04/16/24
November 16, 2003
Les who?: Australia v England final. Chips firmly down.
It is possible to question the quality of opposition which the All Blacks and Les Bleux met in the group stages, but you can certainly argue that they played the most attractive rugby. Like Real Madrid in soccer, this boots you nothing if you leak at the back. The Wallabies won that game with one brutal interception from a graveyard pass, if you ask me. After that they simply exploited the mistakes the All Blacks inevitably made in their catch-up rugby. I would have thought it, actually. They have very much had the edge in recent years in the more competitive games, and although the All Blacks had improved tremendously pre-tournament, the experience in the Aussie side combined with the home advantage was always likely to count. I had this one down as too close to call ... I "knew" England would be in the final and had seen absolutely nothing to convince me otherwise (we play the French a fair bit and we know how to stop them playing), but could not have told you until twenty minutes from the end of that game who would be joining us. Although the conditions were horrific for the England v France match, you can call it a classic encounter as both teams have often traditionally had to play rugby in those conditions, and this was a well-played game, all things considered. The dimples on these world cup balls means they are hard to catch with fingertips when wet (and most of the passing sides mainly catch with fingertips), so a kicking game was more appropriate. As I had been saying since the start of the tournament, Michalak looks every bit the future star, but is not yet ready for the pressure we could put them under in that type of match, and indeed they had to bring him off before the end because nothing was going right for him. To be fair we probably had the best of the wind, but we also have the best kicker in the game, and not bad tactical support in the shape of Mike Catt. Not a pretty game but a performance which filled me with pride. However, the Wallabies shouldn't fool themselves that kicking is all there is to the England game, as they should be able to just about remember an expansive, wide game, in perfect conditions, with which we recently beat them with two of the best tries I have ever seen in international rugby union. Our defence, usually the best in the world, has been atrocious all competition, especially in the first halves of matches, although we have managed to eventually put our stamp on all of the games before the finish. The French try was another example of a poor defensive start from England, but from that point on our game got better, especially as we realised we could not play pretty rugby and just needed to kick advantage and put them under pressure in their own half. Many said before the match that we had peaked too early before the competition, but looking at the England progression I would not advise betting against it all coming to the boil at precisely the right time. This can also be said of the Wallabies. Hopefully the final will be a very different show indeed ...
posted by walrus at 11:43 AM on November 16, 2003
Any weather forecast for the final match next weekend? I realize its the rainy time of year Down Under.
posted by billsaysthis at 12:56 PM on November 16, 2003
Well, it looks like I was right earlier. Man, I hope I'm wrong about Australia beating us though. Australia looked fucking awesome against the All Blacks though (helped, I know, by New Zealand losing their discipline entirely in the second half). I am, it must be said, not too optimistic about our chances against Australia. I don't think any Englishman can ever be that optimistic about our chances of beating Australia at anything. Too many years of hurt and humiliation. Many said before the match that we had peaked too early before the competition, but looking at the England progression I would not advise betting against it all coming to the boil at precisely the right time. This can also be said of the Wallabies. I agree. It should be a classic. Hopefully better than the 1991 final (especially in terms of the result).
posted by dng at 03:28 AM on November 17, 2003
By the way ... personal post-final fantasy: a picture of Johnny Wilkinson holding up the world cup on the front of every Australian newspaper, with the headline "Was that all they had?"
posted by walrus at 12:03 PM on November 17, 2003
Walrus - I'm told one of the Aussie papers (The Australian) had the good grace, after Gregan won a match with a drop goal, to run a picture of him with the caption, "Is this all we've got?"
posted by rodgerd at 12:38 PM on November 17, 2003
In related news, apparently things are reaching America's Cup levels of paranoia.
posted by rodgerd at 12:45 PM on November 17, 2003
Thanks for the info rodgerd! You're not paranoid if they're out to get you, but I notice they didn't mention actually finding any devices yet. Will both teams be up for the third place play-off, you think? I think it's got a chance of being a better-looking match than the final if they both go for it, although the final will be a fascinating close-quarters contest: much more battling rugby rather than flair, methinks. I also think the final will be one by just the odd few points. Can't tell you who it will be: both teams seem to be get stronger as the game goes on. Although the Wallabies have a home advantage, we're a bloody hard team to beat on the day, and we'll pressure them every chance we get. My heart still says England, but either of the two teams we could have met in the final would give me great concern for completely different reasons. With the All Blacks I would have worried about what they could put past us, but with the Wallabies I will be more worried about what we can put past them.
posted by walrus at 01:13 PM on November 17, 2003
"one" = "won"
posted by walrus at 01:14 PM on November 17, 2003
Well well well. Who would have thought the Aussies could beat New Zealand? It's interesting that the two outstanding teams of the group stages were knocked out. When it comes down to it, rugby is about winning games, not looking good. I suppose you could say that rugby and American football are similar. At the highest level, you need a top quality defence. Australia and England probably have the two best defences in the world. England-France was no classic, but then in the conditions, it was never going to be. What I was impressed with was the way England strangled the game in the second half. In 1991, Australia won the world cup by beating England in England. Let's hope it's the other way round this time.