Rugby World Cup: And the Winner is...

[finbar]

The forward pass was unfortunate. To say the least.

Just to prove that not all Australian rugby journos are idiots, this from Charles Happell:

When the history of Australian sporting journalism comes to be written many years from now, one piece will surely be dusted off and held up as perhaps the finest example of its type. And there it would sit under the chapter headed: Breathtaking Stupidity and Boneheaded Arrogance – How Not to Write a Sporting Preview.

For there can be no better example of the sense of superiority that had infiltrated the Wallabies’ camp than the piece in Saturday’s Australian newspaper by its normally astute rugby union editor, Wayne Smith, entitled "Wallabies to lift England burden".

In the annals of sportswriting in this country, few articles can have been so wide of the mark. And it was not just wrong, but ungracious. For it demeaned England, Australia’s opponent in Saturday’s World Cup quarter-final, to the point of absurdity.

This is how Smith’s preview started:

The simple fact is the Wallabies are a better team than England. There is now just the minor and somewhat inconvenient matter of having to go out tonight in Marseille and prove it.

And then:

The poor English, bumblers that they are, have fallen short throughout this tournament on all three criteria: style, humour and most definitely good intent.

And later:

The English are just not cut out to be world champions. They have so little experience of sporting success that when it happens, it leaves them drained and exhausted. Rugby World Cup 2003, Ashes 2005.

And so on. The vitriol for England came in a torrent. We looked twice to see if there was some cleverly disguised irony that we had somehow missed on first reading but, no, the piece was deadly serious.

Rugby Union in Australia has often suffered from this jingoism and parochialism among its correspondents. And it’s not a pretty sight. When a preview of Saturday’s match called for a bit of intellectual rigour, and perhaps circumspection, all we got was cheerleading.

"The belief within the (Australian) camp is that beyond the bullyboys and (Jonny) Wilkinson, England doesn’t have much at all," Smith wrote.

Such conceit set him, and the Wallabies, up for a major fall. And a major fall is what they got - from the equivalent of the top of the Eiffel Tower. An ageing English pack, and old-fashioned British bulldog, not just monstered the Australians in the scrum but completely nullified the backs, the Wallabies’ supposed area of superiority.

In ancient Greece, such preening arrogance was called hubris. And those classical scholars in the Wallabies side should have known how exaggerated self pride and self-confidence often resulted in fatal retribution. If they didn’t before, they do now.

Smith was not the only one at fault. (And to his credit, he’s paid England its dues in this morning’s Australian, while highlighting the Wallabies’ shortcomings with their "popgun scrum".) No, the conceit was all-encompassing.

A fortnight ago, ARU chief executive John O’Neill made the extraordinary claim that all Australian sports fans "hated" the English. David Campese ranted again about "boring" England. Up in the Channel 10 booth before the game, the commentary team, which included two former Wallabies Ben Tune and Ben Darwin, exuded a certain smugness.

The result, in case you hadn’t heard, was a 12-10 victory to England. A sad end for all in the Wallabies camp, to be sure. But when the agony has worn off, hopefully the painful lesson in humility will long remain.

[Havak]

Thats a very nice deconstruction of Smith's article.

*Edit* As for Mr Smith himself it is not exactly a retraction

It is more a switch of targets as he gets Graham Henry in his cross hairs?

[LDiCesare]

Why with all the field position they had in the last 8 mins did NZ not play for the drop goal?

Indeed. I don't understand why they waited to be 50 metres away to try it when they had possession nearer before that.
Was there a forward pass? I thought it was the camera angle? And didn't So'oialo crawl on his try? Mmmm... OK, I'll stop. NZ didn't deserve a win if they were unable to capitalize on the 6 balls they took on French trhows in the lineouts. Mac Alister cost them the game by granting 3 points and then his yellow card bringing them 7 more. I think this yellow card was well deserved considering they did the same thing against the Italians.

And I wish the Fiji had won. Those lost opportunities at 20-23! The boks came to that match being so arrogant (read Fourie's declarations before the match) they deserved being beaten. They will certainly be humbler now, which will make them even more dangerous.

[Andydog]

Oh well, the sun will still shine and the world won't stop spinning. It's time for NZers to move on from the Rugby World Cup and think of other things. However, a few comments first.... (because let's not forget that the All Blacks are a professional business... run along corporate lines and everyone is being paid very well indeed - some would say an obscene amount). The fans have to pay a lot to see them and the sponsors contribute huge amounts too. So the ABs must expect to be subject to evaluation. Also, as our national game the NZ fans are all entitled to have a say.

I watched the game with great anticipation, and a deal of nervousness. I always knew the French had a chance, albeit a small one, and with 20 minutes to go I thought they could actually pull it off. As Fitzy would say, all credit to them. France lifted their game when it counted and had the greater discipline in their play.

However, they were definitely aided by poor refereeing and the missed forward pass that lead to a France try cost us the game. But let's not take anything away from the French, because when we needed to regroup and settle we didn't... and they took advantage of that. The wrong options (dodgy passes and poor kicking tactics) continued, especially in the back line.

