This is a fairly big deal, over here in the Old World. Well, at least in the parts of the Old World that care about rugby, and that would include the British Isles and (go figure) France and Italy.

Each winter, they stage a Six Nations competition in which six “national” teams play each other, and whoever finishes with the best record wins the championship. For rugby people, this is a big deal.

Today’s decisive game was once-beaten Wales verses unbeaten England … and Wales crushed the English 30-3. Massive upset, in the rugby universe. Not just the result, the decisiveness of it.

Something to keep in mind about sports involving the various national teams in the British Isles:

Everyone loves to beat England.

The Irish and the Scots, especially, seem to not care about what happens to them as long as England fails. The Northern Irish aren’t quite as militant about it (they are not part of the Six Nations; they do compete separately in soccer), and neither are the Welsh, but they still enjoy beating the big kids.

England, remember, has a population of 53 million, which is more than three times that of the rest of the British Isles combined — Ireland 6 million, Scotland 4 million, Wales 3 million.

And the English ruled Ireland for centuries, and Scotland for even longer, and Wales for even longer than that … and, well, history has not predisposed many people from those three Celtic bastions to look fondly on their overlords, past (Ireland) or present (Scotland, Wales).

Then you have France and Italy, the former a real rugby power (and 2011 championship finalist), and the latter coming along.

The southern hemisphere has, basically, four rugby countries — the traditional big three of Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, and now Argentina is emerging.

Of the Big Three sports played in the British Isles — soccer, cricket, rugby, rugby is third. It is intensely followed by people from certain social strata (upper-class, in particular) and in geographical pockets. The city of Wigan is often cited as an example. They have a Premier League soccer team there, but it generally is outpaced at the gate by the rugby team.

Rugby is a sort of free-form football, without the forward pass. Guys running back and forth, throwing laterals, bashing into each other, and occasionally lining up for a scrum — the maneuver perhaps most commonly associated in American minds with the game.

If rugby guys threw the ball forward, it would look a lot like football without stoppages, but they never came around to this, and their ball, which is stubbier than an American football, is difficult to throw in an overhand motion.

Rugby is further complicated by the two “codes” of the game — rugby union and rugby league. The former has 15 players (and is considered rougher) and the latter 13, and this is further complicated by the popularity of rugby sevens which will be an Olympic sport in 2016. (Sevens is rugby union on a smaller scale.)

Given all this, cricket soon seems crystal clear, to an American, and soccer absurdly simple. I have watched hours of rugby, especially while living in Hong Kong (it was on) … and I have, as yet, not grasped the subtleties of the game.

But I do know when a game is big. That would be Wales 30, England 3, which is on the cover of The National’s sports section for Sunday morning.