On the Saturday of quarter-final weekend eight years ago, the northern hemisphere delivered a double whammy to two of the southern hemisphere’s big three when England and France knocked out Australia and New Zealand on the same day. There wasn’t too much talk of the divide between the two hemispheres then.

Admittedly, Argentina had beaten France in the pool stages and, along with South Africa, would progress to the quarter-finals with wins over Scotland and Fiji. Furthermore, the Pumas would repeat the dose even more handsomely against the French hosts in the third-place play-off before South Africa ensured another southern hemisphere win in the final against an England side they had routed 36-0 in the pool stages and were flattered to be in the final.

Nor was there much between the hemispheres four years ago as Ireland beat Australia in Eden Park and an ill-prepared French team pushed the All Blacks to a one-point win in the final. Thanks to Ireland carving up the draw into southern and northern halves with that win in Eden Park, the final was the only meeting between the two hemispheres in the knock-out stages.

Granted, the southern hemisphere has been ahead of the European game for over 100 years. Nothing new here. And perhaps the chasm is, as Joe Schmidt maintained on Sunday, not that great. Wales could have beaten South Africa, and Scotland were desperately unlucky not to beat Australia. Yet, there have been seven meetings between the four Rugby Championship countries and those from the Six Nations, and the former have won all seven.

Hence, for the first time in eight World Cups, there will be no European team in the semi-finals, and so for the seventh time the World Cup will be won by one of the southern hemisphere teams.

The one exception was 2003, won in extra time by the true golden generation of English rugby in the professional age. We should never be more grateful that Martin Johnson, Lawrence Dallaglio, Richard Hill, Jonny Wilkinson, Will Greenwood, Jason Robinson et al did win it. Heaven help the European game if they hadn’t.

But that’s what makes Ireland’s failure to make even one semi-final in eight attempts all the more dispiriting. The 2007 team (note, not squad) probably should have seen Ireland’s golden generation at its peak. They were the most under-achieving Irish team at a World Cup. The 2011 version arrived at the quarter-finals unbeaten for the first time ever, only to lose a 50-50 game to a fine Welsh team that were then cruelly denied a shot at an All Blacks team which choked in the final.

Flip side

So how to view Ireland’s latest anti-climactic exit, then? For sure, the flip side of a prolonged run at the French game, building up through Canada and Romania, and the sterner test against Italy before the crescendo of the pool decider against France, was that Ireland arrived at the quarter-finals comparatively battered and bruised.

Viewed in the cold light of day, that French game destroyed Ireland’s World Cup as much as the brilliance of the rapidly improving Pumas who, by contrast, were able to rotate their squad after their opening joust with New Zealand and rest up 10 of Sunday’s starting line-up a week previously for their jaunt with Namibia.

We’ll never know how much more competitive Ireland would have been if three or four of their key absentees had been in harness for the quarter-finals. It assuredly would have made them more competitive. Even then, to recover from an early 17-0 lead and enable the Irish fans to raise the Millennium roof was a credit to them.

Ian Madigan castigated himself for not drawing the sides level with that difficult, 45 metre-plus penalty, and Ramiro Herrera may have been a little fortunate to escape a second yellow with the game in the balance. But it’s hard to quibble too much with a 43-20 scoreline, and the way the Pumas bookended the game with unanswered flurries of 17 points in the first quarter and 20 in the last quarter.

Potent game

The bottom line is that Argentina were so much more comfortable, skilful and athletic with the ball in hand in playing a more ambitious and potent game. As well as puncturing Irish optimism ahead of the projected invasion of Twickenham, that’s what made last Sunday even more deflating than four years ago. And while Argentina will only grow stronger, where do Ireland go from here?

Different circumstances, it is true, but Daniel Hourcade could take the hit of two winless campaigns in their first two forays into the Rugby Championship while vowing that their new brand of rugby would develop. No pain, no gain.

The Six Nations doesn’t allow its coaches that luxury, not even to Joe Schmidt, who has now also lost the services of Les Kiss, and there’s no guarantee Schmidt will be around for the next World Cup.

Home matches

Furthermore, as well as no O’Driscoll and O’Connell, there will be no Rory Best, and perhaps even no Johnny Sexton – who for whatever reason has not looked like his real self – or Jamie Heaslip.

The Irish supporters, aka the Green Army, were one of the stories of the World Cup. Even more than New Zealand, they transformed Ireland’s five games into home matches. But that certainly won’t be the case in Japan four years hence.

In any event, even when Ireland seek an historic three titles in a row, this season’s Six Nations is also going to appear a little hollow.

Never has the world’s oldest tournament seemed more like the B Division of the global game, and so over the next two weekends we shall see the Premier Division have their own play-offs on European soil. Maybe we can learn something. gthornley@rishtimes.com