When are we gonna stop this gap is closing nonsense?

The South has dominated rugby since the beginning of time. New Zealand, South Africa and more recently Australia have been and still are streets ahead of the home unions. Yet some people constantly utter the same line that the gap between the North and South is getting smaller. Repeating and repeating it doesn't make it fact.

Australia are savaged by injury, and the shining light of the North can't even beat them. In New Zealand the All Blacks have humiliated the Irish twice in a three test series. In Bokkeland the Poms struggle against a rebuilding and injury affected Springboks.

the Gap is not closing. One half decent performance by the Irish doesn't change it. The socks beating australia b who had no preparation doesn't change it.

And now with Argentina being regularly being exposed to the finest rugby in the world there'll be a fourth Southern Hemisphere Giant leaping ahead of the North.

I would suggest that the home unions merged and only played internationals as the Lions, but even then NZ, RSA and Aus are too strong for them

Don't think you'll get many positive posts here. England reached world domination in 2002-3 so your first sentence is not correct I'm afraid mate. Wales had their time in the 1970s in particular as well.

I think the NH teams will be disappointed by the results but largely they have been hard fought series with the exception of the first and third test between the Irish.

I think the SH sides will be well prepared for the 4N because each side has asked questions of their SH opposition. They're playing at home and are expected to win because of home advantage and rankings advantage. Let's see now how the November tests go? You can bet if the NH teams win they'll be digging up this post!

As someone rightly pointed out a few days ago....the true division between the SH and the NH is a team who dress in Black and call themselves, appropriately enough, the All Blacks.

The other two, or indeed three (Argentina) well - they've beaten NH sides and have been beaten by them. The tag of 'invincibility' doesn't really attach itself to those sides. They have to be more competitive because they face the best side in the history of the game more often than the NH sides do. (Something you carelessly admitted to when talking about Argentina - playing the best more often improves the standards all round).

So, they (SA and AUS) play them, they learn from them, they get to know some of the weaknesses - and therefore are usually better ready to attack the NH sides too.... but they shouldn't really laugh at the NH from under the skirts of the true SH giant. We're not great at rugby up here - but neither are we blind

Ill wait till the AI's...if we get whitewashed again....then the gap is there...and will not be closed for a long time.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Ill wait till the AI's...if we get whitewashed again....then the gap is there...and will not be closed for a long time.

Tell them to paint my garden fence with creosote whilst they're at it...

SecretFly wrote:As someone rightly pointed out a few days ago....the true division between the SH and the NH is a team who dress in Black and call themselves, appropriately enough, the All Blacks.

The other two, or indeed three (Argentina) well - they've beaten NH sides and have been beaten by them. The tag of 'invincibility' doesn't really attach itself to those sides. They have to be more competitive because they face the best side in the history of the game more often than the NH sides do. (Something you carelessly admitted to when talking about Argentina - playing the best more often improves the standards all round).

So, they (SA and AUS) play them, they learn from them, they get to know some of the weaknesses - and therefore are usually better ready to attack the NH sides too.... but they shouldn't really laugh at the NH from under the skirts of the true SH giant. We're not great at rugby up here - but neither are we blind

I'm not sure how true it say NZ is above rest. What I think you find during the tours to the northern hemisphere is Wallabies and Springboks don't take it as seriously as the All Blacks. The All Blacks will go just as serious to those games as against the SH teams simply because it is never acceptable to loose and they have much pride to give anything less than 100% with a black shirt on. (I'm sure the Aussies and SAans have the pride but Aussie doesn't have 100 years of greatness to live up to while wearing that shirt and the Springboks do have some very dark history attached)

By the end of tri-nations and Super/ NPC / Currie cup etc the Australians and South Africans tend to have backed off the training intensity and become a lot more developmental with their game. Both teams tend to look really disorganised during those tours and I'm sure the Springboks just see it as end of year social trip with some rugby thrown in.(And they still win most the games “not trying”)

To say your on the same level as a team you have to capable of matching them on any given day.

