Big and powerful versus small and weak: Has anything changed in rugby?

World Rugby have a lot of things to sort out — the laws are problematic and the sin-bin and card system needs attention — but more than anything the sport’s governing body needs to drastically address how the tier two nations are going to be stronger and more competitive at the World Cup in 2027.

This is not a new issue; teams outside of the top nations continue to struggle on the global stage.

Have any of the so-called smaller teams improved in the last 10 years, are they any more competitive than they were, are there more rugby players in those countries playing the game now than 15 years ago?

Lopsided results

I’m no expert, but I don’t know what World Rugby have done to lift the profile of the game, improve playing opportunities and make rugby a sporting option for youngsters in countries like Romania, Georgia, Portugal, Uruguay and Chile – among some of the “smaller” teams playing at the 2023 Rugby World Cup in France.

The results at the tournament so far suggest even countries with rich rugby histories, such as Fiji, Samoa and Tonga have not really progressed much over recent years. In fact, some would suggest they have gone backwards.

One has to ask then, what is the point of hosting a World Cup when only a very few number of teams will be in the running to win the title?

Yes, this year’s tournament is supposedly the most wide-open in years, but you only need to look at the draw and the makeup of the pools to know the winner will be one of no more than four or five teams.

Namibia, for example, have now played 26 games at the Rugby World Cup and are yet to win. This is sad and just not right.

The “smaller” teams are competitive against each other, and Uruguay and Georgia have put up some fight during the tournament in France, but when they face the big teams they generally get blown away: Romania have lost 82-8 to Ireland, 76-0 to South Africa and 84-0 to Scotland, New Zealand and France thumped Namibia 71-3 and 96-0 respectively, while England beat Chile 71-0, among some of the lopsided results.

Global game?

Of course, these so-called smaller countries need exposure and as many opportunities as they can get to play and grow, and places like the World Cup can be like gold to them, but development and growth happens in between tournaments and not at a World Cup. Is this actually happening?

I’ve got no problem with minnows taking part in a World Cup, it’s just that they’re often not very competitive and don’t scare any of the big teams — and don’t come close to reaching the knockout stages even.

Surely the time has come for World Rugby to really get stuck in and help the tier two nations become more competitive. Imagine seeing Test series’ in future between the Springboks and Portugal and New Zealand and Romania and the matches being tight and close.

And for Canada or the USA or Georgia to be among the favourites for the Rugby World Cup title? Now that would be awesome — a truly global game with many more top tier teams.