Why is Southern Rugby Superior?

A question that never really gets addressed is the reasons behind Southern Hemisphere rugby's superiority.

SANZAR teams dominate world rankings, having only ever ceded first spot once briefly to England. SANZAR sides have been ranked 1,2,3 83% of the time, and held first spot 94% of the time.

SANZAR teams have won all but one RWC.

But why? The home nations and France hold approxkmately 400% more wealth and roughly 1000% more player resources. More stadiums, more junior coaches, more domestic competitions. More of everything.

Aside from 15 man senior domination. The SH holds the women's World Cup, dominates age grade championships, are the sevens world champs and series holders almost every single time. They are commonwealth champs too, in fact only the USA (Olympic champions) fly the flag for the NH in major competitions.  

SA, Samoa and NZ are a breeding ground for imported northern and Japanese club sides.

Trying to deny it is clearly silly.

But parking that, why? Is it Nature? Or Nurture? Or Something Else?

Well I suppose you have to look at the sanzar nations in isolation.

SA have a clear size and physicality advantage over most teams they play - the reason can be debated i.e. genetics, training, diet or some more sinister means but its a fact none the less. They also have a massive player pool and rugby is one of their main sports so its not surprising they are a real force in the game.

NZ and Australia clearly have far better skill levels than most of the NH sides. As most skill is gained before the age of 12according to current accepted coaching theories then it's likely the grassroots coaching and structure that needs to be looked at more than what is happening at elite level imo.

My belief is that because, in particular in NZs case their skill levels and technique are honed to such a high level they are more comfortable with playing the game at a higher intensity without making silly mistakes and bad decisions that dog most of the home nations at times.

Weather and the way the game is reffed is arguably a difference too, with the NH teams more set piece focused and the game is more stop start up here which means our teams sometimes struggle to adapt when facing SH opposition.

France though do have excellent ball skills and nice weather but because they are in the NH don't play regularly at the intensity needed to match the Tri Nations in more than one of games. Their club game is dragging them down too with too many overseas players and matches.

Australia are struggling to produce enough depth in key positions though so if a SH can be usurped by the NH it is the Wallabies.

The price of alcohol may indeed be an issue....

I think choice (or lack or) is a factor.

In New Zealand you've basically got three options:

a) Play rugby
b) Work in the Gollum museum
c) Move to London and get a bar job

Cyril wrote:I think choice (or lack or) is a factor.

In New Zealand you've basically got three options:

a) Play rugby
b) Work in the Gollum museum
c) Move to London and get a bar job

d) move overseas and work in merchant banking or IT

Interesting. I suspect club/school/provincial system possibly has a bit to with it in NZ. Clubs nurture junior talent, schools are uber competitive, provinces/super teams cherry pick the best.And everything is controlled by the AB's.

I think cracks are beginning to show. I'd be surprised if the golden age lasts. We have some significant systemic problems at the moment.

I always ruin these threads by being serious, which I appreciate is disrespectful to the tone and intention of the original poster. However, I do think weather plays an important part. We see plenty of positive good running rugby in the Northern Hemsiphere when the sun shines and the pitches are firm, but the majority of the season it is wet, muddy and cold and that breeds negative 10 man rugby, which also means skills do not get developed. The ability to take chances under pressure is easier if you practice them more, but we don't do it enough in this part of the world. It is one contributory factor.

rodders wrote:
The price of alcohol may indeed be an issue....

I dont know Rodders... French rugby was doing ok when players were having cigarettes and wine at half time during games.
Beside you have as many high profile players having issues with alcohool in NZ than elsewhere.
 
I sort of agree , you have to look at countries separately and there is many reason to explain the superiority of NZ (and SA) rugby over the NH one. I'd like to see the actual numbers of age group players by country though, not sure in france there is that many and one thing is for sure our standart of coaching is clearly bad considering our resources. even if that was seriously improved I dont think we would reach the quality of the NZ talent conveyor belt as rugby is totally ignored at school here.
then there is the usual competition from many many sports which need strong physical attributes such as judo, handball, basketball etc  it's not like cricket will be competing with rugby in terms of attracting players !

Like it hugehandoff, to continue being serious I think in Britain at least the variety of sports (let alone other activities) and being able to develop those hinder us slightly. I know we get the mick taken about winning nothing but when you look across the range of sports where we are there or there abouts in a lot of things; it's really quite impressive given our population. Leads to a bit of jack of all trades, master of none mentality though sometimes. Perhaps in other nations more priority is put on 'major' sports but alas I know not.

