 |
| Tonga's win over France has hopefully put paid to the intollerable 'minnow' term. Photo: rurgbyworldcup.com |
Answer: According to most journalists and rugby pundits alike, the answer is a 'minnow'.
It's a lazy and simplistic grouping that, based on the performances of the 2011 Rugby World Cup, is inappropriate and irrelevant. Indeed, Georgia, Samoa, Canada are no more the 'minnows' of Rugby than Scotland, Italy and England are the 'whales' of world rugby.
Rugby World Cup 2011 was a break-out tournament for a number of the emerging teams. Georgia have well and truly landed on the world scene and with the Government declaring Rugby the national sport and almost all of their players playing professional rugby in Europe, Georgia are here to stay and their appearance in the knockout stages of a future RWC is inevitable.
Similarly, Samoa had an impressive tournament in what turned out to be a formidable Pool. Although they will be disappointed not to have made the quarter finals, the Manu Samoa took both Wales and South Africa to the wire.
Pool A was intriguing. Japan started their campaign at a furious pace against France which, for mine, was one of the most enjoyable games of the Pool stages. At the 60 minute mark they were within a converted try of France and looking dangerous - only to fall away in the final 20 minutes. Canada played out of their skins to beat Tonga with clinical defence and had it not been for Tonga's brutal defeat of France in their final pool match, Canada would have automatically qualified for RWC2015.
In fact almost all sides, with the exception of Namibia and perhaps Fiji, gave their more fancied opponents a scare at some stage or another at RWC2011.
To collectively group all teams that don't have the privilege of competing in the Six Nations or the Rugby Championship as 'minnows' is fallacious. Rugby is growing at an impressive rate and the international competitiveness of all teams is improving markedly. As this Rugby World Cup has demonstrated, the minnow is dead.
