0
Just stuck this up elsewhere in response to the tenor of the thread. Thought it might generate some chat here, and would love to hear additional analogues.
--------------------------------
Rugby is NOT just a game.
RUGBY = GEOPOLITICS
A. New Zealand = America
Easily the biggest player on the international scene, and has been for a long time. Probably the only power still capable of engaging in multiple simultaneous conflicts, they are formidable in battle with a seemingly endless supply of weaponry at their disposal. Continual success is expected, with any failure treated ruthlessly and prone to generating conspiracy theories. Boundless confidence is often seen as arrogance and can make them a little sensitive to criticism. This, in conjunction with the prominence given to their culture, tends to provoke resentment in some (although there is more than a bit of envy mixed in as well).
B. South Africa = Russia
Used to be the major competition for A, but it was built on internal structures that proved to be unsustainable. Have struggled to deal with their subsequent decline in fortunes, but are considered to have large untapped resources. Can and will be great again, once they resolve their internal power struggles and establish a new, more balanced structure. Seems uncertain whether it should align with Europe.
C. Australia = China
Historically weak, but grew into the space left by the decline of B and now compete with the other international entities. Has enormous potential for growth, but is hampered by geography and a lack of appropriate infrastructure. Is working to address this, but often struggles under top-down management by an elitist, conservative group of ideologues. Has some significant weaponry, although many consider it technologically lacking and based on knock-offs from A and B.
D. England = Middle East
Significant focal point for international conflict, but is characterised by strong internal political tensions and frequently fails to present a unified face due to self-interest amongst member elements. It has arguably never sustained the sort of power that a vast abundance of natural resources should afford.
E. Ireland = Israel
Was originally part of D, but was established as an independent entity during the first half of the 20th century. Having obtained this status, would never willingly go back. Seems to have supporters everywhere and always puts up a hell of a fight in any conflict. Periodically gives D a kicking.
F. Scotland = Great Britain
Owe their position to history more than anything. Provides support for A during conflicts with D.
G. Wales = Germany
Similar roots to F. Have had brief periods of significance on the international stage, during which they caused everyone aggravation. Still manage to have a major say in international events.
H. France = France
What can you say – always unpredictable and always in the mix.
Reply With Quote
the pressure is certainly on after that one!
Originally Posted by Shaunmarn