I think the SH are just harder mentally too, there's a nastiness and hardness there that northern softies struggle with.

Well in SA's case I think its down to a number of things.

a) The boere are fanatical about rugby. They live and breathe the sport. Rugby is a physical sport and their dutch lineage certainly helps... take your average boer south african and your average english south african and they're simply bigger lumps both height and width wise. You could probably count English south african bok forwards from the last decade on one hand... compared to probably a hundred boere.

Also worth noting that in the past the boere were and still in many ways are a farming people. This breeds very strong people as the work is very physical. In the past their forwards were naturally bigger when weights and nutrition were unheard of. Guys like Os Du Randt never did weights as kids... they were farm boys and grew strong by their natural environment. A legitimate reason of pre professionalism success.

b)Their set up is very good and was professional from the 80s onwards in many aspects of the game. Its the number 1 sport for white south africans so whilst they only number 6MM odd, they get the first pick of the natural sportsman (unlike NW Europe where Football has the ascendency in popularity and starting age).

c)The weather certainly breeds a more intense atmosphere. The drier and warmer weather overall breeds a more fluid, intense gameplay... compared to NW Europe where the game is for half the season played in cold, wet and slower conditions.
Just think about it.... if you spent nine months of the year, every year in near perfect running rugby conditions wouldn't your skills be better than if for half your season you spent trudging up and down in the mud???

d) Another thing I would mention is that we shouldn't forget the impact of getting one over the English in particular. Boere still have deep dislike/distrust of the UK from this single viewpoint... whether there is probably not one single afrikaner alive today who remembers life under direct British rule is not the point... the resentment is there and they raise their game against their old colonial masters.

Overall South Africans and boere especially are very competitive people.... Afrikaners, English and Coloured South Africans only count about 10-15MM people overall but they combined, anything they seriously compete in they tend to be very successful at. They have a top 3 rugby team, a top 3 cricket team, since 1994 only the USA have had more individuals become golf major winners and they're a top swimming nation too... all without comparable funding, facilities and demographic benefits of having a large number of people to choose from compared to most of their competitors.

PS - I left out Africans from the conversation as they don't really mix with the 3 non-indigenous ethnic groups in SA in terms of sport. They are very much a football and boxing based people with one or two exceptions.

Hey fa0019 great points. Do you think the ethnic and cultural diversity helps SA?.... I mean you have  a lot of bases covered there in terms of genetic strengths and weaknesses and also such a mix of ethnic groups is likely to breed a fairly competitive domestic environment.

This is a very serious topic hugehandoff, good work:)

Sorry about the random nature of this list but things that spring to mind for NZ include:

An unfair weight of public expectation. Proud history and records to maintain. Rugby culture based on skill and toughness. It's a sport for all social classes. Plenty of open public green spaces to run around on. ABs are national heroes and more important than politicians. Long list of legendary players going back 100+ years to try and live up to and not let down. Weather is both good and bad meaning a balanced style. Our first fives grow up on farms so parents can build rugby posts in the back yard to practice kicks. Hottest chicks at school want to date players in the college first XV so what better reason to strive to be good to make that team. Warrior genes. Pacific islander imigration. Young kiwi kids itching for a scrap are legally allowed to smash other kids on the rugby field. The legend of the maori side step. Pass it don't kick TV ad campaigns to promote running with the ball. Farming culture breeding tough b'stards that know a bit about hard yakka that play rugby and breed kids that play rugby. Many rugby players are hard men that hunt pigs with dogs and a knife. Ok, that'll do, don't wanna give away all our secrets:)

yes and no rodders... at the moment they can't put their best team on the field often due to cultural sensitivities... Beast is a top player but Coenie Oosthuizen should have taken game time off him at least for instance.  It doesn't matter if SA produce the best white wing the world has ever seen... he will find it very difficult to command a place in one of the few areas of strength for non-white players. See Stefan Terblanche for details.... <40 caps... he should have had 80+.
The bench specifically is often weakened as the 1st XV is always close to being first choice (bar wings) but the bench players are much weaker then it could be.

But colored players are certainly worth their weight in gold.... they offer a flare and freedom which is very un south african and compliments the brute power of the boere traditional gameplay.

