There is life beyond World Cup
22 May 2006
Keo. in his Business Day column, writes that the game of rugby is stronger than a six week World Cup competition and it is ludicrous that leading players should be wrapped in cotton wool and withdrawn from the domestic scene in order to try and win the damn competition.
No coach can plan to win the World Cup. A coach can plan to get to the play-offs, but once in the semi-finals it becomes a lottery. A poor 20 minutes, as New Zealand discovered in 1999, is all it takes for an empire to crumble in the play-offs.
Too much emphasis is being placed on the World Cup and too many other competitions suffer unnecessarily because of it. The World Cup is not the cash cow that feeds rugby in South Africa, New Zealand, England and the like. It is the all-year round fare that pays the salaries of players and brings in the revenue.
In South Africa the leading Springboks won’t play in the Currie Cup for the next two seasons and there is a proposal to use them sparingly in next year’s Super 14. New Zealand, whose obsession with the World Cup is even greater than South Africa’s, has withdrawn players from the domestic NPC and also wants most of the World Cup squad protected from the demands of the 2007 Super 14.
It is madness.
Here’s an option. Why not can the Super 14 and Tri Nations next year. Why not can all rugby between now and the 2007 World Cup. That way no coach can have an excuse about injuries or player fatigue. That way there won’t be a squabble about player payments because there won’t be any money to pay them.
How rugby’s prominent investors can stand by and allow national coaches to pick and choose when their stars play is beyond comprehension. Imagine if the likes of England, France, Brazil, Germany, Spain, Holland and Italy’s national coaches had asked to withdraw all their national squad players from all club competition a year ago to prepare for the World Cup? It would never have been entertained because soccer is professional, whereas rugby still tries to marry amateur romanticism with corporate commitment.
Soccer sees the World Cup as part of the calendar. It does not represent THE calendar.
Thierry Henry and Steven Gerrard, to name but two, have played close to 50 matches this season. But they go to soccer’s World Cup as two of the most influential players when assessing France and England’s prospects. It is the nature of the profession.
And that is what rugby after 11 years of legalized player payment still can’t come to terms with. It is no longer a sport where you pick and choose what suits you and do it for the love of the game. It is a job that comes with responsibility to those who pay the bills.
256 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] Show All
23 May 2006, 11:16 am
pierre,
Look at Chris Jack’s last eighteen months and tell me that any Bok has been overplayed.
I want to see the best take on the best every year every game. Not once every 4 years between players that were the best two years previously and then were rested while new youngsters came through. Just like next year when De Wet barry runs out in the WC and Barritt or Cooke are playing CC.
23 May 2006, 11:17 am
The only way to get players to rest more is to scrap the Super 14 and the Tri nations. Go back to playing club rugby, even the bloody Springboks. Bring back the Easter club championships and only there after start with the curriecup. Bring back decent tours like All Blacks in SA for a 6 week tour playing 4 tests and a couple of midweek games. Bring the British lions an go there. Stop the end of year simple player burn out tours.
The paying public would like to see NZ play the Falcons on a tuesday and the Boks on Saturday. That way it will ensure that you have at least 30 players in your squad that can play test rugby.
For once I would like “Moaner White†to stop complaining. He moans abbout the players playing too much but also states that his captain won’t get much rest.
Why not set an example your bloody *******???????
23 May 2006, 11:17 am
Pierre, It may well determine who is the World Champ for 4 years….. But on the other hand, NOT.
England won their WC and within 2 years they sank to 6th in the world… why…
same tactics we are using, they kept to the same squad and after the WC when they were all injured, they had no backup.
23 May 2006, 11:23 am
agree pierre
Comparing the playing hazards of soccer players and rugby players is like comparing michael schumaker’s progam to his motorcyle equivelent.
23 May 2006, 11:39 am
everybody who is going on about Not resting players is in fact saying that without the handfull of Springbok players, the balance of players not in the Bok squad are of absolutely no value and no rugby of any quality can be played with them. I cant help but notice with some interest that these are some of the same posters who not long ago were saying that Jake had not picked the best players anyway. have you all suddenly changed your minds, or have you been confused all along?
23 May 2006, 11:48 am
jake white,
look at the average age of the Eng squad you refer to and then look at the average age of the Bok squad. the reason why the Eng squad went down so far is not confined to a few injuries. They lost their Coach, talismanic Captain, and several players retired. On top of that they had several injuries, including one at the vital 10 spot. You cannot compare the two squads.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.