You're going to see less of that in rugby as the new five year limit on project players takes effect
You're going to see less of that in rugby as the new five year limit on project players takes effect
the thing about rugby union is there's literally only one nation in the world (min 1m population) where it's the most played sport (New Zealand), it's a minority sport everywhere else in the world, so relatively speaking so much easier to conquer. New Zealand's dominance in and of itself is proof of that.
Genuinely, what the Irish cricket team have done over the last 18 years is far more impressive than what the rugby team have done (beating Pakistan, West Indies, England, Bangladesh in World Cups) while having so little participation and losing their generational talent (Eoin Morgan) to England.
It's like being a team like Iceland and having a player who is as good as Salah or Mbappe and he ends up playing for England because Ireland were only an associate member who didn't have test status (we now do). Then despite losing to him, you end up beating the likes of Argentina, France, Italy etc.
ame for Hockey, getting to a WC is an achievement, Women getting to a WC final would be on par with the mens football teams dong the same though thats not a participation things as much as a measure of the achievement.
Would it? Ireland are 13th in the world in women's hockey, and there's only 83 countries in the rankings. Amazing and all as it was that the got through to a World Cup final (one of very very few Irish teams to do that at any sport at any level), I think it'd rank much closer to the same achievement in rugby than football.
That happens plenty in football too. The five year rule is now much of a muchness across both sports. Absolutely tons of football players have played for countries they have no connection to other than residency. The only reason we haven't done it is because our domestic league isn't strong enough or rich enough to start bringing in half decent Brazilians etc.
Bookmarks