Chris Hewett: If fitness counts, back England

COMMENT

Here we are, then. The ever-popular Australians, who win everything in an unshaven kind of way and luxuriate in the inevitability of it all, against the ever-popular English, who never win anything.

The English are so insufferably arrogant even in their failures that the thought of them actually reversing the trend of decades sends a tremor of pure horror through the whole of the westernised Southern Hemisphere.

One of them has to take this 50-50 final, a game so tight it would be crazy to risk a single dollar of someone else's money at the bookmakers.

Maybe it would be better for the world if it were a 0-0 draw.

The fact of the matter, of course, is that the stereotypes are misleading.

That is generally the way with stereotypes. The Wallabies - and yes, this includes Mr Edward Jones, of Randwick - have not smirked and swaggered their way through this tournament because they understood from the outset that they were not good enough to do so.

Jones knew that to reach the final, he would have to make personnel changes on the hoof and trust in his ability to summon a great surge of green-and-gold spirit to see off the All Blacks. This, he has done.

He made a big call by dropping Joe Roff and giving Lote Tuqiri an extended opportunity on the left wing.

It cannot have been easy to kick Matthew Burke clean out of the 22 - Burke had done a fair bit for the Wallabies down the years - or to stick with Justin Harrison and Nathan Sharpe when David Giffin was fit and well and demanding a starting role.

And it was no simple matter to dream up and execute the strategy that did for New Zealand last weekend: a high-risk, unforgivingly precise form of possession rugby in which Steve Larkham was asked to pass the ball about 3000 times in the first quarter.

As for England ... well, if this lot are arrogant, what were the teams of the Will Carling era?

Martin Johnson may be many things, not all of them nice, but he is never boastful, condescending, patronising or presumptuous.

Neither are the men in the ranks, with one or two fairly obvious exceptions.

England do a lot of things the All Blacks would recognise and admire. They are given the best of everything, but they work like Trojans in return; they pay enormous attention to the finest detail; they are fit - some of them far fitter than they should be at their age - and they do not much mind how they win.

They know the Wallabies are smart, but they believe they can handle smartness.

As Phil Larder, the former league coach who is increasingly influential in this set-up, said a couple of days ago: "I've never before been involved with a team of people so psychologically strong.

"I've worked against such teams - Wigan and the Kangaroos in league - and I've taken a close look at the Aussie cricket team. I feel we have that x-factor now, the ability to win games that maybe we shouldn't win."

So, the big question: can they win this one? They are certainly handsomely equipped to do so, particularly in the tight five.

Forwards decide who win rugby matches - backs merely decide by how many - and Johnson, with Steve Thompson, Phil Vickery and Ben Kay alongside him in the trenches, will not be petrified by Brendan Cannon or Nathan Sharpe.

And assuming the English heavies get themselves on the front foot, Richard Hill and Neil Back should be able to handle the Smith-Waugh double act in the Wallaby back row.

Without space, Larkham would be forced to drop back in the pocket and work things out from there.

Who knows? Maybe England will kick badly and let the Wallaby wide runners out of the cage.

Yet even then, even if Tuqiri and Sailor and Rogers come up with a try or two, Mr J. Wilkinson Esq should be good for 15 points minimum.

Whichever way you look at it, England are in a handy position. But there again, this is Sydney and an Australian sports team is chasing a trophy. Bet against them at your peril.

- INDEPENDENT

Full World Cup coverage