Smash them: Samoa showed the Wallabies the way

Smash them: Samoa showed the Wallabies the way

By Spiro Zavos, June 17, 2007

One of the less pleasant experiences I’ve had as a rugby journalist was joining a group of reptiles for a briefing on England’s bid to host the 2007 Rugby World Cup.

The event was at a Chinese restaurant on Sydney’s north shore. Leading England’s team of officials doing the briefing was Francis Baron, who is every bit as bossy and self-righteous in his opinions as his name suggests. One of the points of contention I raised with Baron as a black mark against England’s bid was that outside of Twickenham, English rugby had no other rugby stadiums that were good enough to host a World Cup match. Some of the football pitches they intended to use, such as Manchester United’s home ground, were terrific venues but the fields didn’t allow for a maximum sized rugby field.

The football ground at Bristol, one of the designated grounds of England’s 2007 World Cup, and where the All Blacks played Tonga in 1999, was decrepit and too small. ‘I’ve heard about you,’ Baron muttered when I made these points. There was more than a touch of arrogance in his muttering, as if some one from the colonies who questioned the wisdom of headquarters, was an upstart who deserved to be put in his place. His reply in detail was totally inadequate.

So it doesn’t surprise me that Baron is leading the argument to reduce the number of teams in the World Cup from 20 to 16. The bottom line for England with a 16-team World Cup tournament is that eight grounds and not 10 grounds a round would be needed for the pool rounds. Baron also wants the top tier nations NEVER to play the second tier nations. Again, such a system would mean that England played more - lucrative? - matches against South African, Australia, and NZ and fewer matches against less illustrious opponents.

The argument against Baron’s convenient (for the self-styled Rugby Football Union - England’s rugby union) arguments of creating an elite and isolated group of tier one rugby nations was well put by a NZ journalist, Michael Donaldson, after Canada’s game and belligerent match against the All Blacks. The 64-13 result belied the true rugby spirit of never giving up that Canada epitomised during the contest. ‘Baron’s view,’ Donaldson wrote, ‘would also deny Canada the thrill of looking at the scoreboard in the 21st minute and reading 12 - 10 to New Zealand. Game on.’

And Baron’s policy would also deny a player like Mike Pyke the thrill of scoring a long range try against NZ. Pyke intercepted a pass from a NZ backline move identical to that which gave Stirling Mortlock his famous intercept try against the All Blacks in the 2003 World Cup semi-final.

For the Canadians, as it was for the Fijians at Perth, playing against the legendary players of world rugby is a thrill of a lifetime. It is a pleasure that mean-spirited officials like Baron should not deny players from less rugby nations in the World Cup, and in one-off tests.

There is also a value for the first tier countries playing the lesser nations. The Springboks this season against England in two tests looked like World Cup winners. But then Manu Samoa played the South African second-string squad. The Samoans showed that gang tackling, hitting the ball runner hard and securely, reduced the Springboks to a barge and bash game that could be contained, provided the tackling and defensive lines were secure.

Samoa demonstrated to the rest of the rugby world that the Springboks, to use a boxing analogy, were Mike Tyson, throwing haymakers and knock-out punches but lacking in skills in the crucial five-eighths area to dissect a strong, front-on and aggressive defence. The Springboks can’t do too much about this without a skilful playmaker at five-eighths. But the Wallabies got the message.

They embraced the Samoan defensive policy - almost successfully - against the Springboks at Newlands. Players that this writer has scorned in the past lifted their game considerably. Stand up and take a bow George Gregan, Matt Dunning, Rocky Elsom, Lote Tuqiri and Nathan Sharpe. Daniel Vickerman, Stephen Larkham, Matt Giteau and Geroge Smith were - as usual - outstanding players, as well. My thought was that the Wallabies coaching staff, in fact, made a mistake in substituting Smith with Phil Waugh. Waugh had trouble containing Pierre Spies running from the scrums and it was from these breaks that the Springboks got themselves into the position to kick the two drop goals to win the test.

If there is such a thing as a ‘good loss’ - and I find the concept an unappealing oxymoron - then the Wallabies had a good loss in South Africa. They were leading at half-time and most teams go on from this position to win tests. They exposed strategic and skills weaknesses in the Springboks. Converting this terrific effort into victories against the All Blacks at Melbourne on June 30 and the Springboks at Sydney on July 7 are the next challenges of the World Cup journey.

Read more great work from the Zavos family @ www.theroar.com.au