Sponsored Links:
Getty Images
For the sake of the game and its future, writes Peter Bills, it would be a whole lot better if the Bok' blinkered strategy failed.
‘Blessed is the man who expects nothing for he shall never be disappointed.’ Contrary to popular belief, English essayist Alexander Pope did not write his famous line with the Rugby World Cup in mind. But he might as well have done.
Strip away the hype and the sense of occasion and the last three World Cups have been crushing disappointments. Australia ground their way to victory in 1999 applying a tourniquet to all-comers while England in 2003 and South Africa in 2007 kicked the living daylights out of the sport to reach their individual Valhalla.
You have to go all the way back to the South African World Cup of 1995 to uncover not just the excitement and colour of the event but some outstanding rugby. Remember Jonah Lomu, the man who ran over a Catt to score tries?
It may have taken the International Rugby Board a devil of a time to recognise the faults inherent within its sport. But the fact is, it has done so and in time for this year’s World Cup.
That’s one of the reasons I believe this New Zealand-hosted tournament, which kicks off in Auckland on Friday, could become one of the best yet. It is a hell of a long way for most people to go to see a World Cup, but if they return to their homes thrilled at memories of the blur of movement, the sight of both forwards and backs attacking with ball in hand and some spectacular tries scored at regular intervals, even such a long journey will have been worth it.
Rugby union circa 2011 needs an outstanding World Cup and it seems to me it has a very good chance of getting it. At last, laws that allowed the slow and inexorable suffocation of the play, either by nefarious forwards killing their opponents’ ball or constant kicks out of hand, have been tweaked.
What the IRB likes to call the “new law interpretations” have come down hard on those intent only on negativity and killing the game. That has meant sides with the desire to run with the ball and attack by another method other than kicking, have seen the opportunities opening up before them.
One of the worst examples of this contagious suffocation at the last World Cup was the tolerance of players following up a kick downfield by a colleague. The defensive blanket they spread across the field in such circumstances meant that the player catching the ball or regaining possession had virtually no chance of doing anything other than lamely kick the ball back from where it came.
These mindless kicking sessions so disfigured the game that rugby came close to mislaying the whole creed upon which it was forged, namely a sport where a player could pick up the ball and run with it.
Happily, the new law interpretations have done something about all this. So much so that some of the rugby that has been played under these new interpretations has been wondrous.
New Zealand and Australia have led the way and thus merit the belief that they are likely to meet in the 2011 World Cup final at Auckland’s Eden Park on October 23. If they do and if they have held true to the new creed throughout the tournament, we may see a final to captivate the world.
The cynics sneer that goal kicking has always decided every World Cup and this one will be no different. Of course, it will again be important especially in pool games that bring together two of the major nations, like New Zealand v France and Australia v Ireland. Nerves invade the mind of every sporting human being; they frequently affect philosophy and determine courses of action.
Even so, what has become very clear is that the side which maintains its belief in attacking rugby, that seeks to get the ball through the hands and keep it alive will, in the majority of cases, eventually profit. I am willing to promise you here and now – if New Zealand hold true to this attacking philosophy, as coach Graham Henry insists they will, then they will terrify most of the teams they encounter.
I honestly wonder whether any of the northern hemisphere-based sides could keep up for long with such a fast, high tempo game. Nor am I convinced most of the European teams have the ball skills under the pressure of contact and pace to withstand such a challenge.
But if, as the Italy coach Nick Mallett believes, this is likely to become a largely southern hemisphere dominated World Cup, so be it. If the countries south of the equator, South Africa excepted, produce rugby that captivates audiences right around the world then that can only be of long term advantage to the game as a whole.
If countries like New Zealand and Australia send out a siren message that the skills and fitness levels required to play this ‘new’ game successfully are deficient north of the equator, then it will be up to those countries to take the necessary measures to catch up.
