On professionalism and our World Cup rivals

One of yesterday’s readers asked: ‘How many of [the USA’s World Cup] guys are professional? Can we assume all the other teams in our pool consist entirely of pros?’

Helpful as Gainline.us readers are, the first question already has been answered: seven are paid to play in Europe. In the regard to the second, Samoa and Tonga are not, and like America, their stars compete overseas.

There are two primary reasons why I would use an alternate yardstick for measuring our opponents. One, the IRB has devised a useful system of classifying countries in ‘tiers,’ and since Dublin effectively has been splitting the national team’s bills with CIPP dues payers, it makes sense to understand how we’re being evaluated.

Briefly, tier 1 comprises the traditional powers. Tier 2 includes Canada, Fiji, Japan, Romania, Samoa, Tonga, and the US. The characteristics of these countries vary – some are large, some are small, some have pro leagues and/or ‘cross border’ tournaments, some ‘export’ top players – save for the fact that none of them consistently defeat T1 countries. The rest of the world falls into lower tiers.

So, there are two countries in our pool which are considered to be in our class. Samoa is 11th in the IRB rankings (these guys think of everything), and Tonga recently moved up to 14th, passing the Eagles, now down to 15th from 13th at the start of May.

Two, ‘professionalism’ describes a competitive environment but does not predetermine outcomes. Commercial rugby entails more than advanced rugby infrastructure, defined as the quality of top leagues and the pathways leading to them. It also requires the ability and willingness of a country’s people and businesses to spend entertainment and/or marketing dollars in support of sports entertainment.

Neither Samoa nor Argentina have professional leagues, but one is T2 and the other T1. Japan is highly professionalized, but nowhere near Scotland, which also may soon export all of its best players, as two of its three pro teams are defunct or heading that way.

Now consider that Australia had just three pro Super 14 franchises (essentially 125 or so full-time players) when it won the 1999 World Cup.

Aussie-born Belmont Shore coach Jonnie Cox is among a growing number who suggest the US would raise its standards should top clubs became competitive with the world’s best amateur teams, such as Cox’s home club, Sydney University. Leading ‘Uni’ players go to the New South Wales Waratahs, and some on to the Wallabies, but note the basis of success is not a full-time, professionalized club competition.

(By the by, it is interesting to note that the ‘post professional’ Mike Hercus plays for Belmont while holding down a job arranged by USA Rugby chair Kevin Roberts.)

The USA has never beaten England or South Africa, falling 43-20 in its last match against either of two, versus the Springboks in Houston in 2001. America’s historical record against Tonga is 1-1; against Samoa it is 0-2 with both losses by 7 points.

Separately, flyhalf Hercus will captain the Eagles in France, US coach Peter Thorburn said yesterday in an email.

USA 2007 World Cup schedule
England          September 8      Lens   
Tonga            September 12    Montpelier
Samoa            September 26    St. Etienne
South Africa    September 30    Montpelier

Comments

[performance]

The excuse that's always made for our losses to Canada - "they have more professional players" is purly that...an excuse...in reality, Canada has more professional players because Rugby has been run better and with more foresight in Canada. We'd be better off basing the Eagles in Europe so that they can play more games.

[JR]

Canada also has more amateurs than professionals on their RWC team.

When we hear the Eagles-Thorburn's version, it was a story of amateurs vs pro's. We never had a chance.

Turns out they have a few more pro's than us. What gives with the spin ?

[JR]

Did anyone see the story in the NY Times yesterday ?

There are three types of rugby press: bad (what we mostly get), good (what we seldom get) and missed chance (which this story was).

It was a story about the USA captain, who calls Aussie home, a kiwi coach and a English ceo.

Never once did it mention American rugby. Fair enough we can't control what the media writes. But the captain should get over himself and talk about his teammates. Give the mic to Gross or Emrick, anyone from the middle of the country.

Win or lose this is starting to get a very bad feel to it.

[victor]

this is all so tiresome - NY Times story and and our hometown bloggers are all negative - international pundits give the USA no chance of winning at the RWC - maybe we should all play badminton!

[awgorbdls rzampv]

slhcbq czyvljrxk ocawpvmhu kulorzs nqxomv zfpqenbk cxdk