And then there were two.
We’ve seen it all in this World Cup – giant-killings, party-poopings, redemptions and jaw-dropping excellence – but we’ve gradually whittled it down to just two sides. Or, rather, the tournament has been whittled down from a World Cup, to a Rugby Championship… to a Bledisloe Cup.
One thing that the protagonists and fans of one of the sport’s greatest rivalries definitely don’t need is extra motivation for this one – but they’ve got it. In the form of being crowned World Champions. No pressure there, then.
Buckle up, brace yourself, pack a spare pair of underpants – because this will go down to the wire.
NEW ZEALAND
Steve Hansen has made my job a lot more difficult because, instead of waffling on for two paragraphs about mundane team changes and selection issues, I’m left to ponder the deeper tactical aspects of the All Blacks’ strategy after he named an unchanged squad from the one that defeated South African in the semi-final. The fact that they got through 80 minutes against the Springboks without getting anybody crocked deserves some sort of award in itself.
You can attempt to analyse the All Blacks all you want but all it boils down to is that every man who pulls on a silver-fern is a very good, very smart rugby player. The set-piece is solid, the basic skill-set is excellent, the balance of the side is spot on. Want to play an open game against them? Good luck with that. Fancy an arm-wrestle? Bring it on. The current New Zealand side has been the best team in the World for at least six years because they have an all-court ability to meet different kind of challenges and inevitably dictate the way that the game pans out.
The only time we have ever really seen the All Blacks look wobbly is when sides force the game themselves, and do so accurately – and there are very few that have the nerve or the execution to do it well – but it can be done and, as so often is the case, the breakdown is the focus. Last week the Springboks had the upper hand in the first half because they won the gainline battle with their back row and because Francois Louw was an absolute menace over the ball whenever the men in black tried to put some phases together – in the Rugby Championship, they were turned over by the Wallabies because they suddenly couldn’t control their own ball in the face of the Hooper-Pocock axis. Inevitably – as they showed last week – they adapt, change the way they play (for example, by kicking more), and recover. But they are not invincible.
They are pretty bloody close, though, and you can bet that they won’t leave anything out there on the pitch on Saturday. This is so much more than ‘just’ a World Cup Final for the Kiwis. This is the chance to write history – to become the first side ever to retain the title. But, even more importantly, their legacy is on the line. Probably the best side to ever play rugby will see five of its icons – McCaw, Carter, Nonu, Smith, Mealamu – retire after Saturday evening and there can be little argument that this will be the end of an era. How the sun sets and what legacy is left behind – that’s what the All Blacks are fighting for.
One to watch: Richie McCaw
Well, how unoriginal of me. But come on, one last chance to see the Yoda of the breakdown in action? Sign me up. His battle with Pocock promises to be absolutely epic and you can expect him to reel out every trick in the book to keep his opposite numbers at bay – if you have my drinking game to hand, it could get messy. McCaw will know that his role on Saturday will be predominantly protective, and if he can neutralise the Aussie stealers then the All Blacks have more than enough to build the phases and score some tries.
AUSTRALIA
Michael Chieka, well on the way to earning the deserved nickname of ‘Magic Mike’ (although one hopes he keeps his clothes on) has made just one change to the side which disposed of the Pumas in their semi-final, dropping most-capped prop James Slipper to the bench after his struggles against the Argentina pack, and re-instating the fit-again and mightily impressive young Scott Sio. Under the guidance of Mario Ledesma, the Aussies have moulded a prop that finally offers set-piece power and stability to match their talents in the loose. You just wonder if they may be fancying themselves in the scrum against the World Champions – the Kiwis are no mugs there, by any stretch of the imagination, but it’s far from their strongest suit.
The Wallabies’ chances of causing an upset and winning their first World Cup for 16 years will be hinging on the performances of two men – David Pocock and Bernard Foley. More about Pocock below, but the best the All Blacks can hope for with him is to keep him anonymous – the man who has the capacity to implode every now and again is the gifted fly-half. I should specify that I am one of the Waratah playmaker’s biggest fans and his breakthrough in 2014 was superb, but this year he has – in parts – looked a wee bit shaky.
The KIWIS will only have to look back to the first half of their loss against the men in gold earlier this year to know that they can shut down a dangerous Wallaby backline at source – Foley was all over the place, dropping passes, scuffing kicks, and all because the wall of black was pressing at an alarming speed. Make no mistake, he will be targeted. But the second half of that game showed the other side to Foley… ‘the Iceman’. The man who knocks over monumentally high-pressure kicks on a regular basis (for the Super XV title in 2014, to knock-out Scotland just a fortnight ago) came out and bossed the game. He shook off the All Black defence by varying his play and executing superbly, with fantastic vision. If the Iceman is the Foley we see on Saturday, then Chieka’s boys will fancy their chances.