When the All Blacks play at 100% the only team that could stop them is the Springboks. The Springboks at 100% and the only team that could stop them is the All Blacks. The Wallabies can take either if those two play less than 90%. No northern Hemisphere team is even close to that level.

Any of tri nation teams playing above 50-60% and only the French can stop them/us and I'm sure they do it solely with adrenaline from having there back against the wall with nothing to lose.

I'm not sure there is much gap between Australia and Wales. Wales have only lost their 3 tests out there due to giving away penalties, nearly all of these as a result of a Southern Hemispheres referees different interpretations of the break down / contact area.

I'm not saying Wales lost because of referees but I am saying we should of adapted a lot better to their interpretations and maybe at least had 1 Northern Hemisphere referee in one of the games so at least we could of had a chance to play under more familiar interpretations. We played a good team, they put us under pressure and many of our players reverted to type and fell foul of different interpretations.

Still if someone had said to me at the end of a hard World Cup season that this Welsh team would go to Australia, play a strong side and come away with 3 narrow losses I don't think anyone would of been too disheartened. You only have to look at 1991 when we lost 63-3 and 71-6 to see what can happen out there. Wales have done well.

Agreed, even in 2002/2003 Englands advantage over the All Blacks and Australia was minimal in fact i always belived New Zealand to be the better side but lost a couple of close ones. The step up in standard since that era is incredible, the All Blacks were always magnificent in attack but they just have every area covered. Powerful pack, good lineout, breakdown, unmatched attack and excellent defense.

Actually Shifty I think you'll find plenty of Welsh people upset with the fact that in 3 tests Wales were in a position to close out the game and didn't. A loss is a loss and it should hurt. No comfort should be taken from losing. Harsh but true.

So not need to speak about the All Blacks game because we all see this and not so much to say except that when the all blacks one day reveal the problem so quickly is getting solve. For example just last October was worry about who replace Daniel Carter? And now we know is Aaron Cruden already who win the game in just 20 minutes before get injured. And then Beauden Barret play very well if not spectacular for 60 more! Also who will replace Richie McCaw get an answer! and then finally new Brad Thorn show up and play like a professional with 20 caps already on debut. Amazing. Liam Messam play the game of his potential and now the back row look covered. 60-0 and no DC, Read or Nonu. Who would thinking like this before kick off? Not so many by prediction poll.

Second my mind is about "THE GAP". Now I wonder this riddle : Is "The Gap" Between the ears?

Yes, once more Wales make the winning position on 73 minutes with a lead to the score board and get the possession in Australian 22 by some good work. But once again somehow they manage to lose again with another two stupid mind melt implosion penalties to give the game to Australia on a silver plate and while wearing white gloves and saying "thank you for rogering my hopes" like some submissive.

Then Ireland aparently go missing in the mind for 80 minutes and not showing up at all. No spirit. No fightback. No mettle. Just surrendering.

So... what is the question or discussion?

Edit: I was replying to anotherworldofpain. For some reason his topic has been merged into this one

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Actually Shifty I think you'll find plenty of Welsh people upset with the fact that in 3 tests Wales were in a position to close out the game and didn't. A loss is a loss and it should hurt. No comfort should be taken from losing. Harsh but true.

I'm not that upset, I never like seeing Wales lose, but I am also realistic, firstly the boys have been playing rugby since the World Cup without a break, then we lose our coach before the tour due to an accident. Wales have come to Australia and competed really well, under the circumstances. I think these defeats will build character and strength in the squad, and will focus them. Besides we will be playing Southern Hemisphere teams 3 times on tours now so we will have more than enough oppertunity to bridge the gap in the future.

anotherworldofpain wrote:
Then Ireland aparently go missing in the mind for 80 minutes and not showing up at all. No spirit. No fightback. No mettle. Just surrendering.