You may say hindsight is a great thing, but this rotation thing has backfired at the worst possible time. The top team should have been sorted out and allowed to play together to get the combinations and understanding of each others play working. This never happened. Also, I believe that Major, Smith and Howlett should have been on the field. The players that took their places all had poor performances in my book. The forwards were great, but the backs didn't match their professionalism.

As with the private sector corporates, when the company doesn't do well, the shareholders demand change. This will happen to the ABs with a new selection and coaching panel and a change in strategy leading up to the next World Cup.

So congrats again to France, and also congrats to England, another deserved win.

[LDiCesare]

this rotation thing has backfired at the worst possible time

I'm not sure about this. France too kept rotating its players. The scrum and fly half had never started a game together for instance. The full back hadn't played full back for a long time. And the team has kept changing during the whole competition.

[finbar]

In the ABs' case, I think it was more a selection problem. The selectors always preferred L. McAlister to A. Mauger. I'm not sure why. Youth, exuberance and potential, perhaps. Trouble is, he has always been an uneasy fit in a smooth, well-oiled backline. His penchant for solo efforts and problems with dodgy decision making too often interrupted things. Mauger, on the other hand, always fitted like a glove. Yes, McAlister was heavily involved in a fine try, but I think Mauger would have been vastly more useful in the circumstances of the match. Enough said about the yellow card. On top of the problem at #12, the ABs have simply never found a replacement for Tana. C. Smith, the supposed heir apparent, was never given enough game time after his long injury layoff. The midfield, always one of their strengths, was always, unfortunately, problematic.

I also think Dougie Howlett should have played. I've always been a fan, watching him mature into a fine all-round player. They put all their eggs into the powerhouse winger basket. Dougie is more versatile than either of them, a great scrambler in defence, and, most importantly, a good thinker on the field. He, along with Mauger, would have made a difference towards the end.

Yes, the Michelak pass was forward. Relative to the white line, which was stationary, Michelak was at least a metre in front of the passer. The ref was probably unsighted. In statistical terms it cost the ABs, but they blew their chances elsewhere.

[MikeH]

Well, that was one of the greatest sporting events I've ever attended. I started off supporting New Zealand but ended up being swayed by the sheer determination of the French players in the second half and was cheering them on by the end.

Amazing support in the stadium, the French were in great voice all night even when they were losing. The Millenium Stadium with the roof on is incredibly loud and right from the start when the French team faced the Haka in their French flag shirts the atmosphere was amazing. Actually... the first big cheer was for England beating Australia.

The French try did look blatantly forward from where I was sitting, but they deserved the win on the day.

[MikeH]

Another pic

[LDiCesare]

Great photo of the Haka. But then you didn't see the NZers performing their war dance from where you were, as they were hidden by the French. A pity French TV didn't even show us the French wore blue/white/red (I had to see the photos in L'Equipe to get it).
I'm afraid other nations get the same TV images as we do? I would have liked to see the scrums more closely in Australia-England in particular.

[finbar]

I've been assuming it's pool coverage - everyone taking the host nation's coverage. That's how it usually happens. The Italian coverage cuts away from what they don't want to use. Which, unfortunately, includes the post-match interviews.

I thought the French response to the Haka was wonderful. Red, white and blue and right in the ABs' faces. S. Chabal couldn't have glowered harder at them if he tried.

I saw the Wallaby-England scrums in all their ... depressing ... bone-crunching ... glory, with close-up replays in slow motion from all angles. M. Dunning and G. Shepherdson are back in Australia looking for holes to crawl into. There I go ending another sentence with a preposition. It must be depression after the pitiful scrum display.

[MikeH]

It was ok, I saw the Haka really well at Murrayfield.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Havak


Logially they are now red hot favourites.

So were the ABs last Saturday morning of course. The cup isn't over yet.

I know what LdiC will be worried about - tradtionally after a 'shock' result the French tend to be flat in the next game. They cannot afford that even against England.

For me it's all gravy from this point on - after the debacle against South Africa beating Australia has put the smile back on my face.

I'm hoping for a France/Argentina rematch in the final.

[Havak]

I would have been disappointed if you wanted anything else.

In Paris France should be favourites to see off England. LdiC I am sure is very confident? My hope has to be that this siege metality and purely passionate approach has another game left in it.

to Andydog by the way. And not for the tip of the hat to England , but for the balanced and reasonable reaction to what must have been a shock result.

[finbar]

Living amongst such balanced, reasoned, charitable and unbiased people has obviously rubbed off on him.

Although I found the BBC's player ratings for the Wallabies-England match yesterday. Astonishing. Every England player scored at least 8, with A. Sheridan earning a 10. Fair enough for Sheridan. The Australians seemed to average 5, with S. Mortlock earning a 5 and criticism for ignoring an overlap. Euphoria can have its downsides.

[Havak]

A fine example of sarcasm.

Do please remember that for some reason they let their two RWC 'bloggers' give those ratings. These are the two lads who normally do the ball by ball cricket commentary (and that is sometimes infantile), they are larking around France in a winnebago and I would question whether they know much about Rugby Union at all to be honest.

They were at the ground and got caught up in the Euphoria I think. They do not speak for me or most English fans I've toasted the result with.

Because I'd have given them all 10/10 and all the Aussies 1/10.

That was a joke by the way. And yes I know it wasn't funny