Notes from a sporting week – 29/10/07

Hard lessons need to be learned from France:

So, we are being told, that was the best IRB Rugby World Cup ever. And to be honest there is a lot of evidence for the prosecution. There were mostly full stadia, a great atmosphere on the streets of the various cities, welcoming hosts and memorable matches. However, there are one or two caveats that future organising committees and the International Rugby Board and their new chairman, Bernard Lapasset, must take account of.

That there were some great matches is unquestionable. From the shock of the opening match and Argentina’s 17-12 win over France to their 34-10 win in the bronze medal match, there was plenty of excitement on the pitch. A shame then that the final was unable to extend the thrills, instead of serving up a stodge pudding with both teams waiting for the other to make a mistake. That it was the two youngest players on either team, South Africa’s Francois Steyn and England’s Mathew Tait, who were the only two that looked likely to make any impression with the ball in hand, says all it needs to. But that seems to be the way with world cups, of any variety, these days, with the desire not to lose overriding the need to go and win it. In terms of the final and the overall competition, the right team won, but it would have been good for the sake of the match if Mark Cueto’s try had counted, at least to breath some life into the proceedings.

Sadly the general style of play demonstrated is not one that will last long in the memory. There were moments of inspiration, but unfortunately they were few and far between and all too often teams had kicking as their first and only option. Argentina showed in the bronze medal match that they could put some width on the ball, but until then the up and under by Juan Martin Hernandez appeared to be their primary way of getting past defences. France provided the odd blast from the past, most notably against New Zealand, but on the big occasions froze badly. In the semi-final against England they stuck rigidly to their game plan or kick, kick and if that fails, kick again. Even the mercurial Fredrik Michalak failed to open his eyes to the possibilities out wide and stuck to putting his foot to the ball.

Thank god then for the smaller nations stirring things up. Argentina’s win over France was what the tournament needed as it’s start and Fiji were magnificent in their run to the quarterfinals. Mosese Rauluni was an excellent captain and at 20-20 they had South Africa on the ropes and sweating more than ordinary on a warm Marseille afternoon. This shouldn’t have surprised the Springboks following their narrow escape in the pool stages against Tonga, when one bounce of the ball could have swung the result the other way.

South Africa were worthy champions, though their style was functional rather than flash. In Fourie du Preez and wings Bryan Habana and JP Pietersen they have three wonderfully creative players. Unfortunately Butch James was in the traditional Springbok mould of uninspiring fly halves and it was up to Steyn to provide much of the spark in the backline. But with a pack of strong as the one they have and a kicker as accurate as Percy Montgomery, it would have been negligent to not use these strengths to the maximum.

There has been a lot of talk about the Stellenbosch Laws, which are being trialled in the Australian Rugby Championship, to encourage teams to keep the ball in hand, and there are some worthy ideas there. One idea I would consider is that if a missed drop kick goes dead, rather than being rewarded with a 22 dropout, a scrum is awarded from where the kick took place. Too often the drop kick was used for territory or to run down the clock, with any points accrued a bonus, notably in England’s win over Australia. With a 22 dropout the reward, the attacking team knows that it will receive the ball back in the opposition half and that the match is a minute or two nearer the end. Either way there is a definite need to bring the try back into vogue.

The rise of the smaller nations was one of the major stories to come from the world cup. The IRB-paid four-month preparation, which a number of the lower-tiered nations had, meant that the anticipated bloodbaths did not materialise and even though Portugal conceded over 100 points to New Zealand, they at least got on the scoreboard, something tier one Scotland failed to do. The world saw what Fiji could do with four months preparation; imagine what they could have done with four years worth?

These improvements need to be built upon, not ignored for another four years. It also needs the IRB to make a commitment to a 20-team tournament and dispel the rumoured reduction to 16. The colour and standards the likes of Portugal, Georgia, Tonga and USA brought to the world cup should be built upon and nurtured, through competition and player development and regular tests against the tier one nations. Furthermore any international federation worth it’s salt should only be thinking of expansion of it’s flagship tournament, with any reduction a complete contradiction of it’s claims that the rugby world cup is the third biggest sports event after the Olympic Games and FIFA World Cup.

The stadia were almost full and that alone gives New Zealand 2011 and all other hosts thereafter something to strive for. Whether the failure to reach 100 per cent in ticket sales is down to pricing, match scheduling, antipathy on the part of fans or anything else is unclear, but that is something that future organising committees should be aiming for. If it means a sliding scale of prices depending on the match and when and where it is taking place then so be it. After all it doesn’t take a clairvoyant to tell you that France v Ireland in Paris on a Friday night was going to be a sell-out, whilst Georgia v Namibia on a Wednesday afternoon in Lens was not. Therefore a little more leeway in ticket pricing and perhaps more geeing up of the locals is needed. It was something that worked a treat in RWC 2003, for the Namibia v Romania match in Launceston, when odd day birthdays supported one team and even day birthdays the other. It got the response it merited with a full and vocal crowd.

The selling-off of matches to neighbouring unions is something that should be left in the waste bin. Cardiff and the Millennium Stadium will always be a part of RWC 2007 folk-lore following France’s quarter-final victory over New Zealand there. However, it overlooks two atrociously –attended matches between Canada and Fiji and Wales and Japan that could and should have gone to venues in France. As for the decision to use Murrayfield, the lasting memory of that is of a poor Scotland second-string team (whose captain, Jason White, had publicly announced that they could beat New Zealand) putting on a training match for New Zealand in which it was hard to pick out which team was which, such was the design of their playing jerseys.

Hopefully though the biggest legacy of RWC 2007 will be the ending to mind numbing, four-year shadow boxing that now takes place between tournaments. England’s unexpected run to the final shows what can be done with a committed bunch of quality players, who all buy into the game plan and adapt it accordingly on the pitch. It also helps that New Zealand blew up so spectacularly against France, after pretty much four years of having their own-way.

If this means that summer and autumn tests regain their lustre, rather than serve to try out yet another combination or two then so much the better. Likewise, the 6 and Tri-Nations should be viewed as a competition in their own right, to be won as best as possible, rather than a chance to blood a few new faces in the last 20 minutes. International rugby, infact any rugby, should be about the here and now and not some pot of gold four years hence. It has taken some high profile bloodied noses and frighteningly determined Argentina and England sides to show this and frankly hasn’t come a moment too soon. JI 29/10/07