Guilty on all accounts I'm afraid . Pint for AWOP

Well certainly not going to argue with you but I hope the players don't share that attitude. They came here wanting to prove they could win, they played well enough to win but sadly didn't. Sometimes realism all too easily slides to defeatism and indeed v.v.

Chin up rodders just the game and everyone know Ireland much better than this scoreline.

I am a bit sad to see BOD end his legacy about combat NZ on the bum note. He look too upset even for his usual after-the-match diplomatic speech.

For the recording I thought that the yellow card was very unfair again this week and Kearney only inches away from a great intercept! There was only the other same case early on in the game that was more look like the deliberate knock down and was just call to the scrum! Tough luck on that one!

I thought Poite let the scrum engage too early all day and was big contrast to Owens last week.

gowales wrote:So... what is the question or discussion?

There are never discussions with AWOP's views on rugby. The discussion comes later on what he has actually said and what it should have been.

When the guy asked BOD in the interview whether they would see him again in NZ, he looked peed off for sure.

Yeah I noticed that to, don't blame him. What did he say, muff burger in queenstown or something.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:

gowales wrote:So... what is the question or discussion?

There are never discussions with AWOP's views on rugby. The discussion comes later on what he has actually said and what it should have been.

My point is about "is the gap a mental problem?" I think Wales are hard-wired to losing because pscyhological damage of years in children watch the Wales team lose. NH teams not fight back if they go down points early.

I think the NH players just know/think that the opposition has better players.

EBOP wrote:Yeah I noticed that to, don't blame him. What did he say, muff burger in queenstown or something.

http://www.fergburger.com. Worth the trip to Queenstown just for lunch.

kiwi4ever wrote:

SecretFly wrote:As someone rightly pointed out a few days ago....the true division between the SH and the NH is a team who dress in Black and call themselves, appropriately enough, the All Blacks.

The other two, or indeed three (Argentina) well - they've beaten NH sides and have been beaten by them. The tag of 'invincibility' doesn't really attach itself to those sides. They have to be more competitive because they face the best side in the history of the game more often than the NH sides do. (Something you carelessly admitted to when talking about Argentina - playing the best more often improves the standards all round).

So, they (SA and AUS) play them, they learn from them, they get to know some of the weaknesses - and therefore are usually better ready to attack the NH sides too.... but they shouldn't really laugh at the NH from under the skirts of the true SH giant. We're not great at rugby up here - but neither are we blind

I'm not sure how true it say NZ is above rest. What I think you find during the tours to the northern hemisphere is Wallabies and Springboks don't take it as seriously as the All Blacks. The All Blacks will go just as serious to those games as against the SH teams simply because it is never acceptable to loose and they have much pride to give anything less than 100% with a black shirt on. (I'm sure the Aussies and SAans have the pride but Aussie doesn't have 100 years of greatness to live up to while wearing that shirt and the Springboks do have some very dark history attached)

By the end of tri-nations and Super/ NPC / Currie cup etc the Australians and South Africans tend to have backed off the training intensity and become a lot more developmental with their game. Both teams tend to look really disorganised during those tours and I'm sure the Springboks just see it as end of year social trip with some rugby thrown in.(And they still win most the games “not trying”)

To say your on the same level as a team you have to capable of matching them on any given day.

When the All Blacks play at 100% the only team that could stop them is the Springboks. The Springboks at 100% and the only team that could stop them is the All Blacks. The Wallabies can take either if those two play less than 90%. No northern Hemisphere team is even close to that level.

Any of tri nation teams playing above 50-60% and only the French can stop them/us and I'm sure they do it solely with adrenaline from having there back against the wall with nothing to lose.

Kiwi, I have never thought about it that way, but there is some sense into you theory, even though the percentages may be debatbale.

gowales wrote:I think the NH players just know/think that the opposition has better players.

Sometimes they dont, then they lose and the penny drops