Rugby now more popular than football AND GAA?!

[AlaskaFox]

Rugby's Top 25 teams. Imagine the score if Ireland played Chile:
1 New Zealand 91.43
2 Australia 87.99
3 France 84.70
4 South Africa 84.34
5 England 82.34
6 Wales 81.01
7 Argentina 80.28
8 Ireland 79.25
9 Tonga 76.63
10 Samoa 75.81
11 Scotland 75.44
12 Italy 73.99
13 Canada 72.92
14 Georgia 71.09
15 Japan 70.45
16 Fiji 68.78
17 United States 65.63
18 Romania 63.98
19 Namibia 61.24
20 Russia 60.54
21 Uruguay 60.47
22 Spain 60.33
23 Chile 59.52
24 Portugal 59.30
25 Belgium 57.02

[Charlie Darwin]

The expectation levels for national football side still far exceeds that of the rugby team. I can't believe people still celebrate triple crowns for example. Rugby WC 2007 was a disaster for Ireland and last year no better, before a ball was kicked Ireland were in the 1/4 finals so really they fell at the first hurdle. Imagine if the most talented Ireland soccer team had similar achievements. For the last decade Ireland have had one of the best rugby squads, some top class individuals and a set up that has nothing but advantages.....one six nations title. For Ireland's soccer team it's not good enough to qualify anymore, the style counts too!!

To the big list of reasons above why people turned from soccer etc etc. Just two reasons to stick with it. Love football, love Ireland. Otherwise you are a fair weathered event junkie, period.

I don't think a direct comparison in terms of achievement is really possible. You're right the rugby team has never achieved more than the bare minimum expectation at a World Cup (though the win over Australia is rightly regarded as a milestone) but the 6 Nations is very tight in the sense that the top four teams are generally quite close in terms of quality, and two of those teams dwarf us in terms of player resources. The rugby team has not achieved as much as it could or perhaps should but that shouldn't mask the reality of how much they've brought the game forward here.

You're right, though, that the soccer team does have different expectations (some of them unreasonable, like the style of football), but again I think we've had the players to qualify for more tournaments than we have.

[Stuttgart88]

Some good points above, all round.

I agree with the above comments that the club game may soon put pressure on the national rugby team in terms of popularity, although the structure of Irish rugby can contain the usual issues that this presents in other countries and other sports.

I think that Ireland being a small, relatively insignificant peripheral country (and one with a chip on its shoulder wrt the UK) has issues with big sport.

(1) We're almost always on the outside looking in on big sport. In football we get invited to the party from time to time, but usually go home early. In rugby, we're very much on the inside. We win European club competitions and make our presence felt in the international arena. (That said, I think our perceived success in international terms doesn't stand up to close scrutiny.) But it's an international sport, unlike GAA, and we usually beat England. That's enough for most.

(2) I think "bandwagoning" is a bit of a cliché, but there is no doubt in my mind that "BIRGing" (Basking in Reflected Glory, a well known concept among sports marketers), plays a factor in rugby's popularity. People like being associated with success, and like to do so as part of a group.

(3) Fans can also get instant gratification in rugby - none of this having to qualify for anything nonsense. In the modern era of consumerism, instant gratification is a big thing.

In football, we "participate" by aligning ourselves with dominant English brands - clubs and the EPL itself. Product marketers in Ireland like Aviva are unlikely to invite Wayne Rooney around for tea at your house, like they do with Rob Kearney! Rugby players are marketable commodities for Irish products, footballers aren't. There's no BIRGing factor associated with Given, Dunne or Keane as between them I'm not sure if they've ever even won a medal.

[AlaskaFox]

[Paddy Garcia]

Wilson is a utility player who hasn't excelled in any position. Can't see what he would bring besides versatility, and we have several players already who can cover multiple positions. Clark has the potential to be a better CB than St. Ledger, but I know who I'd trust more if we were playing tomorrow. Perhaps either player could get in ahead of Ward, but neither are specialist left-backs.

Wilson is far superior to Ward.

[tetsujin1979]

Matt Williams' account of his experiences in Paris in the Irish Times: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...312051970.html
Quite a good article, actually. Until this.

If that was an international soccer crowd, there would have been a riot.

Once again, who asked him to compare it to soccer, and why is he conveniently ignoring the evidence of how an international soccer crowd did react in Paris after what happened the last time we were there?

[tetsujin1979]

There's an excellent response to the above article in today's Irish Times: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...312116408.html
Declan Bannon, I salute you sir

[Mento]

'Knackerball', 'wendyball', 'chavball' etc.
Edit: Shane Horgan on Off the Ball has just reiterated the exact same point the guy in the airport made i.e. if this had been soccer fans there could have been trouble.

