New Zealand to rule world, Toulouse to rule Europe, Wales to beat Italy

My old colleague Adrian Hamilton wrote in the Independent yesterday that journalists should stop making predictions at this time of year. This was excellent advice. Alas, in the world we live in, it is not practical advice. For what would be in the papers if all the predictions were suddenly to disappear? I will tell you what would be in them: reviews of the year that is about to pass. This column will be a bit of both, with a few added grumbles.

To begin with, some predictions: New Zealand will win the Rugby World Cup, Toulouse the Heineken European Cup and England the Six Nations' Championship. The choice of England is not quite so straightforward as it may appear at first sight. True, they have greater strength in depth than any other European country. But the depth varies from position to position.

At wing, for instance, the manager Clive Woodward can perm any two from Iain Balshaw and Jason Robinson (who can both play at full-back), Austin Healey (can play virtually anywhere), Phil Christophers, Ben Cohen, Marcel Garvey, Dan Luger and James Simpson-Daniel.

At centre, by contrast, the pool is relatively shallow, with Will Greenwood its only permanent inhabitant. But the other countries, France apart, would be grateful just for him.

France are obviously once again the team that can spoil England's party. The two countries meet at Twickenham in February for the first of the season's internationals. On the same day, slightly later on, Wales have an away fixture in Italy. This is one match at least that Wales ought to win.

If France were playing England in Paris in April, my prediction for the Six Nations would be different. What fortifies my view is that France are travelling to Dublin to play Ireland.

This is the ground where the French are perhaps the least at home. They can scintillate at Cardiff, despite the rain. They can astonish at Twickenham too, as anyone who saw Philippe Saint-André's there can testify. But Dublin seems to have a different effect on them. Their spirits visibly droop, like a soufflé that has been left out in the rain.

Ireland are the team who may astonish us all. But then, at this time of the year, they always are. They have good players; an impressive record; an excellent spirit. They proceed to win difficult matches – against France, England or even both – only to lose the easy ones and to end up in the middle or towards the bottom end of the table. But I wish them well. We all wish them well.

If, on any realistic assessment, the Six Nations is between France and England, why start the competition with England v France? True, an April fixture tends to favour France because of the weather. But I have known some pretty cold, wet and windy April days at Twickenham as well. It is too late to rearrange this match. But so long as England and France maintain their European pre-eminence – which may not, of course, be for ever – the match between them should take place on the last Saturday of the competition.

That is one grumble that I have. There are plenty of others, both about the rules (as Welshmen always call the laws) and about the way they are now interpreted. Last week I wrote about the menace of the rolling maul and the dangers of having too large a gap between the contestants at a lineout. I also pointed out the perils of the "engage'' instruction which referees now bawl at the two front rows. These criticisms were all related to safety, though I should have made them on other grounds as well. Here is another grumble.

The most irritating feature of the modern game is the short penalty kick to the corner, from which the attacking side hope to score a pushover try. Clearly, if you are four points down with, say, 10 minutes to go, it is the rational course to follow. But sides such as Gloucester against Northampton on Saturday do not confine themselves to so restricted the ploy. On the contrary: if they are seven points up in the first few minutes, they will try for another five at least by kicking to the corner.

In these circumstances, the only thing that gives me greater pleasure than a successful defence is an inaccurate kick by the punter, putting the ball over the in-goal line. But such a satisfying error is now less common than it used to be, since the laws were changed so that the line-out has to be five metres out. Accordingly kickers are less ambitious and thus less prone to error.

What makes the modern ploy more irritating still is that the sinned-against side have, in addition to a shot at goal, a choice between a tap penalty and a scrum. Manifestly a side who are given a penalty behind the half-way line and put the ball into their opponents' corner deserve their reward. Not so a side given a penalty inside their opponents' 22. I would prohibit penalty kicks direct to touch within this limit. And a happy New Year to all.