I don't think there is anything wrong in saying that peoples from certain ethnic groups have a different approach to the game, often a combination is deadly.

Yeah fair points but I suppose the reality is that you have the resources, in part due to the cultural diversity there, but its structural and political issues that are causing the problems.

I just want to address the weather / ground issue.

We are seeing a trend of new hard grounded 'G' pitches pop up all over the place in recent years, in a somehow act of catching up to the USA's, Brazils' NZ's advantage of being able to play their games in optimum conditions. Infact we saw the 1st, and 2nd total artificial pitches at pro level rugby recently, which is amazing that in this day and age a slodge of poorly looked after grass can contribute to results of games worth hundreds of thousand of pounds!!!

Each nation has it's own problems, and having being extremely lucky to have visited all 3 SANZAR nations and all 5 top tier rugby nations up north it seems particularly obvious that rugby gets effected by how succesfull, how well run, and how much money other sports governing bodies are at the time.

For example a lot of money in previous seasons were thrown toward the olympics 2012, and the premier league has become THE force in world football, both of which detract money, attention and fans/participants away from the RFU, and there is nothing the RFU can do about that!

With recent activities in Welsh football, new developing stars of the last few seasons of the likes of Bale, Ramsey, Matthews, Collison all playing prem football the FAW has done a great job in near doubling junior participation in the sport, not helped any less by funding increasing 3 fold!

From what I have witnessed in NZ there are a number of high profile sports still struggling to get their acts together, with NZ football currently giving away Tshirts with numbers and names on them to entice people into the stadium for a WC qualifier, they are underfunded and undermanaged.

The cricket body is struggling apparently, for both funding and participation. And the one thing that alarms me (as a NH rugby fan) is that the 2nd most popular sport in NZ to date is netball?! both participation and fanbase according to a few net sources. With total domination of the male market like that I'd say NZ could drop rugby for another sport and be near top of the tree.

Australia are probably the SANZAR nation most hampered by other sports, League and rules both keep union in their place and well with what Australia are offering of late it looks like the ARU are struggling to compete.

I'm not saying it isn't fair on NH sides, it's not NZ's problem that NH teams have to compete with governing bodies with bigger funds, higher profiles and larger fanbases, but it does highlight the uneven footing each governing body has.

You left out the 'better at cheating' option.

I also left out "more honest about own weaknesses, hence more likely to remedy them"

The Saint wrote:You left out the 'better at cheating' option.

Doesn't explain it as Ireland and Munster are great cheaters too  .

I'd say it's mainly down to the fact that rugby is the no.1 sport in the SH nations.Even in Australia where Union isn't the top sport they have rugby league which means that kids learn the main skills of running,tackling and ball handling from an early age.

In the NH nations rugby is at best the 2nd or 3rd most popular sport and the best athletes gravitate towards different games.Young kids also don't have as much chance to learn the basic skills as soccer,cricket,gaelic football,hurling,shinty etc... don't have much in common with rugby.

The 'South Africans produce bigger players' is also debatable. They made the Argie's look small recently, but if you take the recent U20 JWC then they were far from the biggest side there.

rodders wrote:Well I suppose you have to look at the sanzar nations in isolation.

SA have a clear size and physicality advantage over most teams they play - the reason can be debated i.e. genetics, training, diet or some more sinister means but its a fact none the less. They also have a massive player pool and rugby is one of their main sports so its not surprising they are a real force in the game.

rugby is only a mian sport in 20% of our population. so it comes from a genepool of about 10 million people.

Admittedly we have underground labs.

The Saint wrote:The 'South Africans produce bigger players' is also debatable. They made the Argie's look small recently, but if you take the recent U20 JWC then they were far from the biggest side there.

The bigger players is a myth.

If that was the case asore Wales would be able to beat Australia without the help of Corbiesero, Parling, Sexton and O'Brien.

At least we can beat them without the help of BOD . #overthehill #JD2

Biltong wrote:

The Saint wrote:The 'South Africans produce bigger players' is also debatable. They made the Argie's look small recently, but if you take the recent U20 JWC then they were far from the biggest side there.

The bigger players is a myth.

No Finn McCool and Cuchulan are myths.... Ezbeth, Du Plessis and Alberts are definitely real......

Biltong wrote:

The Saint wrote:The 'South Africans produce bigger players' is also debatable. They made the Argie's look small recently, but if you take the recent U20 JWC then they were far from the biggest side there.

