2011 South American Championship

[ZeFrenchy]

A question for Melhor

disregarding South Africa and Argentina, which continent is better between Africa and South America at rugby?

and do you think it would be fairer to have a playoff for the spot which is now the African qualifying spot between the below teams?

20. Portugal
21. Uruguay
22. Namibia
23. Spain
24. Chile
25. Belgium
26. Morocco

Not knowing much about african rugby, I can tell you that south american average level is really poor. The only countries (excluding Argentina, of course) where rugby has some sort of history are Chile and Uruguay, mainly because of english immigrants. In both countries rugby is an elite sport played mostly in english high schools. In Uruguay, since their qualification to the 1999 and 2003 RWCs it has become more popular (that was when they started to increase their distance with Chile). For years the south american championship was played by those three countries, always being won by Argentina (except for one, where they didn't play and that was won by Uruguay).
For the last 20 years or so, Paraguay was the fourth best country, getting a win against Chile every once in a while. Only recently, after Brazil's improvement, this has changed. Venezuela, Colombia and Peru also have national teams, but they always get a hiding from Uruguay or Chile (probably from Paraguay and Brazil as well).
When I left Chile, Brazil was at a similar level than Peru or Venezuela. A friend of mine had played against Brazil in a game that ended something like 130-0. That seems to have changed.

As for Africa, I think that despite the closeness in the ranking, Namibia would easily beat everyone except Uruguay (it would probably be a tight match that one). Having seen Kenya's 7s team, they could probably set up a decent XV, and the same for Uganda. I'd say the africans have a physical advantage, and if they are not already, they will be better than second-tier south american teams very soon.

 

[Melhor Time]

A question for Melhor

disregarding South Africa and Argentina, which continent is better between Africa and South America at rugby?

and do you think it would be fairer to have a playoff for the spot which is now the African qualifying spot between the below teams?

20. Portugal
21. Uruguay
22. Namibia
23. Spain
24. Chile
25. Belgium
26. Morocco

Both have great potential. Who is better cannot be known as there re no matches to determine this. No doubt about it, Namibia are at the Rugby World Cup again because of Africa´s direct spot. Uruguay are not there because South America has no qualifying spot. Curiously all other continents do. South America is ignored by the IRB. Its as if Uruguay´s wins vs Spain and Georgia at Rugby World Cup´s 1999 and 2003 were insignificant. No African side (besides RSA) has ever won a match. Namibia have lost all 11 matches and never scored a bonus point. The worst record of all teams in the history of Rugby Worldn Cup´s by a large distance.

There should indeed be a play-off between Africa 1 and South America 1.

In terms of the future ZeFrenchy made a good post about the upperclass issues, etc. But I should add that in Brazil it is rapidly changing. I started a team in 2009. The city is the size of Cardiff or Christchurch but small for Brazil. We play in the São Paulo state championship. Last year (first year) we lost every match in the comp as all other sides in our pool had 5 or more years experience. One had over 30. We did win some warm-up games. This year we´re winning compeition games. A side defeated my team by 15 last year and this year we took it to them. Its expensive to play. There are lots of bankers, lawyers and doctors but its not the majority. I´ve got students, brick-layers and other low income players.

Anyhow, the level here is on the rise. As more teams are being created and in turn more guys are playing. Give it a generation and Brazil should be pretty damn good.

[video]http://video.globo.com/Videos/Player/Esportes/0,,GIM1515184-7824-BRASIL+VENCE+PARAGUAI+NO+SULAMERICANO+DE+RUGBY,00. html[/video]