let me explain my issue with the gap.


The gap between my teeth isn't big enough to accommodate a whole toothpick, it is frustrating when you have pieces of meet stuck between them and you just can't get it out.

Are you becoming a messer, biltong?????????????? We'll have none of that gobbledeegook stuff from you, sir. Enough of that from the Irish crowd! Keep to the stats! Now, tell me is a team who have been beaten by number 1 side in the world better than the side who have been beaten by the number 2 side in the world? Because all I hear is that the side that were beaten by the number 2 side is by definition the best side still in Europe. These are important issues and need numbers to make substantial judgements on.

Patience fly, the stats will come out after next weekend's tests. All good things come to those who wait.

England beat Australia home and away a couple of years ago and Scotland have beaten Australia home and away and South Africa once since 2009. In that time Ireland have a win (at the RWC) and a draw against Australia and one win over South Africa. France have beaten South Africa at home and New Zealand away and ran them very very close in the RWC final in New Zealand no less.

So it seems for European teams, Australia are very beatable but still probably better than any of us, wins against South Africa are less common but not unheard of. New Zealand are close to unbeatable. Only France have managed it once and of the rest only Ireland have come close.

I think there probably are more northern wins than there used to be. But not by much. It's just Ireland and Scotland have joined England and France as teams that can get the win in these one off games. Wales haven't managed it yet but they've come agonizingly close on more than enough occasions to suggest they're almost there.

The problem is that the Super 15 tends to pump out top class talent at a higher rate than any of the European leagues. So any northern teams breaking into the top 3 for a prolonged period of time doesn't look that likely yet. Although I think the gap is narrower than it has been. It's not a gulf.

NH teams will achieve long term up when they realise that the next step up is not the step to reach AB standards but to look longer and push past that objective to take tactical thought and player conditioning to the level ABs are still chasing towards.

In other words, when we eventually achieve present AB standards they'll have long since moved on in tactics and the sciences around rugby. And it doesn't matter what we all think about traditions, traditions don't amount to a hill of beans when placed against the high end science and strategy of next-step-into-the-future in rugby union development.

So it isn't about leagues and sub leagues and more sides in the 6N and all the other guff I hear about developing rugby in Europe. It's that immediately after the planes land with the teams home from the SH, we all instantly forget the SH again until next time we meet them. We don't need to think about them, we all have sides in the "best" leagues in the world. We start navel gazing again - we think our standards are enough.

SH are always thinking about the next steps needed to break down defences and find the spaces needed...we just think of promotion/relegation and lovely dirty and passionate derby games.

Good post fly

I disagree with you there Fly. There are a lot of NH players who far out perform their AB counter parts in numerous areas.

If we take the Yo Yo test as an example, the top performers I've seen are all european players, strength testing leans toward Oz and English players, physiological tests are great from SA and England. I firmly believe all top tier nations are on an even footing when it comes to fitness and conditioning, yet the SH teams have some innate skill quality and nous for the game not shown in th NH.

My thoughts on that I won't go into right now as I could rant all day long about it.

Maybe it's because we learn fron a young age how to outrun the cheetah, sidestep a rhino, or in case that doesn't work, how to wrestle them to the ground, how the New Zealanders do it with no dangerous wildlife is up for debate.

billtong

Have you met Kiwi women??? Theres a reason they are faster more agile and stronger!

That probably suggests that Yo Yo and strength tests aren't a great yardstick for onfield performance, or at least there are many more variables to consider.

I totally agree with fly.... that NZ in particular are always innovating, pushing ahead, raising the bar...that extends far beyond just conditioning training but about producing talent, skills development, producing a winning mindset and providing the infrastructure and enviroment for peak performance an success.

The pace and intensity that the Tri-nations team play at is a big step up from our competitions in the NH.

There clearly is a gap between the SH and NH. The 3 best sides are in the SH and the results over the past few weeks reinforce that, however close some of the games have been. 17 years into professionalism and the NH sides are still chasing one of victories over the SH sides.

Wait until SA harnesses the full potential of the black population .And by this i dont mean qoutas i mean fair chances and facilities from grassroots all the way up to varsity . It will be the Springboks equivalent of the maori playing for the all blacks and Abos for the Wallabies

thebluesmancometh wrote:I disagree with you there Fly. There are a lot of NH players who far out perform their AB counter parts in numerous areas.

