Well the World Cup is over! Australia are champions, and for the fourth successive occasion the northern hemisphere teams are licking their wounds after disappointing campaigns.

There has been some speculation as to the reasons for the southern hemisphere’s domination of rugby in the last 15 years? And if in fact the gap between the hemisphere’s is narrowing? As an Australian who has played rugby on both sides of the world I will do my best to explain the reason I believe for this domination, and if it will continue.

The main difference I can see between rugby in both hemisphere’s is primarily in the backs. English forwards as I can attest, I’ve played their, are perhaps not as skillful but are a match in the other areas and surpass the southern Hemisphere in the heavier conditions.

The fact is though that northern hemisphere backs are simply not as good. It is not in the area of skill that they are lacking but size, strength, and attitude. Backs in the southern hemisphere are bigger, stronger, and far more aggressive. In the southern hemisphere this means they are more likely to attempt to break the line or even the tackle and consequently their opposing number i.e. the loose forwards and centre’s are far better TACKLERS. Not just defensively but also in an aggresive sense.

I encountered this reluctance to break (and make) tackles whilst playing with teams in the UK and believe it is inherent in most northern hemisphere teams. Backs are encouraged to be skillful and speedy in the Southern Hemisphere there first prerequisite is that they can tackle, because they have got to stop the man they are marking. The inescapable fact that Jonah Lomu, Matt Burke, and Joost van Der Westhuizen are running over their smaller Northern opponents does not, however, explain why? And it is perhaps here that is where I have some new insights.

Firstly it is not money, player numbers, or even professionalism. The English and French league’s have more money and are more professional generally than the super 12. There is however an argument here that the talent is thinly spread but when you consider that the majority of the Irish, Scottish, and Welsh teams play in these league insures that the spread is not too bad.

It is not more attacking gameplans, South Africa played, and have for some time, very defensively and almost beat Australia. France have always had an attacking gameplan and have had mixed success.

It is not even player numbers, England and France have the most players in the world.

It is attitude. And this perhaps come from the grass roots of every union. Right down to the boys on the 3rd, 4th, or 5th team. In Australia some of the most competitive, even violent matches I have played in have been in the thirds. those boys want to win every bit as much as those in the “Ones”. They also want to impress the selectors, move up the grades. What this unwittingly does is make every player that little bit more competitive. It feeds up the grades in the pyramidal structure that have been put in place. It gives them the edge.

In England I believe this is the case throughout the northern hemisphere rugby is social, its alot of old men running about on a Saturday and it is coming off the ground not that worried about the result. This is not to put it down, it is bloody good fun, but it is the reason that the Five Nations are not the power houses they should be.

Will this situation continue? I doubt it, rugby in the North is becoming more competitive, the league have been restructured and game schedules have been cut. But above all there are other reason why believe England and France, maybe Wales, but definitely not Ireland and Scotland will catch up and ultimately perhaps eclipse the south.

The first reason is, I don’t think the gap is really that great, the nature of modern rugby is that small differences can be magnified into big scoreline’s very easily. The second and unavoidable reason as I mention before playing numbers. the law of averages says they have got to kick in at some stage. More players means that the chances of good ones developing, providing the environment is right, are higher.

The third is money. It is unquestionable that a European League will arrive given time. This will bring unprecedented levels of professionalism and resources to the Northern Hemisphere. Despite the problems inherent in the structure of their rugby the future looks bright for England and the world cup runners up France. But for Ireland and Scotland I can only think that there are dark times ahead.