Link anywhere?

[Qwerty]

Complete nonsense about a riot had they been soccer fans, no evidence whatsoever. Surely there must be bleeding heart liberal soccer fans who are offended by this? Why isn't this Williams person being forced to apologize??!! Why does he still have a job!!??

But rugby has been a huge success, 20 years ago an inter-provincial game might be watched by under 1000 fans, now a Leinster v Munster game fills Lansdowne Rd or Thomond Park.

With regard to the success or otherwise of the Ireland team, rugby is much better at providing a decisive result, you get very few draws in rugby and to be honest the better team usually wins, and results don't hinge as much on own goals, bad referring calls etc. The Ireland soccer team has actually won very very few games against decent opposition in the past 20yrs.

In soccer putting 10 men behind the ball is a strategy that often works to get a result, in rugby you can't play for a draw.

Rugby is a far superior game to soccer when played at the _highest_ level - in addition there is no rampant cheating, diving and feigning injury. I'm embarrassed sometimes watching soccer at the antics grown men try and get away with. Waving imaginary yellow cards, so much BS in soccer today. It's almost like the WWF at times. I miss the old Division 1 days, the English game is dying ...

[jbyrne]

rugby is much better at providing a decisive result, you get very few draws in rugby and to be honest the better team usually wins, and results don't hinge as much on own goals, bad referring calls etc.

wales v Ireland 6N '11 and '12 are matches decided by bad ref calls that come to mind straight away. france should have been a awarded a very kickable pen in the last few mins of the wc final to win and were not. 100s more examples i am sure but they don't get the sky 24 hr coverage that football does.

Rugby is a far superior game to soccer when played at the _highest_ level - in addition there is no rampant cheating, diving and feigning injury.

you're right, most rugby teams don't spend most of a match deliberately offside at rucks. and sure who knows what's going on in the middle of a ruck, scrum or maul most of the time?

also, is there anything in the world as cowardly as eye gouging and spear tackling?

rugby, the purest sport in the world played only by fair minded gentlemen!!

[elroy]

Complete nonsense about a riot had they been soccer fans, no evidence whatsoever. Surely there must be bleeding heart liberal soccer fans who are offended by this? Why isn't this Williams person being forced to apologize??!! Why does he still have a job!!??

But rugby has been a huge success, 20 years ago an inter-provincial game might be watched by under 1000 fans, now a Leinster v Munster game fills Lansdowne Rd or Thomond Park.

With regard to the success or otherwise of the Ireland team, rugby is much better at providing a decisive result, you get very few draws in rugby and to be honest the better team usually wins, and results don't hinge as much on own goals, bad referring calls etc. The Ireland soccer team has actually won very very few games against decent opposition in the past 20yrs.

In soccer putting 10 men behind the ball is a strategy that often works to get a result, in rugby you can't play for a draw.

Rugby is a far superior game to soccer when played at the _highest_ level - in addition there is no rampant cheating, diving and feigning injury. I'm embarrassed sometimes watching soccer at the antics grown men try and get away with. Waving imaginary yellow cards, so much BS in soccer today. It's almost like the WWF at times. I miss the old Division 1 days, the English game is dying ...

Good post up until the very last paragraph. If this is personal opinion then you are entitled to it. But as a general sweeping statement, I find it very hard to see how rugby is a superior game to soccer. A game where the likes of spear/tap tackles, eye gouging are far from infrequent. Some of the cheating in soccer is indespicable but you are very naive if you think that does not go on in rugby, many countries most notably NZ play very close to the rules each time and in many cases beyond - Richie McCaw is a classic example. The reality is that alot of people who follow rugby dont know the extent of the rules and also it is alot harder to see cheating in the ruck etc than it is in soccer. Also how often do you see players call for a try when it is clear that it is not, very similar to soccer in that case.

The respect for the referee is something from rugby that I do admire. But has often been pointed out, in rugby it is easier to take your frustrations at a refereee out on the opponent.

[Macy]

But has often been pointed out, in rugby it is easier to take your frustrations at a refereee out on the opponent.

Fair points on either side of the debate in general, but I really don't buy the above and just think it's excuse making for the lack of action from FIFA, UEFA and national FAs. It's nothing to do with being able to take your frustrations out on an opponent - if they started reversing free kicks, advancing the 10 yards etc in football (including making a free a penalty), I think players would get over their frustrations pretty quickly too.