If we take the Yo Yo test as an example, the top performers I've seen are all european players, strength testing leans toward Oz and English players, physiological tests are great from SA and England. I firmly believe all top tier nations are on an even footing when it comes to fitness and conditioning, yet the SH teams have some innate skill quality and nous for the game not shown in th NH.

My thoughts on that I won't go into right now as I could rant all day long about it.

You're a little like Sin é in the diagreements department bluesman, in that you seldom do agree with me But no harm in that.

I think Wales have certainly given themselves a step up in the conditioning standards...but no, I can't agree that most European sides are close to top SH sides (club and then International) in terms of sustaining the fitness necessary to continue high tempo rugby for 80 minutes. We have our days of course when form and strategy hits a rich seam and off we go on the crest for a few months or years but no, I don't think we're close to SH in terms of thinking about rugby in the right areas.

They have by far more complete sides in terms of all 15 players capable of handling and running. Take Paul O'Connell as an example - Ireland always feel we are better with him and boy does he have his bonuses but one of them isn't an ability to link up with more creative patterns of attack or to susbstitute for a back if lucky enough to be in space that might make it an option. And he's not alone...too many players in Europe have certain merits to play a certain game but the winning game (SH variety) is beyond them in terms of continuity. Yes, they can be part of one-offs but to sustain the effort to keep the SH on the back foot, nope, we don't have that quality in enough quantity right now to do it.

We've finally sat up and realise that's where it has to go, we're on the right road - but again, the right road is always a few years short of the road SH is on. But we don't really acknowledge that distance until we meet the SH. We live too much in a cloud, which is surprising considering how open the world now is in communication terms.

thebluesmancometh wrote:billtong

Have you met Kiwi women??? Theres a reason they are faster more agile and stronger!

Something else must be chasing them cause Kiwi men sure aren't! Gimme those girls in the hot tubs outside the Shark Tank any day.

The reason for the gap is very clear and simple - soccer. Any NH kid with good footballing skills will play... er... football. There are obscene amounts of money to be earned even at low level and with a lot less danger!

OTOH in the SH, the average rugby player probably earns more than his soccer equivalent so with that incentive and the culture of the game they can attract the very cream of their athletic youth.

Morning everyone

I am new to the forum so will mind my ps and qs

The Welsh had a sign up in the dressing room about talent winning games and intelligence winning championships, press today refers to emotional intelligence and composure. SCW refers to the TCUP princicple. It seems to me that intelligence and decision making is the key to Wales loss; Hibberd's sole contribution was to stand off the maul until the Aussies were within range and collapse it while Priestland decides that, on the basis that possession of the ball is the best way to prevent the opposition scoring, he would kick it to them instead of retaining it.

Seems 'intelligence' is the main gap and Wales achilles heel (not window cleaning)

Bullsbok wrote:Wait until SA harnesses the full potential of the black population .And by this i dont mean qoutas i mean fair chances and facilities from grassroots all the way up to varsity . It will be the Springboks equivalent of the maori playing for the all blacks and Abos for the Wallabies

For me this is the single biggest potential in world rugby and Ive been saying it since mandela took power.

Problem is SA powers that be are too slow to embrace it as they are in other areas of their rugby.. Such as the opening up of their game.

When they stop seeing quotas as a bad thing and embrace the potential from top down there will be a shift in SA rugby that will never turn back.

The abo, polynesian etc presence has a huge influence on oz and nz rugby and I think the absence of the same in SA has resulted in this staunch very white structured game.

Polynesians bring flair in truckloads and racist or not black athletes the world over represent pace, flair and expression in most sports. Even the current bok team theyre the flair/ speedsters. Imagine if they had the option of several thousand similar.

For me not embracing pace in the backs on the hard and fast grounds of SA as a central part of their rugby is a crime.

Unfortunately it will take a generation or two to get rid of the old boys thinking but its inevitable.

Wales could easily be 2-0 but the fact is they are 2-0 down. Its infuriating because as a Welsh fan I know we can get the win in Oz. For me, I said before the tour Wales just need to show they can beat Oz in a test down under. The real work begins at home. Wales need to be looking to beat the SH at home consistently. I'm not saying every single test, its almost impossible. But we need to be looking at getting at least 2/3 wins when NZ, OZ and SA come and tour.

For instance, Wales play Argentina, Samoa, Australia and NZ in the AI. We need to be looking to beat Argentina, Samoa and Oz and then its the big one against NZ. The sooner we get that monkey off our backs the better. Crawl before we can run and all that.

disneychilly wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:billtong

Have you met Kiwi women??? Theres a reason they are faster more agile and stronger!