In players like Dan Carter, Zac Guildford, Cory Jane, Mils Muliaina, Conrad Smith, Sonny Bill Williams and Ma’a Nonu, the New Zealanders clearly have the personnel to triumph. The Australians can match some of those illustrious performers with brilliant individuals of their own like Quade Cooper, Will Genia, James O’Connor, Kurtley Beale and Digby Ioane.
But perhaps crucially, the Wallabies do not have the strength in depth of the All Blacks.
As for the South Africans, their game has atrophied for four years under coach Peter de Villiers. They will play the 2011 tournament much as they played 2007, hoping their big, physical forward pack, kicking half-backs and physically solid backs can repel all opponents.
For the sake of the game and its future, you have to say it would be a whole lot better if such a blinkered strategy failed.
In Europe, three countries excite most interest – France, England and maybe Ireland. There is no earthly reason why the mercurial French should do anything much. They have been an enigma in recent years, uncertain which philosophy to embrace. The kind of halfway house upon which they have settled in terms of a playing philosophy has not been convincing. All of which probably means France will go close, because for sure there will be upsets and surprises at some stage of the tournament.
England could win the World Cup – but in 2015 when they host it, not this time. They have a young side with much promise and could, conceivably, reach another final if, as expected, they are confronted by France in the quarter-finals and Australia in the semis. They know how to beat both countries, although Australia’s Tri-Nations victory over New Zealand last weekend will have lifted their confidence massively.
A month ago, Ireland would have been great challengers. They have a nice mix of senior players, established performers and some hugely exciting youngsters. But they have stumbled, with four straight Test defeats.
The key to their tournament will surely be the pool game against Australia. If they could win that, the road to the final would open up before them with a potential quarter-final against Samoa and probably a semi-final against either England or France. Lose it and a quarter-final against South Africa would loom.
But, putting aside national interests, you have to say that if this World Cup produces a series of fabulous, memorable matches filled with great rugby, then the game itself would be the ultimate winner.
|
|
huh?, wrote
I am surprised I managed to get all the way through this article, which was both boring and senseless. The absolute dribble that this writer has stated here leads me to believe that writing about rugby is most probably a hobby for him and not a profession. Come 23 October, not one team in the world would opt for running rugby in a WC final.
Amuzbocaj, wrote
Bills should stick to writing flowery observations on world war one memorial sites. His writing on rugby is pointless and inane. Please tell me he doesn't get paid for his penning of this drivel.
Joburg Tumble, wrote
@ Ybgur Noinu - ha ha ! i think you are the only one who got it!! Sneaky Brit journo's tryning to subvert our southern game plans.... good on ya !
BN, wrote
Peter Bills, you're an idiot. Who are you anyway? Has your team won the WC twice? As for @Zaheer Cassim...I think the players have a lot of fun celebrating a WC win and partying like rock stars. They gotta play the rugby that wins cups. Besides the 1st WC final, none have been amazing try scoring fests. It is what it is...and Peter is what he is...CLUELESS! Boom!
Mark, wrote
All you people complaining here about the way we play, know nothing about rugby. 2 simple facts Both rugby world cups we won explain to me exactly what style of rugby we played????? Stop moaning and support them.
Anonymous, wrote
Your trying to regurgitate the Australia sports newspapers like "The Roar". Get your own identity and leave the coaching to the coaches.The game is won and lost in the tight play and who controls the ball in the loose play. Each nation plays its own unique style of rugby. GO BOKKE.
Kev, wrote
Bills is spot on. How does the one-dimentional rugby under Peter de Villiers differ from the boring "stampkar" rugby under other unimaginative previous coaches like Markgraaf? How often do our wings get the ball in full flight and how can be be proud of Springbok rugby when we have resort all the time to a kick and charge game plan?
zaheer cassim, wrote
I agree with the author. I would like to see more free flowing rugby and although the Bokke always get the results in the WC, its boring rugby. I want to see the players have fun.
