KEY POINTS:
The Rugby World Cup in France has been a grand occasion, as international sports festivals usually are. Sometimes it is only when the final whistle has sounded and the celebrations have begun that audiences realise what a treat they have had. This World Cup has produced all the
drama of unexpected triumphs and disappointments that tournaments need. The stadiums were magnificent, the crowds enthusiastic and the support drawn from England for the semifinals and final was a boon to the game, as were the successes of Argentina, Fiji and Tonga.
And the rugby was not too bad, either. Certainly it was not the spectacle that Graham Henry's All Blacks have produced over the past few years but the knock-out rounds produced matches that were intense, gripping, fast and furious.
The early pool matches suggested the event would be a Southern Hemisphere walkover but it turned out quite differently. England and France, after dismal early defeats, stiffened their defences to beat Australia and New Zealand in the quarter-finals. England's defence beat French flair in their semifinal and yesterday the Springboks beat England at their own game.
South Africa's coach warned us long ago that defence would win the 2007 World Cup and yesterday he proved it. The Springboks forced the English to play the more enterprising game. There were no tries in the final, few line breaks and the cup was decided by five penalty goals to two. South Africa deserve their second World Cup. They will carry the mantle of world champions more credibly than England have done.
At the end of the celebrations yesterday the words "New Zealand 2011" flared on the stadium field. France's World Cup has left us with much to do to match the splendour of the amenities and the event's presentation. But we can do better than France by involving the whole country in hosting the pool rounds and giving lower-ranked teams the benefits of preparing in a provincial environment here.
The most important challenge we should set for ourselves, however, is to improve rugby. The knock-out matches in this World Cup were good defensive contests but rugby can be much better. Henry set out with the All Blacks to play a more expansive style and win. Until this year he was succeeding. The All Blacks won the Tri-Nations and completed clean sweeps on northern tours by running and passing, spreading the attacks and counter-attacking from anywhere. It was exhilarating rugby, and it was not the reason we failed at this World Cup.
For some reason Henry's team could not reproduce the same pattern this year. The difference was evident before the World Cup. The team were not as commanding as in previous seasons. The reason may have been the loss, or non-selection, of some key players, or the loss of momentum when so many were rested for the first month of the season. Whatever went wrong, we must not lower our hopes for the great game rugby can be.
New Zealand has led rugby's development for a long time. The winning power of All Black teams has been such that the way they played has generally been copied by others. It has been no different in the professional era. Players are bigger, fitter and faster and the running, passing game has prospered.
Rugby needs that sort of spectacle if it is to retain the television audiences it needs as a professional sport. It needs to improve its rules to produce that sort of game and encourage teams to play the game rugby can be. That should be the host's aim for World Cup 2011. Let's not just win this elusive cup, let's win it well.