Something else must be chasing them cause Kiwi men sure aren't! Gimme those girls in the hot tubs outside the Shark Tank any day.

I don't think bluesman meant running towards kiwi women Disney

He may have a point. And Kiwi men cunningly gave women the vote before any country so that they could take over the bulk of the decision making and let the men concentrate totally on the rugby

HQ matt wrote:Taylorman, I understand and you are completely justified in beliving the SH will increase the gap again by the autumn because you generally do.

I for one hope the NH nations can maintain the level of competition they have shown so far this summer and follow it up in the autumn. These summer tours have been much more enjoyable to watch than normal and that should be a good thing for every spectator.

Interesting you took my comments that way. For me the opposite could be true. With us rebuilding and the NH sides having been here...all having had chances to win I see this years AIs as the toughest we will face as the stigma of SH being dominant will be slightly eroded.

With one win and six matches going to less than 10 points away represents a consistency i dont think weve seen amongst all four NH sides.

These tours are key to dismantle this NH/ SH myth. By coming down in force you could all perhaps be more united in support of each other even if only just for the tour. As it rubs off. Ill bet Irelands near win gave some hope to the Welsh and english players even though they didnt get there.

As ive said the AI's will see the NH far more confident at home.

There are so many variables to be considered but firstly the more matches the SH and NH play versus each other .The less the gap will grow,there is a difference between natural muscle and Gym Muscle.The way the game is played in the Hemispheres is different in the NH it is slower and more set piece orientated.Two factors which need to faced is NZ/OZ only pick Home based players.You can play in Europe or Japan and still be a Bok,getting release s of your best players does`nt help if there in France for example.It is no coincedence the teams with the most wins versus the AllBlacks are those that play them most.SA,Oz.France.What one can`t explain even allowing for SA quotas.Is that NZ have twice the number of wins versus Sa and OZ combined since 1995 and they play them 2 or 3 times every year.It is certain if the trend for multiple match tours continues the NH will starting notching up wins.

Taylorman wrote:

Bullsbok wrote:Wait until SA harnesses the full potential of the black population .And by this i dont mean qoutas i mean fair chances and facilities from grassroots all the way up to varsity . It will be the Springboks equivalent of the maori playing for the all blacks and Abos for the Wallabies

For me this is the single biggest potential in world rugby and Ive been saying it since mandela took power.

Problem is SA powers that be are too slow to embrace it as they are in other areas of their rugby.. Such as the opening up of their game.

When they stop seeing quotas as a bad thing and embrace the potential from top down there will be a shift in SA rugby that will never turn back.

The abo, polynesian etc presence has a huge influence on oz and nz rugby and I think the absence of the same in SA has resulted in this staunch very white structured game.

Polynesians bring flair in truckloads and racist or not black athletes the world over represent pace, flair and expression in most sports. Even the current bok team theyre the flair/ speedsters. Imagine if they had the option of several thousand similar.

For me not embracing pace in the backs on the hard and fast grounds of SA as a central part of their rugby is a crime.

Unfortunately it will take a generation or two to get rid of the old boys thinking but its inevitable.

These posts are missing a big point. The Polynesians are physically a big race while the South African Blacks are not. According to Wikipedia the average height in SA is 5'6". Thats smaller than the Asians!

Also your theories about Blacks being blocked by the White management doesn't make sense considering that the Beast and a few other Black players make the squad. The Beast is their only Black forward and he happens to come from a different country!!! Hes also not the greatest scrummager in the world so there would be plenty of reason to drop him. Btw, Whites also have physical advantages over other races.

The standard in the NH has risen in recent times and thats been the real catalyst in closing the gap. Despite the criticism it gets from England and France and parts of Wales, the Rabo league is a faster, harder, more skilfull version of the old Celtic/magners league. The AP was won by Quinns who like to play an expansive game.

The French league however is a very dull league where not 1 try was scored in the semi finals or final. It reflected the league in general. The French should be worried especially having a negative coach too.

profitius wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Bullsbok wrote:Wait until SA harnesses the full potential of the black population .And by this i dont mean qoutas i mean fair chances and facilities from grassroots all the way up to varsity . It will be the Springboks equivalent of the maori playing for the all blacks and Abos for the Wallabies

For me this is the single biggest potential in world rugby and Ive been saying it since mandela took power.