[Murfinator]

you're right, most rugby teams don't spend most of a match deliberately offside at rucks. and sure who knows what's going on in the middle of a ruck, scrum or maul most of the time?

also, is there anything in the world as cowardly as eye gouging and spear tackling?

rugby, the purest sport in the world played only by fair minded gentlemen!!

Unsporting play happens and guess what? It's severely punished. For every notable case of gouging, spear tackling or unsporting play the players have been hit with huge suspensions and plenty of coverage to highlight the shame of their crime. That one tackle by Bradley Davies the other week ended his Six Nations, when Quinlan eye gouged Cullen he missed a Lions tour and never played for Ireland again. Wales lost a world cup semi final in no small part because of a spear tackle by Warburton. While things like this exist the consequences are huge and a massive deterrence for players, its never ever beneficial to do these things anymore.

Tell me what happened to De Jong when he kung fu kicked Xabi Alonso in the chest in the world cup final? Or that recent Hutton tackle on Shane Long? Those weren't just zealous tackles, they were vicious acts that could have caused serious bodily harm. And nothing whatsoever happens. Worst case scenario for any of those assaults is a red card and a few games rest, clearly the big suspensions are reserved for when somebody calls someone a name on the pitch.
There's at the very least a sense of justice in Rugby thats lacking in soccer.

[Charlie Darwin]

I hope you don't mean to equate a late challenge with a deliberate attempt to blind an opponent. Rugby suspensions are heavy because people die or suffer permanent disabilities that can inhibit their ability to work ever again. Even so, 8 weeks or whatever for an eye gouge is pitiful.

[Stuttgart88]

In all walks of life one should question the prevailing conventional wisdom. If more Irish people had questioned the conventional wisdom of our economic boom we'd be in a much better place. I don't think the conventional wisdom surrounding rugby stacks up (overly positive), nor do I think the conventional wisdom of football does (overly negative).

I think rugby at the highest level (or any level) can be thrilling but the recent RWC, supposedly the highest level of all, totally failed to live up to what Qwerty says.

Bad and inconsistent refereeing (that altered the outcome of the final), below par performances from many teams, reckless behaviour from players and so on. Rugby players dive & cheat too. Marcus Horan in last year's Magners League final was pathetic. Rugby players serially disrupt ball illegally, "accidentally" get in the way of a full back who has just kicked a Garryowen and so on. Alan Quinlan's eye gouging of Leo Cullen? If rugby players could get an advantage by diving, they would. Why do you think lifting in the line-out was legalised? Because everyone was cheating by lifting in the lineout!

Football at the highest level can also be exhilerating. Barcelona's 5-0 win over Real last season was a thing of sheer beauty. Germany's dismantling of a good Argentina team in 2010. Barcelona's dismantling of Man United. Even the EPL that I am so quick to criticise threw up some really memorable games recently. The Christmas & New Year programme was one of the best ever.
Both sports have their ups and downs. Sure, certain parts of football are cringeworthy but I watch a lot of games and most pass off without anything I'd be embarrassed about. I personally think the WWF reference is apt: the EPL feels that any publicity is good publicity. Anything that keeps the sport on the back pages is good news, so the bad bits get plenty of airtime. The EPL & the FA should be ashamed of their efforts to properly enforce their "Respect" agenda.

But again, rugby isn't exempt. Leicester vs Northampton(?) witnessed a fight between both coaches and foul and abusive language towards the ref. Bloodgate at Harlequins. Delon Armitage!

Professional sport is a dirty business. The more professional rugby becomes, the dirtier it will get.

Wrt defensive tactics, I think proper enthusiasts of each code will appreciate tactical play if it bears results. I for one was very impressed by how England got to the final in RWC 2007 by ditching their usual game in favour of a dour tight game dependent on their front 3 (or 5). It wasn't pretty, but it worked. You play to your strengths. If the floating fan can't appreciate that, then that's his / her loss.

As for Matt Williams. His comments are bad enough, but the Irish Times sports editor's decision to publish them is worse, and further confirms my opinion that there is a deep-rooted institutional bias in the Irish media.

[Stuttgart88]

Wrt respect for referees, there's very little argument there except - in my opinion - the intense physical nature of rugby means that the game would simply not work without that code of respect. It'd be sheer chaos. Football still works even when refs are abused.


I also actually like the way footballers can interact with their referee, though in an awful lot of cases it goes way too far. This could be acted upon much harder in my opinion.

The number of occurrences of intolerable behaviour towards refs doesn't tally with the supposed conventional wisdom either.

