The last game against NZ hammered the now old point: SA rugby is structurally a loser rugby. It cant win because of outdated concepts. It cant win because of poor training of players. It cant win because of poor coaching.
Since the inception of professionalism, SA rugby slowly but surely grew into a third rate rugby with a cherished past.
While NZ or AUS put the increased means provided by professionalism to good use, developing new ways of playing, debating over the way the game should be played, perfecting their training methods, their scouting network etc, SA kept to old ways, unable to provide anything efficient.
The gap already existing between SA and NZ has kept growing.
ENG VS SA is going to be a revelation.
NH rugby is in deep crisis, the celtic nations are lacking means to support themselves, France suffers from their club rugby that makes all the earnings. England is in a similar situation, while it adds an always increasing debt.
In this context, english rugby is looking for a way out, promising to restore the old english ways of playing, based on staticness, rigidity and driven by a will to destroy the opponent.
Which is the same type of rugby practised by SA.
The autumn international game is going to be a strong game between two nations aiming at bullying.
There is also a stake attached to it: it might determine that it would be better for SA to join the NH.
England has not yet replenished its pool of players to sustain that kind of rugby while SA has still so many of that type.
By joining the NH, SA could get a short spell of dominance, being number one once again.
By remaining in the SH, with the situation left by the excellent men that jeopardizes the renewal of SA rugby, it will be a sinking ship.
Pro4,003 posts
10 Oct 2016, 13:26
#1
10 Oct 2016, 13:26#1