Problem is SA powers that be are too slow to embrace it as they are in other areas of their rugby.. Such as the opening up of their game.

When they stop seeing quotas as a bad thing and embrace the potential from top down there will be a shift in SA rugby that will never turn back.

The abo, polynesian etc presence has a huge influence on oz and nz rugby and I think the absence of the same in SA has resulted in this staunch very white structured game.

Polynesians bring flair in truckloads and racist or not black athletes the world over represent pace, flair and expression in most sports. Even the current bok team theyre the flair/ speedsters. Imagine if they had the option of several thousand similar.

For me not embracing pace in the backs on the hard and fast grounds of SA as a central part of their rugby is a crime.

Unfortunately it will take a generation or two to get rid of the old boys thinking but its inevitable.

These posts are missing a big point. The Polynesians are physically a big race while the South African Blacks are not. According to Wikipedia the average height in SA is 5'6". Thats smaller than the Asians!

Also your theories about Blacks being blocked by the White management doesn't make sense considering that the Beast and a few other Black players make the squad. The Beast is their only Black forward and he happens to come from a different country!!! Hes also not the greatest scrummager in the world so there would be plenty of reason to drop him. Btw, Whites also have physical advantages over other races.

The standard in the NH has risen in recent times. The Rabo league is a faster, harder, more skilfull version of the old Celtic/magners league. The AP was won by Quinns who like to play an expansive game.

The French league however is a very dull league where not 1 try was scored in the semi finals or final. It reflected the league in general. The French should be worried especially having a negative coach too.

Profitius, what bullsbok is talking about is the 80% of the population that isn't actively involved or supporting the game, and 5 foot 6" is the coloureds not the blacks.

There are some very big blacks around and muscular like you won't beleive. Aplon, Basson etc, they are small, the blacks aren't.

What's the difference here between "coloureds" and "blacks"?

Nothing. They're both politically incorrect. We are all a rainbow.

The thing that annoys me about the gap is that in the tube stations where they put the mind the gap warning over the speakers, there invariably is no gap between the train and platform but when there is a cavernous chasm they don't put any announcement. So for my mind, this is a cynical exercise to lull us into a false sense of security in the stations where there is indeed a gap. So much like the rugby gap, there is no gap, until you realise too late that there is a gap.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Nothing. They're both politically incorrect. We are all a rainbow.

The thing that annoys me about the gap is that in the tube stations where they put the mind the gap warning over the speakers, there invariably is no gap between the train and platform but when there is a cavernous chasm they don't put any announcement. So for my mind, this is a cynical exercise to lull us into a false sense of security in the stations where there is indeed a gap. So much like the rugby gap, there is no gap, until you realise too late that there is a gap.

You think it's some kind of population culling process introduced by the WMF to cut down spiraling world debt?

ChequeredJersey wrote:What's the difference here between "coloureds" and "blacks"?

It goes to their genetic pool if you look at it from a scientific point like Profitius.

Coloureds are mixed race between white and blacks, then under the blacks you get different tribes which once again has different genetic characteristics, such as Zulu, Xhosa, etc.

Some of the tribes such as the Zulu was historically a warring tribe and physically they are bigger, stronger and faster.

I've been reading comments on the BBC 606 for many years and I've seen many, many articles of this nature saying exactly the same thing, yet the results are still not forthcoming.

biltongbek wrote:

profitius wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Bullsbok wrote:Wait until SA harnesses the full potential of the black population .And by this i dont mean qoutas i mean fair chances and facilities from grassroots all the way up to varsity . It will be the Springboks equivalent of the maori playing for the all blacks and Abos for the Wallabies

For me this is the single biggest potential in world rugby and Ive been saying it since mandela took power.

Problem is SA powers that be are too slow to embrace it as they are in other areas of their rugby.. Such as the opening up of their game.

When they stop seeing quotas as a bad thing and embrace the potential from top down there will be a shift in SA rugby that will never turn back.

The abo, polynesian etc presence has a huge influence on oz and nz rugby and I think the absence of the same in SA has resulted in this staunch very white structured game.

Polynesians bring flair in truckloads and racist or not black athletes the world over represent pace, flair and expression in most sports. Even the current bok team theyre the flair/ speedsters. Imagine if they had the option of several thousand similar.

For me not embracing pace in the backs on the hard and fast grounds of SA as a central part of their rugby is a crime.

Unfortunately it will take a generation or two to get rid of the old boys thinking but its inevitable.

