Northern Hemisphere vs Southern Hemisphere
I am curious, I want peoples opinion on which hemisphere plays the better rugby, who is generally better, and maybe a comparison between Super Rugby and The Heineken Cup, all for the purpose's of research. Throw in your picks for north and south too, not sure if this has been done before, but I want opinions of those from across the world, and there experiences and what not. Cheers.
I personally believe the Highlanders would fit right in with the European Clubs, based on their forward orientated rugby.
and the highlanders haven't won a game this season so far.
Clermont would give most SH teams a run for their money, as would Leinster on top form.
The Southern Hemisphere are better, no one can deny this. If you do, you're deluded and you need to look at the results over the past 100 years (in international rugby anyway).
Club rugby wise; Clermont, Leinster and possibly Toulouse (on form) could do well in Super rugby but the others are all on a much lower level.
However, i personally think that the Northern Hemisphere has caught up (international) a lot in the past 6 years or so (performance wise that is!) and it will continue as rugby continues to grow in popularity in these countries.
If you're talking about style of rugby then again it's obvious that the Southern Hemisphere play the more open, flowing rugby. That's primarily to do with super rugby imo.
But then again European fans have different tastes and we like the nitty gritty stuff that a lot of Southern hemisphere fans moan about (mostly Australians). So i don't think you can really say which is the "better" style.
Last edited by welshglory; 16-04-2013 at 08:52 PM.
How can anyone enjoy a game that finishes 9-3? You NH are a funny bunch!
What intrigues me are these huge Northern Hemisphere seasons, a lot of people have said that this is a contributing factor to poor results internationally? But personally I love NH club rugby, the atmospheres seem comparable to none. I am not looking for the "better" style of rugby because like I said, take Highlanders for example, there are teams across both hemispheres who play very similar styles of rugby, watching Clermont in the Heineken Cup the other week, I was surprized and shocked at how much of a running, open flowing game they were playing, and Montpellier were just getting done in.
I like Southern Rugby but I hate the lack of fighting and the number of tackle failed.
In Northern Hermisphere, we have sometimes less show but we have more witness because the players of rugby are more warriors.
The spirit of rugby is first a fight with some rules.
Super rugby is far more attacking and there is more of an emphasis on skill in training according to the likes of Haskell who has played both. We can enjoy games that end 9-3 as we often have worse conditions up here and it makes it impossible to play the super brand of rugby. I have to say though at times the lack of commitment to defence etc in Super Rugby is appalling and some of the brilliant tries that get scored in it wouldnt be scored as the defences are tighter. And its rubbish that only those teams could compete. Any top8 premiership side would be far better than the lions, cheetahs, rebels or highlanders, adn i believe the likes of Clermont, Leinster, Leicester, Toulon and Quins would compete at the top of the table given the opportunity to play that kind of rugby. Harlequins actually play very attractive attacking rugby on a hard pitch.
The Heineken Cup is a higher intensity than the Super 15, which I think levels out the lack of mad offloading. In the conditions were the same consistantly in both hemispheres, I reckon there'd be no doubt over the fact that NH club rugby is superior. However, that's not to say the international game is the same, and results and world rankings speak for that.
It's all a preference thing... I enjoy watching a flawlessly executed backline move just as much as i enjoy watching a forward pack absolutely dominate at the breakdown! In the Southern Hemisphere you see both on display most weekends... surprisingly the Reds forward pack were immense against the Chiefs over the weekend and IMO it won them the game, good front football meant that Genia and Cooper could run riot. Sadly i don't think that in the NH you get to see back lines with as much sting as in the SH, although there Forward pack are CRAZY good!!!
I think NH is more forwards orientated (not saying SH forwards don't get any action) but if I think about big name backs I nearly always think of SH players.
Only exception to that rule is the Top 14, which (even though I'm English) I would say is the most fascinating division to watch....I find it like rugby's answer to the Champions League.
We need a real life 3 game series between the SuperRugby Champion and Heineken Cup Champion.
Well the way the Heineken Cup is going that might be the case. It could work, just got to think about any opening in the season's for both teams.
If they did play against each other you would get what u get with the nrl prems flying over to beat who ever.
Go the chiefs.
If there ever was such a competition they could play in Hong Kong or somewhere in the middle east
A northern hemisphere team vs a southern hemisphere team would be brilliant for 3 games.
Team I would name
NH is more tactical, rumbling up, tactical kicking were SH is more running rugby (except for South Africa)
Northern Hemisphere XV
2.Bismarck Du Plessis
12.Peter De Villiers
Current Form Southern Hemisphere XV
14.Willie Le Roux
I must say my form XV is biased towards Aus/Nz players as hear in nz the SA games are very early in the morning so I don't have any chance of watching them. Definitely not a fan of De Villiers but ATM he's better than Nonu,
I'd say Southern Hemispehere overall is better, as a result of a number of factors such as better conditions, it's the #1 sport etc. Although on there day a number of Nothern Hemisphere teams would easily be a match.