Their display against the Pumas will have given Hansen food for thought – their defence (especially on the goal-line) has been mostly exceptional, but there were points when they were pierced far too easily around the fringes by runners attacking inside the 10 channel. If Cordero can scoot through, then so can Milner-Skudder and, with less subtlety, Julian ‘the Bus’ Savea. But the Kiwi boss will also have noted how clinical this Australia side have become, biding their time patiently and using the hands of Giteau and Foley to probe the wider channels before exploiting the mismatches and overlaps… the Wallabies have come a long way in 12 months.
Theirs is a story of redemption – one year ago, they were the laughing stock of international rugby, a walking catastrophe of PR disasters and on-field mediocrity. Now, they are the real deal. Their disposal of England in the group stages will go down as one of the great displays in this World Cup and you get a sense, in stark contrast to the team they face on Saturday, that this is a team which is at the beginning of its journey. This is their opportunity to complete the resurrection of Australian rugby.
One to watch: David Pocock
Strike two for predictability on my part, but I don’t care. Yes, he is part of a great unit with Hooper and the unsung Fardy and, yes, Foley is a key man in his own right, but so much of the hope for the men in gold depends on this guy. I am not exaggerating when I say that he turns the Wallabies from a good team into a great team. He is, without question (sorry All Black fans) the best openside and breakdown operator in the world at the moment, regardless of the number on his back, and if he can break down the New Zealand attack with anything like the regularity he has shown against others, then his side will have the upper hand.
PREDICTION
The honour falls to me to predict the World Cup final, which means – when I get it spectacularly wrong – the embarrassment is all the greater. That said, I have picked up splinters from sitting on the fence when trying to call this one. The All Blacks have the experience, but I think the Wallabies are one of the few sides with the weapons to rattle them.
One point that will be critical is that the All Blacks have the stronger bench of the two squads, which could be a decider later on, but I cannot shake from my memory the images of the ‘Pooper’-axis ruffling Kiwi feathers just three months ago. A lot has changed since then. I’m not sure if the result will. Australia by 2.
P.S. Can we all blow a great big raspberry to whoever scheduled the Final please? If you remember 2003 and 2011, watching the biggest game of the last four years wasn’t that tenuous (although forcing Guinness down at that time in the morning over here was a challenge), since they all kicked off at 8am, thanks to the night-time kick-offs down under. This one? It kicks off at 4pm. 3am in Australia, 5am in New Zealand. Probably just so it doesn’t clash with the X-Factor.
No wonder everyone bloody hates us.
By Mike Cooper (@RuckedOver)
Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images
You are right. The timing is utterly absurd – it would have been a pretty safe bet that at least one of the Southern Hemisphere teams would make it to the final, so why not hold it in the evening? No logic to a 4pm kick-off
14 degrees and dry at Twickers – couldn’t be a better forecast for it.
Personally, I had a moment when I thought Aus could do it but now I’ve decided that I can’t see beyond the All Blacks.
They’ve been exposed to the Hooper Pocock axis already, so know what to expect. Their rucking and counter rucking is probably the best in the world, so I’d imagine their props and locks will have a busy day targeting Pocock and Hooper
Kaino will be told to get in Foley’s face as much as he can and if he does, he could well upset Foley.
As the last couple of matches have shown, the Aus defence, whilst on the whole pretty good does have moments when it goes missing. That’s ok against teams like Scotland and even Argentina as the scramble defence has worked well and the opposition have not made the most of their breaks. However, if NZ find the same gaps then the result will be tries
As for the set-piece. Although it’s clearly come a long way, the Aus scrum has been somewhat exposed by Scotland and Argentina – suggesting that their previous successes have been more due to the weaknesses of Wales and England (and successful social media campaigns) than to its intrinsic strength. However, NZ were outclassed in the scrum by South Africa. So the two sides are likely to cancel each other out here, perhaps leaning slightly to Aus
In the line-out, the Kiwis have stolen more than any other team so far, so no doubt they’ll attack the Aussies here.
Finally, I just can’t see the ABs sayiong goodbye to McCaw, Carter, Nonu et al without a win.
My feeling is that Aus are playing out of their skins atm but that NZ have another gear they can to, so I think a NZ win, will be close for most of the match but comfortable by the final whistle (though the neutral in me would love extra time).
The timing is all the more odd as it’s Halloween too? Surely 4pm will be prime trick or treating time for young children, who might otherwise be inducted into rugby if the final is good.
Could be an arm wrestle like the last 1 & go near the wire, but why, on the other hand does this need to be the case?
Both sides can score TRIES… & both can also defend, but if Nigel lets the game flow & decides not to blow, we might be in for an epic? Maybe.
It all rests on the day of course. On who makes least errors & creates & takes their chances.