These posts are missing a big point. The Polynesians are physically a big race while the South African Blacks are not. According to Wikipedia the average height in SA is 5'6". Thats smaller than the Asians!

Also your theories about Blacks being blocked by the White management doesn't make sense considering that the Beast and a few other Black players make the squad. The Beast is their only Black forward and he happens to come from a different country!!! Hes also not the greatest scrummager in the world so there would be plenty of reason to drop him. Btw, Whites also have physical advantages over other races.

The standard in the NH has risen in recent times. The Rabo league is a faster, harder, more skilfull version of the old Celtic/magners league. The AP was won by Quinns who like to play an expansive game.

The French league however is a very dull league where not 1 try was scored in the semi finals or final. It reflected the league in general. The French should be worried especially having a negative coach too.

Profitius, what bullsbok is talking about is the 80% of the population that isn't actively involved or supporting the game, and 5 foot 6" is the coloureds not the blacks.

There are some very big blacks around and muscular like you won't beleive. Aplon, Basson etc, they are small, the blacks aren't.

That makes no sense. If Whites are bigger than Coloureds and Blacks are bigger than Coloureds how can they be so small. There are big Japanese people too but Japan still struggles with size unfortunatly.

Ok if we're going to play the genetics card and throw cultural and racial stereotypes around......

Does anyone else think that the fact that the game is played on a flat pitch rather than a hill is a blatant anglo-saxon ploy to disadvantage celtic bogtrotters?

yeah and the fact that it's played on the ground at all instead of in The sea is totally unfair on dolphins

profitius wrote:

biltongbek wrote:

profitius wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

Bullsbok wrote:Wait until SA harnesses the full potential of the black population .And by this i dont mean qoutas i mean fair chances and facilities from grassroots all the way up to varsity . It will be the Springboks equivalent of the maori playing for the all blacks and Abos for the Wallabies

For me this is the single biggest potential in world rugby and Ive been saying it since mandela took power.

Problem is SA powers that be are too slow to embrace it as they are in other areas of their rugby.. Such as the opening up of their game.

When they stop seeing quotas as a bad thing and embrace the potential from top down there will be a shift in SA rugby that will never turn back.

The abo, polynesian etc presence has a huge influence on oz and nz rugby and I think the absence of the same in SA has resulted in this staunch very white structured game.

Polynesians bring flair in truckloads and racist or not black athletes the world over represent pace, flair and expression in most sports. Even the current bok team theyre the flair/ speedsters. Imagine if they had the option of several thousand similar.

For me not embracing pace in the backs on the hard and fast grounds of SA as a central part of their rugby is a crime.

Unfortunately it will take a generation or two to get rid of the old boys thinking but its inevitable.

These posts are missing a big point. The Polynesians are physically a big race while the South African Blacks are not. According to Wikipedia the average height in SA is 5'6". Thats smaller than the Asians!

Also your theories about Blacks being blocked by the White management doesn't make sense considering that the Beast and a few other Black players make the squad. The Beast is their only Black forward and he happens to come from a different country!!! Hes also not the greatest scrummager in the world so there would be plenty of reason to drop him. Btw, Whites also have physical advantages over other races.

The standard in the NH has risen in recent times. The Rabo league is a faster, harder, more skilfull version of the old Celtic/magners league. The AP was won by Quinns who like to play an expansive game.

The French league however is a very dull league where not 1 try was scored in the semi finals or final. It reflected the league in general. The French should be worried especially having a negative coach too.

Profitius, what bullsbok is talking about is the 80% of the population that isn't actively involved or supporting the game, and 5 foot 6" is the coloureds not the blacks.

There are some very big blacks around and muscular like you won't beleive. Aplon, Basson etc, they are small, the blacks aren't.

That makes no sense. If Whites are bigger than Coloureds and Blacks are bigger than Coloureds how can they be so small. There are big Japanese people too but Japan still struggles with size unfortunatly.

how would I know, I am not a geneticist. you asked, I answered, you make up your own mind.

Fantasticbarnsmell wrote:I've been reading comments on the BBC 606 for many years and I've seen many, many articles of this nature saying exactly the same thing, yet the results are still not forthcoming.

Yet the gap IS closing. A few years back Australia would be beating Wales by 20 - 30pts.

Maybe all the small "whites" slept with all the small "blacks" thus removing small people from their respective genepools whilst forming a uniformly small "coloured" genepool?

Could be to do with diet?