The bigger players is a myth.

There's no denying that there is some massive lumps coming out of that country though.

The Saint wrote:At least we can beat them without the help of BOD . #overthehill #JD2

Oh so you admit he would have helped then? #Justice4Bod #GatlandhatesIreland  

It's all about attitude if you ask me. In our stiff upper lip and keep everything fair and do not exclude the weaker people regime we live in now we are always happy with the plucky performance. The southern countries are all of the attitude win at all costs, losing is nothing, I bet during the grass roots level at school or in the clubs they do not feel obliged to give the "little kid/or less talented kid" a run out just to be fair. I know this sounds harsh but I know a lot of Aussies and when their team looses at anything they are absolutely shattered, we do not have this attitude up here, also their governments spend a lot more money on developing sports at a younger level, and our great and rich nation are cutting funding to sports, we are closing swimming pools at a rate of knots. So for me, until we are a nation (Great Britain and Ireland) that start taking the attitude that winning is everything losing is nothing then we will still be playing catch up to the big three. You just have to look at the like of Richie McCaw, he will do anything he can whilst pushing the boundaries of the rules to win a game of rugby, do any of our countries have players like him ?

There's just the one 'o' in losing LD.

There, I've fixed it you sarky git. This damn predictive spelling that I have is a F*@£$&g pain in the 4R5E.

"Predictive spelling" that old chestnut . Sorry LD, the losing and loosing thing really bothers me for some reason .

LordDowlais wrote:It's all about attitude if you ask me. In our stiff upper lip and keep everything fair and do not exclude the weaker people regime we live in now we are always happy with the plucky performance. The southern countries are all of the attitude win at all costs, losing is nothing, I bet during the grass roots level at school or in the clubs they do not feel obliged to give the "little kid/or less talented kid" a run out just to be fair. I know this sounds harsh but I know a lot of Aussies and when their team looses at anything they are absolutely shattered, we do not have this attitude up here, also their governments spend a lot more money on developing sports at a younger level, and our great and rich nation are cutting funding to sports, we are closing swimming pools at a rate of knots. So for me, until we are a nation (Great Britain and Ireland) that start taking the attitude that winning is everything losing is nothing then we will still be playing catch up to the big three. You just have to look at the like of Richie McCaw, he will do anything he can whilst pushing the boundaries of the rules to win a game of rugby, do any of our countries have players like him ?

I'm not sure it applies to all our teams or sports.

The England and Wales cricket side seem to have that hard edge and mental toughness. They're becoming unpopular so they must be doing something right

Cyril wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:It's all about attitude if you ask me. In our stiff upper lip and keep everything fair and do not exclude the weaker people regime we live in now we are always happy with the plucky performance. The southern countries are all of the attitude win at all costs, losing is nothing, I bet during the grass roots level at school or in the clubs they do not feel obliged to give the "little kid/or less talented kid" a run out just to be fair. I know this sounds harsh but I know a lot of Aussies and when their team looses at anything they are absolutely shattered, we do not have this attitude up here, also their governments spend a lot more money on developing sports at a younger level, and our great and rich nation are cutting funding to sports, we are closing swimming pools at a rate of knots. So for me, until we are a nation (Great Britain and Ireland) that start taking the attitude that winning is everything losing is nothing then we will still be playing catch up to the big three. You just have to look at the like of Richie McCaw, he will do anything he can whilst pushing the boundaries of the rules to win a game of rugby, do any of our countries have players like him ?

I'm not sure it applies to all our teams or sports.

The England and Wales cricket side seem to have that hard edge and mental toughness. They're becoming unpopular so they must be doing something right

Haven't SKY ploughed money into cricket though ? The same with the cycling. Anyway, the cricket team only seams to be Australia nowadays, they always loose to India and South Africa and the rest.

LordDowlais wrote:

Cyril wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:It's all about attitude if you ask me. In our stiff upper lip and keep everything fair and do not exclude the weaker people regime we live in now we are always happy with the plucky performance. The southern countries are all of the attitude win at all costs, losing is nothing, I bet during the grass roots level at school or in the clubs they do not feel obliged to give the "little kid/or less talented kid" a run out just to be fair. I know this sounds harsh but I know a lot of Aussies and when their team looses at anything they are absolutely shattered, we do not have this attitude up here, also their governments spend a lot more money on developing sports at a younger level, and our great and rich nation are cutting funding to sports, we are closing swimming pools at a rate of knots. So for me, until we are a nation (Great Britain and Ireland) that start taking the attitude that winning is everything losing is nothing then we will still be playing catch up to the big three. You just have to look at the like of Richie McCaw, he will do anything he can whilst pushing the boundaries of the rules to win a game of rugby, do any of our countries have players like him ?

