The IRB is trying to help weaker nations like Namibia, but recent efforts are unlikely to prevent mismatches in France 2007, writes Paul Rees

One of the abiding memories of the last World Cup was the mismatch between the hosts, Australia, and the hapless amateurs of Namibia. The game was played at Adelaide Oval, the home venue of the late Don Bradman, and a cricket score was duly compiled, 142-0.

It made a mockery of rugby union's boast to be a world sport.

Namibia burst on to the international scene in the early 1990s, pushing Wales close in a two-Test series before beating Ireland and Italy, only for the onset of professionalism to lure their better players to South Africa. The Springboks' fullback Percy Montgomery, for example, is a Namibian.

The score in Adelaide put the International Rugby Board on the back foot. Officials were repeatedly asked how they intended to close the gap between emerging nations and the rest, while Namibia pointed out that nations such as Wales, Scotland and Ireland - never mind countries outside the top 10 in the world rankings - had enough problems grappling with Australia and New Zealand.

The 2003 World Cup was blighted by players refusing to play for countries destined to be also-rans, preferring to earn more money playing club rugby. Withdrawals have been less of a problem this year, although Namibia protested to the IRB last week after their Natal-based hooker Skipper Badenhorst pulled out of the tournament for what he said were family reasons.

"I have no proof but I suspect there were other factors behind his decision," said the Namibian Rugby Union chief executive, Christo Alexander.

Badenhorst would earn more with Natal this month than he would with Namibia.

"Our players will get around £2,000 (€3,000) for the month," said Alexander, a sum that includes compensation for taking time off work. "It has not been easy for our squad because they have had to take a lot of holiday time preparing for the World Cup. We have twice been away for two weeks, and when the players left for France a number had to put in a day shift before the night flight."

The IRB would argue that without the benefit of elite competition smaller countries would be unable to raise their game to the necessary standard. To that end it is using some 45 million of the money raised during the last World Cup to help emerging nations such as Namibia. Rather than simply hand money over to unions the board has tried to set up development programmes and help in practical ways: in Namibia, the lowest-ranking team, at 24th, in the finals, coaches and conditioning experts have been drafted in, including Alan Solomons, the former South Africa assistant coach. The IRB gave Namibia, Georgia and Portugal more than 150,000 each this summer to help them prepare for France.

"Thanks to the board's help we will be better-prepared for this World Cup than we were for the other two we took part in," said Alexander. "The only area we have not been able to cover is defence coach. If I had one criticism of the IRB it is that its programme for developing countries should have been set up sooner. It is 12 years since the game turned professional and we have so much ground to make up.

"We know we are not going to win our group, which is probably the toughest. Our aim is to give everything against France, Argentina and Ireland and look to beat Georgia. We are a proud nation and what happened four years ago hurt us."

The IRB admits its aid programme will probably not achieve much in the way of results this World Cup. Mismatches such as France against Namibia and New Zealand versus Portugal will create the same negative headlines as Namibia's Adelaide misadventure.

"We do not expect to see the fruits of our investment until the 2011 World Cup," said the board's spokesman Greg Thomas. "We have made a difference already in a number of countries, but the plan was always going to be long-term. It is based on improving the infrastructure of developing nations and ensuring they play in competitive competitions between World Cups."

To that end the year before the next World Cup, the last four places in the finals (which are likely to see a reduction in the number of teams from 20 to 16) will be decided in a tournament. There will be 12 seeds in 2011, the teams that finish in the top three of their groups this year, and the aim is that the final four will be more competitive than the potential also-rans in any previous competition.

"We need matches," said Alexander. "The problem after 2003 was that while everybody said how terrible it was that the gap between the best and the rest was growing, they soon forgot about it. Only now are we starting to get regular fixtures annually and the IRB is going about things the right way."

Portugal have even less of a rugby history than Namibia - Wales put 100 points on them in a World Cup qualifier in 1994 - so records will be under threat when they face the All Blacks. Their rugby team is called the Wolves but they will be virtual lambs against New Zealand.

"Getting to the finals was a massive achievement," said the Portugal coach, Tomaz Morais. "We just want to return home with our dignity. We are under no illusions about what we face, but we will approach every game with enthusiasm."