The breakdown will be pretty key & I was surprised that Hansen didn’t play Vito instead of Kaino more often. The former is quicker & has gas & guile in attack. Thought he might counter Pocock more effectively because of some these attributes. However, Kaino is plenty exp, strong & he was no slouch in scoring v SA.
Some have queried the NZ scrum, but it’s held it’s own & the bench can stiffen it up as v Argentina & besides, it’s a means to an end, not an end in itself.
If NZ play more footy than they did v SA, when they seemed to grubber every other ball into TOUCH, this might serve them better. Also, as they are unlikely to wilt as the game draws to its conclusion, they therefore have the potential to up the tempo & hit Oz hard as they again did v the Saffas just before & leading to Nonu’s try.
It’ll be a hard match. Cheika will ensure his team’s not lacking in this area, but neither will the ABs, as a few of the S. Africans can likely testify after the last game… like Etzabeth, who looked like he was crying at the end, or Du Preez, who had a pumpkin on the right side of his face at the post match interview. Rather them than me, that’s for sure.
Anyway, this is all speculation & predicting the result is a mug’s game. However, NZ & Hansen really want this one & have prepped for it & paced themselves during this WC, so barring the unforseen the ABs ought to close it out. Cheika & Oz will have their other ideas on this of course, but I hope the bookies have have got it right this time, with NZ by 5 – at least when I last heard.
Scotland should be in this match but Craig Joubert was a disgrace. Despite good form, and potentially being dangerous, NZ should win this in a high-scoring game. Expect NZ to have a firm HT lead. NZ by 7
Understand yr frustration. Exp likewise in 07 (and 95) when I was denigrated for being a whinger, whiner etc for expressing similar sentiments to yrs.
Little consolation, but unfortunately these things happen. Joubert has been pilloried by WR who had NO process in place for an event such as this.
In real time how could any ref have been expected to see such an incident?
IMO Joubert was cravenly hung out to dry by WR. Shame on them and the game. Talk about disrepute! Darn right.
Still, time and all that… and Scotland now have a decent coach in place with whom you can look forward to the 6N and the future with a degree of confidence… unlike England?
Regds
Oh please, don’t embarrass yourself. Let it go! Craig Joubert cocked up, sure, but he’d also been pretty bloody generous to you in the scrum before that. You lost to a better side (albeit in horrible circumstances) and you assume you would have beaten Argentina in the semi-finals. I know where my money would have been on that one.
Also, I seem to recall that the only reason Scotland made the quarters was because the ref missed a knock-on by Laidlaw seconds before he scored the winner against Samoa? Maybe Japan should be in the Final?
Anyway my point is stop being bitter – it’s bad for your health – and be happy that it looks as if Scotland are well on the way to becoming a quality side.
You wish. If Australia can struggle against Scotland they really don’t deserve to be in the final. Good as they are, NZ have easily been the best team of the tournament. There was also an element of prejudice in Joubert. Deliberate knock-on? Anyone can see it wasn’t.If Australia did that he would have thought they were unlucky not to pull off the job. NZ deserve to win more than Australia. This should be a Scotland vs NZ final anyway. NZ by 7.
@ Ross – if the correct call was made it would have been an Oz scrum. If they get it moving forward they keep it in and look for the penalty (remember they were up against Welsh not Nel). If it doesn’t move they put it out to Foley for a straightforward drop goal. Even if we did get through we could not have played Argentina the way Oz did. Arg backs would have ripped us apart (we’d jus conceded 12 tries in 3 games) and we’d have had to win a points shoot out with no advantage at the setpiece (same as Oz) and no ability to win turnovers (polar opposite of Oz).
@ Coops – there was no knock on, it came off Denton’s boot. Even if it was called as a knock on (which it wasn’t – see my first point) it was a penalty advantage to Scotland. They would have scrummaged again and they would have kept scrummaging until they got the result they wanted – the Samoa pack was as useless in the setpiece as their backs were deadly in the loose.
I thought that the ball went fwd from 1 Scot to another?
Even if it hadn’t been knocked fwd, as you state, by the 1st Scot , surely the 2nd Scot was ‘off side’ when he played the ball (from in front of his colleague), which should have been a penalty?
But, as it was deemed that an Oz arm had ‘touched’ (? I couldn’t tell for sure from replays) the ball on it’s trajectory between the 2 Scots (and was apparently missed by Joubert), this then meant that the 2nd, ‘off side’, Scot (who last played the ball), wasn’t in fact ‘off side’… and this is what caused the fuss.
However, how anyone could have expected any ref in the world to have made a different decision from Joubert’s must surely have expected him to do so only if he (the ref) were wearing ‘X-Ray’ specs!?
Either way, the sin bin that led to an Aus try was never valid. Just because he’s Scottish doesn’t mean he didn’t try to get the ball.