nzherald.co.nz

Andrew Mehrtens: Rugby World Cup victory brought relief

5:30 AM Sunday Oct 30, 2011

I am sure a lot of people shared my first emotion at the end of last Sunday's final: relief. Ecstasy came later and of course there was immense pride and admiration for our brave lads and their coaching team.

But as the game unfolded I was getting some awful flashbacks to 2007: the All Blacks putting in their most stuttering, nervous and ineffective performance of the tournament, the inattention of the referee to the innumerable French indiscretions, and the phenomenal resolve of the French defence.

Stephen Donald has no rivals for the "came from nowhere" award in this tournament, and I was chuffed for him that his 100 per cent kicking record effectively won the Cup for New Zealand.

This is a guy who gives his all in the black jersey - the tightness of which clearly indicates his recent whitebaiting trips were largely successful ones ...

On top of that, to land a pressure goal with a ball he must only have kicked a handful of times, makes me take my hat off to a guy who is obviously popular within the team.

While the rugby was not necessarily always the best, that is finals rugby and the spectacle itself topped off a very positive and exciting tournament.

To me, the biggest strides were made by the Welsh, who played a simple, effective high-intensity game and showed that as they mature further they will be a force to be reckoned with. The win of the tournament goes to the Tongan team over France - the first time one of the so-called "big five" has lost to a "minnow" at the World Cup. The look on the Tongan front row's faces in the final scrums on fulltime was priceless.

That victory showed the power of mental preparation: Tonga no doubt entered this tournament gunning for the French, and in the meantime took their eyes slightly off the Canadians who were targeting the team directly above them in their pool's pecking order.

The smaller teams suffered from an unhelpful schedule and a lack of playing depth. The schedule is certainly something that needs to be reassessed; having pools of five makes it impossible to have a uniform schedule.

The alternatives are to have 16 teams - which is too small - or to go to 24, which would create larger potential mismatches. But the scheduling of five-team pools is ridiculous.

My favourite players of the tournament were the surprises from the smaller nations. We all know how good Jerome Kaino, James O'Connor, Chris Ashton, Thierry Dusautoir and Fourie du Preez are and those guys were awesome to watch throughout the tournament. But it is less usual for the rugby world to be inspired by the likes of DTH van der Merwe and Adam Kleeberger from Canada, Kahn Fotuali'i from Samoa, the Namibian Theuns Kotze and Russia's big winger Denis Simplikevich. Of these, I enjoyed the contribution each game of van der Merwe, who was a constant threat on attack and a real niggling menace on defence as well.

Not all was positive of course and the consistency of refereeing was poor and should be a real concern for the IRB. The difference between good refs like Steve Walsh and Craig Joubert, and bad ones like, well, basically the rest, was stark.

Joubert didn't have his best game in the final; after setting strict standards at the breakdown in the semifinal by coming down hard early on against McCaw and Pocock, he took a much kinder line in the final and allowed a relative free-for-all which overall benefited the bigger cheats - and we all know who those are.

But the occasion was huge for New Zealand, and not just because we won. As a country, I think we showed a maturity and more of a willingness over the tournament to celebrate the event rather than the rugby.

The resulting seven-week party will leave a predictable hangover. One well worth having.

- Herald on Sunday

Mr Blobby (England) | 09:33AM Sunday, 30 Oct 2011
Unsure as to why having 16 teams is too small. There's only four teams who have won it and even the Tier 2 nations get beaten easily most of the time. Take it down to 16, have midweek games like they did back in '95, and complete the tourney within a month.
concerned (New Zealand) | 10:17AM Sunday, 30 Oct 2011
How about make it like the Super 15 but with 20 international teams, in world cup years we have the World cup Super 20, everyone gets to play everyone else and all the countries get to benefit from really big games, with no country being stuck with a really big bill.

Of course this wont mean much for the IRB's purse strings, but international rugby will benefit. That way everyone has a fair chance, home advantage is diminished and the winner will truly be able to say they have been the best. Right now, referees have decided the outcome and the eventual winner never even played the previous winner, -farcical.
Moriarty (Australia) | 11:07AM Sunday, 30 Oct 2011
Participation in the RWC is critical if the 'minnows' are to grow in strength and depth. Accordingly increase to 24 and have the bottom 16 first play off in four pools of four with the top two in each pool graduating to the second round where they join with the 'guns' in a further round of pool play, followed by RWC finals.

If teams play to form the 'minnows' have a month at the RWC as do the 'guns' but the door is open for a 'bolter' to upset the apple cart. I would suggest the same for the cricket World Cup, or any world cup for that manner.
Copyright ©2013, APN Holdings NZ Limited