I'm not sure it applies to all our teams or sports.

The England and Wales cricket side seem to have that hard edge and mental toughness. They're becoming unpopular so they must be doing something right

Haven't SKY ploughed money into cricket though ? The same with the cycling. Anyway, the cricket team only seams to be Australia nowadays, they always loose to India and South Africa and the rest.

They're unbeaten in something like 13 tests and have beaten India, Australia, Sri Lanka and the West Indies in the last couple of years. South Africa are the best in the world but England are up to 2nd and certainly aren't artificially high in ranking.

I'm not saying that investment and good management aren't a factor but these cricketeers are very streetwise and not intimidated.

Yeah, and pizzing all over the pitch.

Anyway I do not follow much cricket, were all those games over here, or out in their countries as well ?

LordDowlais wrote:Yeah, and pizzing all over the pitch.

Anyway I do not follow much cricket, were all those games over here, or out in their countries as well ?

Peeing on the pitch wasn't a great moment but it's the type of thing the Aussies would do when they were in their pomp

Sri Lanka, India and Australia wins were also away.

I take it your a cricket fan then Cyril ?

Great article - A major thing to remember is that the majority of well heeled schools in South Africa see rugby as the de facto #1 sport. Full stop. The climate helps, of course three months of winter and Ive only needed the trenchcoat twice in the highveld. Also, Afrikaans kids are massive, I mean colossal. My girlfriends little brother is a sixteen yo wing who weighs in at 100kgs and is yet to get in the gym. At that age, I weighed 70-odd.

I disagree with fa0019 re: African players not having much in common with the three non-indegenous groups re: sport as the reason for the lack of Africans playing rugby. Anyone who has recently been to a co-ed high school game will know that that is hogwash. Middle-class Africans are very much rugby-centric, my alma mater had an all-African (with the exception of 10) backline. This sadly led to the personification of a team that leaked tries while counter-attacking from anywhere and everywhere. The real reason for the apparent lack of Africans in the higher spheres of South African rugby is two-fold and more sinister:

1) The obvious - the apartheid government actively sought to keep Africans from playing the Afrikaner's holy grail. This meant that until recently (i.e people who made their sporting choices during apartheid), rugby wasnt a big sport. This is changing, big time. I see it every weekend at either Loftus or Ellis Park when I go.

2) Politics - the quota system may hurt white players somewhat, but it absolutely cripples good black players. Fact is, advantaged black players are disadvantaged in School sports. Fact is middle-class black players are routinely overlooked in place of poorer (in the economic sense) black players. I suspect this is so the government can continue to peddle to the poor black majority which makes up their backbone.
I appreciate that this is a tad off-topic but I cant in allow fa0019 to explain such a huge issue away with a pretty simple (and simplistic - 35 million Africans, vs only 800 registered pro boxers retards the argument) argument.

LordDowlais wrote:I take it your a cricket fan then Cyril ?

Yeah, I am.

Yorkshire looking good for the County Championship too

Sport education, same with football and england - others do it better at a young age by focussing on skills. We tend to go the other way and suffer.
Also we have too many national sports, playing talent is stretched too thinly.

Cyril wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:I take it your a cricket fan then Cyril ?

Yeah, I am.

Yorkshire looking good for the County Championship too

But would you agree it is only as of late that the national cricket team are any good, infact since SKY have been ploughing money into it.

kingraf wrote:Great article - A major thing to remember is that the majority of well heeled schools in South Africa see rugby as the de facto #1 sport. Full stop. The climate helps, of course three months of winter and Ive only needed the trenchcoat twice in the highveld. Also, Afrikaans kids are massive, I mean colossal. My girlfriends little brother is a sixteen yo wing who weighs in at 100kgs and is yet to get in the gym. At that age, I weighed 70-odd.

