Changing Northern Hemisphere Rugby to make it work

It's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain that the Southern Hemisphere sides punch above their weight, have punched above their weight for years, in terms of their population compared to their world rankings.

Since the advent of professional rugby they've been the dominant sides in terms of Rugby World Cups, IRB world rankings and so on.

Although there are lots of things, one thing that I think really makes a big difference, and the recent rebranding of the Heineken Cup won't change, is the structure of their rugby competitions.

Obviously their internationals play test matches, in June against touring Northern Hemisphere sides, in August/September against each other and in November they tour the Northern Hemisphere. This is roughly the same as the reciprocal tours and the Six Nations. So lets assume that doesn't need to change. You can argue that home and away tests between South Africa, New Zealand and Australia (and Argentina now) are more of a challenge than Italy and Scotland in recent years but there are still a number of tough matches each year too.

Under that, though, the contests are very different.

In the Southern Hemisphere they have Super Rugby which runs roughly from February until June (or just after the June test window now, although this will probably change again next year) in which a smallish number of franchises (currently 5 in each of the SANZAR nations) plays. All the test players who are healthy play, along with a wider pool (about 4x as many others) who are mostly test hopefuls, rising potential stars. Then, while the Rugby Championship and November tours are going on, the next level down contest takes place. None of the test players are available, but there are (in New Zealand and South Africa at least) about 12 clubs in this contest. The non-test players and the really young up-and-coming stars mix and play for their provinces or similar. (There are levels under this too, called club rugby.)

In the Northern Hemisphere, although the fine details vary, there are large national (or super-national for Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Italy) leagues that play long seasons and play through the internationals as their time to play younger players as well. Then, although the new competition will change this slightly, there are bursts of 2 weekends back to back taken out several times through the year where the best sides from last season play against each other for 'European glory.'

Now, rugby is very much a sport where you learn the basics yes - how to pass, tackle, kick etc. - how to scrummage, perform in the line out and so on. But a lot of what makes the difference between a good player and a great player is doing the right thing, brilliantly, when under pressure in the right way. Some of that comes from within, certainly. But some of that comes from talking to people who have done it and are willing to share their experience with you and help you get it.

The Southern Hemisphere system gives you a system where the best players play against the best, but spread their experience somewhat. 50 or so test players dilute their experience to 5 franchises and 200 extra players, supporting the others who play reserve in their position. Those 200 people then take their experience to about another 400 or so players. Plus, of course, most of the time you won't have the test player and their sub playing for the same franchise so the test experience is spread out to two or sometimes three franchises.

In the Northern Hemisphere it stays very tightly within the silo of the club.

There are other differences. Particularly the New Zealand sides (and they're always the gold standard when it comes to rugby) tend to play very similar styles. Why not? It works nicely after all. Sides in the Northern Hemisphere very much have a sense of individual style, and then a different style (maybe) for their country. It's a bit different if you look at Australia and South Africa but not all that different - their styles are different to New Zealand, but they're largely similar to each other.

The remedy? It won't be easy. There's a lot of traditions and history to overcome and traditions that don't place the national side's glory at the top of the heap.

I think all the top tier NH nations need to have a contest that runs from perhaps a late September start until the 6N. Then a proper break for the internationals. Then a proper pan-european contest with, if possible, different sides. If not, at least pick the top sides THIS year so you don't have the farce of a side that was great last year but has disintegrated (with retirements and so on) and is dropping like a stone this year being in the top-flight contest. (It has happened, more than once.)

Will it necessarily fix things? No. I think you need to mix things up more than the clubs staying together so there's more spreading of knowledge and understanding and experience. While I'm a big fan of Warren Gatland I don't think the resurgence in Welsh rugby's fortune's is down to him. It's no coincidence that Wales moved to four or five (the numbers have changed) super-franchises with the older clubs under them, feeding players up.

Of course, while the remedy is relative easy to prescribe, this isn't a case of getting one patient to agree. As Welsh rugby - where there are relatively few stakeholders - shows, getting all the stakeholders to agree is a very fraught process. English rugby has more stakeholder. French rugby even more. Then agreeing some format for (another) new look European competition... I honestly doubt it will happen.

So, it's early for a prediction for the RWC. But barring injury disasters, don't be surprised if a team that plays South of the equator lifts it yet again.