[Stuttgart88]

Unsporting play happens and guess what? It's severely punished. For every notable case of gouging, spear tackling or unsporting play the players have been hit with huge suspensions and plenty of coverage to highlight the shame of their crime. That one tackle by Bradley Davies the other week ended his Six Nations, when Quinlan eye gouged Cullen he missed a Lions tour and never played for Ireland again. Wales lost a world cup semi final in no small part because of a spear tackle by Warburton. While things like this exist the consequences are huge and a massive deterrence for players, its never ever beneficial to do these things anymore.

Tell me what happened to De Jong when he kung fu kicked Xabi Alonso in the chest in the world cup final? Or that recent Hutton tackle on Shane Long? Those weren't just zealous tackles, they were vicious acts that could have caused serious bodily harm. And nothing whatsoever happens. Worst case scenario for any of those assaults is a red card and a few games rest, clearly the big suspensions are reserved for when somebody calls someone a name on the pitch.
There's at the very least a sense of justice in Rugby thats lacking in soccer.

The problem with soccer is that people who know better and who help form public opinion don't see anything wrong with the likes of Hutton's tackle. Nor did anyone in New Zealand or the IRB see anything wrong with a premeditated and violent assault on Brian O'Driscoll mind you.

[Qwerty]

wales v Ireland 6N '11 and '12 are matches decided by bad ref calls that come to mind straight away. france should have been a awarded a very kickable pen in the last few mins of the wc final to win and were not. 100s more examples i am sure but they don't get the sky 24 hr coverage that football does.




you're right, most rugby teams don't spend most of a match deliberately offside at rucks. and sure who knows what's going on in the middle of a ruck, scrum or maul most of the time?

also, is there anything in the world as cowardly as eye gouging and spear tackling?

rugby, the purest sport in the world played only by fair minded gentlemen!!

The Wales v Ireland game was decided by Paddy Wallace coming inside to try and make the conversion of the try - that wasn't - easier. Sure bad by call by referee and unsporting of Wales but the I'm not saying that rugby games are never decided by bad decisions but less so that soccer, we'll have to agree to disagree. It's apples and oranges anyhow.

I've watched the NZ v FRA final twices and I'm happy with the games was refereed, France had their chances and didn't take them. They didn't deserve to win the Cup anyhow and if you want to find a dirty team look no further than France.

I don't know about fair minded gentlemen but rugby players are men and not fannies that wear gloves when it's a little chilly and act like little girls when they weren't even touched!

[Qwerty]

Good post up until the very last paragraph. If this is personal opinion then you are entitled to it. But as a general sweeping statement, I find it very hard to see how rugby is a superior game to soccer. A game where the likes of spear/tap tackles, eye gouging are far from infrequent. Some of the cheating in soccer is indespicable but you are very naive if you think that does not go on in rugby, many countries most notably NZ play very close to the rules each time and in many cases beyond - Richie McCaw is a classic example. The reality is that alot of people who follow rugby dont know the extent of the rules and also it is alot harder to see cheating in the ruck etc than it is in soccer. Also how often do you see players call for a try when it is clear that it is not, very similar to soccer in that case.

The respect for the referee is something from rugby that I do admire. But has often been pointed out, in rugby it is easier to take your frustrations at a refereee out on the opponent.

I'm talking about entertainment value, I'm talking about a real engaging contest particularly in the Southern Hemisphere. Sure there is some violence but it is rare and punished severely. Please don't start on the McCaw thing, he is a great player in the truest sense, yes some refs are too lenient with him but you can't blame him for that. The role of a 7 is to steal the ball FFS.

I should say that I'm not against a bit of cheating per se, it is OK to push the boundaries and see what you can get away with, as they say in the NFL if you're not cheating you're not trying but I think as I watch more rugby, when I watch a soccer game and see the silly and frankly embarrassing carry on of grown men I shake my head. I would say that feigning injury is gross dishonesty and it is rampant in soccer.

Maybe I'm guilty of having a preference for certain types of cheating! Personally I find rugby a better game in terms of excitement and spectacle and overall a more honest game. Yes rugby will have isolated incidents of real violence but overall it's a more honest game. I can't imagine how anyone who watches both codes could disagree with that.

I suppose you would have to say that players are players, they respond to the incentives that they are presented with, their behavior is influenced by the mores of the game at any given time.

What players, managers, referees and especially the fans are willing to accept is effectively what they will get. It can change, maybe that is a discussion worth having, how to make soccer a better game with less cheating.

[Qwerty]

I hope you don't mean to equate a late challenge with a deliberate attempt to blind an opponent. Rugby suspensions are heavy because people die or suffer permanent disabilities that can inhibit their ability to work ever again. Even so, 8 weeks or whatever for an eye gouge is pitiful.

Do you honestly think the idiots who engage in eye gouging are trying to blind their opponent?