I disagree with fa0019 re: African players not having much in common with the three non-indegenous groups re: sport as the reason for the lack of Africans playing rugby. Anyone who has recently been to a co-ed high school game will know that that is hogwash. Middle-class Africans are very much rugby-centric, my  alma mater had an all-African (with the exception of 10) backline. This sadly led to the personification of a team that leaked tries while counter-attacking from anywhere and everywhere. The real reason for the apparent lack of Africans in the higher spheres of South African rugby is two-fold and more sinister:

1) The obvious - the apartheid government actively sought to keep Africans from playing the Afrikaner's holy grail. This meant that until recently (i.e people who made their sporting choices during apartheid), rugby wasnt a big sport. This is changing, big time. I see it every weekend at either Loftus or Ellis Park when I go.

2) Politics - the quota system may hurt white players somewhat, but it absolutely cripples good black players. Fact is, advantaged black players are disadvantaged in School sports. Fact is middle-class black players are routinely overlooked in place of poorer (in the economic sense) black players. I suspect this is so the government can continue to peddle to the poor black majority which makes up their backbone.
I appreciate that this is a tad off-topic but I cant in allow fa0019 to explain such a huge issue away with a pretty simple (and simplistic - 35 million Africans, vs only 800 registered pro boxers retards the argument) argument.

Excellent and informative post, as was faa019s. Thanks guys.

Yeah cheers guys. I learned a lot about the size of South Africans.

GloriousEmpire wrote:A question that never really gets addressed is the reasons behind Southern Hemisphere rugby's superiority.

It's a question that gets addressed all the time and the answer is simple and always the same - the SH nations don't care about football.

LordDowlais wrote:

Cyril wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:I take it your a cricket fan then Cyril ?

Yeah, I am.

Yorkshire looking good for the County Championship too

But would you agree it is only as of late that the national cricket team are any good, infact since SKY have been ploughing money into it.

Not really (although the funding and infrastructure helps). In the cricket England have been 'lucky' to have brought through a number of very good players and have kept a consistent team together for a period of time.

I was responding more to your view on attitude and belief than the surrounding issues.

rodders wrote:If that was the case asore Wales would be able to beat Australia without the help of Corbiesero, Parling, Sexton and O'Brien.

I don't see why.Rugby is the national sport of Wales in the same way hurling is the national sport of Ireland.

I don't think its about Southern rugby being superior but more NZ being superior.

NZ are the best because it's their national sport and they can cherry pick from the Pacific Islands who produce monster athletes ideal for the physicality.

I suppose Wales is the mirror of NZ in the Northern hemisphere. They have a small pool to pick from but it's a priority sport so they constantly do well or punch above what they should.

England/France/Scotland/Ireland will never command the top spot for a prolonged period as the sport isn't as popular as say football, although they may have a purple patch every few years.

I can only speak for Scotland, but the basic issues are:

1. We are fat and drink too much.
2. The sun never shines.
3. We prefer football, because we are so good at it.
4. There aren't very many of us.
5. We poach dodgy players like Dan Parks.

I'd do one for Ireland, but fear a collective sense of humour failure of epic proportions....and threats on Twitter.....

funnyExiledScot wrote:I can only speak for Scotland, but the basic issues are:

1. We are fat and drink too much.
2. The sun never shines.
3. We prefer football, because we are so good at it.
4. There aren't very many of us.
5. We poach dodgy players like Dan Parks.

I'd do one for Ireland, but fear a collective sense of humour failure of epic proportions....and threats on Twitter.....

 

funnyExiledScot wrote:I can only speak for Scotland, but the basic issues are:

1. We are fat and drink too much.
2. The sun never shines.
3. We prefer football, because we are so good at it.
4. There aren't very many of us.
5. We poach dodgy players like Dan Parks.

I'd do one for Ireland, but fear a collective sense of humour failure of epic proportions....and threats on Twitter.....

#ah_go_on_go_on_go_on_go_on_go_on_go_on_go_on

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

funnyExiledScot wrote:I can only speak for Scotland, but the basic issues are:

1. We are fat and drink too much.
2. The sun never shines.
3. We prefer football, because we are so good at it.
4. There aren't very many of us.
5. We poach dodgy players like Dan Parks.

I'd do one for Ireland, but fear a collective sense of humour failure of epic proportions....and threats on Twitter.....

#ah_go_on_go_on_go_on_go_on_go_on_go_on_go_on

• It's their tenth choice sport.

• It's only played in Dublin.

• The people are small and red haired.

There's more but I just can't think.