Thor!, wrote
Mind games, every Peter and his dog will come out and say something to unsettle the other. This fella is obviously trying to set a bar by which everybody should play. Rubbish! World cups are about doing the necessary to win the tournament. I will say this, NZ will NOT win the world cup playing expansive rugby the way they tried to do in the tri-nations final match! The first half was a disaster for them. They came back in the second half by using their forwards, yes forwrads to lay the foundation for attack. Who does that best, SA!! I'll bet you the other teams studied that game and have put measures to counter BOTH NZ and AUS. Case closed (Edited by IOL)
Kitaarnek, wrote
1995 was exciting because of Jonah Lomum, but he couldn't win the All Blacks the World Cup. The final was dominated by the two flyhalves! In 2007 the Springboks scored the second most tries (32), 15 less than New Zealand but they had Romania and Portugal (108 points scored by All Blacks in that match) in their group. Bryan Habana was the tournament's top try scorer in 2007! So what is this writer talking about?
Khalsa Singh, wrote
Great article Peter. Would love to see the Boks play running rugby, but this negative kick+chase rubbish is killing the game. Agreed...for the sake of rugby union as a sport, it would be a crime if NZ dont win.
Anonymous, wrote
Get with the program Peter bills - Rugby is here to stay and the style of rugby is irrelevant, if you are so worried about the popularity of rugby why don't you address the fact that only a small portion of our nation has access to the beautiful game on SA TV - dude wake up!
Deebee, wrote
@Tony Fisher - absolutely! And the fact that the Blue Bulls for once scored more tries and lost is a marvellous joy in itself. May it long continue!
Tony Fisher, wrote
World cups are not about how mant tries you score and then lose the match but more about how you defend, force the penalties and kick the goals. On Saturday the Blue Bulls scored 4 tries, the Sharks 3 but they still lost the game and the Sharks came away with 4 points to 1 for the Blue Bulls!
Deebee, wrote
The Boks in 2007 were the only side to score at least 30 points a match (final excluded) and at least three tries a match. Peter 'Tosh' Bills would be well advised to rewatch some of those matches where the Boks scored from moves started in their own half. he then belittles the Bok approach but puts England - England!!! - in the exciting camp. With Martin Johnson in charge??? What rubbish. The problem is, if you read the UK press, it's almost expected of journos to rubbish an event before it takes place and decry how lousy a tournament is before it's even kicked off. They do it across the board - rugby, soccer, Olympics, you name it.
Anon.E.Mouse, wrote
Peter Bills should stop taking pills. Winning is winning, different teams have different styles of play and yes its great on the eye to watch NZ and Aus play, but when last has NZ won the world cup? In a different sporting code football, Arsenal plays arguably the prettiest footy in England, when last have they won the League? Peter Bills should to retire and stop spewing nonsense like this which make many think he is a newbie amateur rather than a seasoned sports journalist.
Ryan, wrote
@ Alwyn ... nice clear thinking and argument friend. I wish SA could play a more exciting style of rugby, but there is merit in your argument. makes sense.
Spock101, wrote
@ Anonymous 09:04 - Not according to Bakkies Botha. Do you know something he doesn't? After all, he is the one that will be on the field with John Smit, isn't he? Why don't you go follow tiddly winks - maybe that's more suited to your whinging personality.
Greg Shark, wrote
@john - referee errors aside, because many forward passes nowadays are due to the laws favouring fast running rugby and are not penalised, there are teams that commit breaches of the laws precisely to stop teams scoring tries. so you advocate increase try points and decreasing penalties points - what do you think the result will be? more penalties of course! look how often the all blacks get away with forward passes and then score tries, very often off side from rucks and get away with it. the answer may be in bringing in more on field observers to ensure the laws are adhered to and fairly applied then off side players will be further back and that extra yard will give the attacking team an even chance instead of being hit back behind the advantage line at rucks! as for bills....what do you expect he's just being peter bills
Amakosi, wrote
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Services
Buying a car has never been easy. Motoring.co.za contains a large database of car listings with a user friendly search.
Start searching today »
Business Directory
We like to make your life easier
Mobile
Browse IOL on your phone at m.iol.co.za.
Newsletters
Subscribe to our newsletters. News delivered to your inbox!
Comment Guidelines