More thoughts on the Lions
Jul. 13th, 2005 12:04 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
So enough of all this frivolousness about Yorkshire and back to the important things in life...
I've now watched all three New Zealand vs Lions tests which was done in the interests of science, rather as one might watch Christians in the arena in order to study leonine dentition.
I have come to several conclusions.
1. The Lions are an idea whose time is past. Even if the Lions had the players there is no way in this modern era that a motley assortment of players who don't know each other well can be moulded, in the time available, into a side that could beat one of the big three.
2. SANZAR has a structural advantage over the Northern hemisphere sides that is likely to mean a widening gap in performance. The Super 12/14 and the 3N are a forcing ground for innovation in a way the 6N is not. Trends become apparent sooner and it's a tougher testing ground for new offensive and defensive ideas. This gives SANZAR an evolutionary advantage. The 6N is just too soft a competition. There aren't enough games and for a top side in any given year two or three of their five matches will be played against very weak opposition. No other northern hemisphere competition comes close to giving the level of play needed to develop world class teams, players and coaches.
3. The total rugby player has finally arrived. There is just no longer room for the elegant little winger with the darting sidestep or the fly-half who can't tackle. Nor for that matter is there room for the prop who is there almost exclusively for his prowess in set scrums. Every player has to have the power to break the gainline, the strength to offload in the tackle and the sheer physicality needed to get around the park and hurt people. The trouble is, in the 6N, a player can look good with just a subset of those skills. Stephen "turnstile" Jones was a pretty good example, as, in a very different way, was Julian White. There should be no way on earth that a centre can score a try from first phase just by barging past the fly half.
4. What needs to be done is obvious and has been ever since the game turned pro. Put the money back with the national unions instead of letting the clubs squander it on retired kiwis and create a tough pan-European super league as a forcing ground for current and developing national squad members.
5. 4 will never happen.
I've now watched all three New Zealand vs Lions tests which was done in the interests of science, rather as one might watch Christians in the arena in order to study leonine dentition.
I have come to several conclusions.
1. The Lions are an idea whose time is past. Even if the Lions had the players there is no way in this modern era that a motley assortment of players who don't know each other well can be moulded, in the time available, into a side that could beat one of the big three.
2. SANZAR has a structural advantage over the Northern hemisphere sides that is likely to mean a widening gap in performance. The Super 12/14 and the 3N are a forcing ground for innovation in a way the 6N is not. Trends become apparent sooner and it's a tougher testing ground for new offensive and defensive ideas. This gives SANZAR an evolutionary advantage. The 6N is just too soft a competition. There aren't enough games and for a top side in any given year two or three of their five matches will be played against very weak opposition. No other northern hemisphere competition comes close to giving the level of play needed to develop world class teams, players and coaches.
3. The total rugby player has finally arrived. There is just no longer room for the elegant little winger with the darting sidestep or the fly-half who can't tackle. Nor for that matter is there room for the prop who is there almost exclusively for his prowess in set scrums. Every player has to have the power to break the gainline, the strength to offload in the tackle and the sheer physicality needed to get around the park and hurt people. The trouble is, in the 6N, a player can look good with just a subset of those skills. Stephen "turnstile" Jones was a pretty good example, as, in a very different way, was Julian White. There should be no way on earth that a centre can score a try from first phase just by barging past the fly half.
4. What needs to be done is obvious and has been ever since the game turned pro. Put the money back with the national unions instead of letting the clubs squander it on retired kiwis and create a tough pan-European super league as a forcing ground for current and developing national squad members.
5. 4 will never happen.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-13 04:26 pm (UTC)I do like the idea of a European Super League. But I fear it would be contradictory to the idea of nurturing home grown talent. We would end up with a mixed pool of players floating around Europe playing for the highest bidder: just like soccer is today.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-13 04:58 pm (UTC)You are thinking of the Neil Jenkins. Too slow to be a fullback. I think rugby has changed and is changing a great deal and at quite a clip. Remember what a phenom Lomu was when he burst on the scene? Now there are huge powerful wingers all over the place. The idea of offensive tackling was just making its way from RL in 1997. I remember Scott Gibbs demonstrating the "wrong foot" tackle and how revolutionary that seemed. It's pretty much standard now. Add a revolution in openside play, decoy runners, drift defences and stuff I don't even know and I think you have a lot of change.
I do like the idea of a European Super League. But I fear it would be contradictory to the idea of nurturing home grown talent. We would end up with a mixed pool of players floating around Europe playing for the highest bidder: just like soccer is today.
The key is to have the players contracted to the national unions, as in SANZAR, then the national unions can tell them when and where to play.