Shock results and Rugby World Cups rarely coincide. In four previous tournaments you could count the genuine shocks on the fingers of one hand: Wales’s victory over Australia in the third-place playoff match of 1987, Wales losing to Western Samoa at Cardiff Arms Park in 1991 and France beating New Zealand in the 1999 semifinal at Twickenham.
So if there are so few shock results, have there been shock champions? Do me a favour! In 1987 the All Blacks were head and shoulders above every other side in the tournament and they had home advantage. In 1991 the Wallabies had great players in each of the key positions and their talisman, the great David Campese, goose-stepped off with the player of the tournament.
Campo also played his part off the field by telling the press that England were too boring to be allowed to win the World Cup. Responding in predictable fashion after killing every other side they had faced with their mighty forwards, England threw the ball around in the final and lost.
Only the natural pessimism of South African rugby supporters stood between the Springboks and victory in the 1995 tournament. Every other nation saw the fact that under Kitch Christie the Springboks had made giant strides and recognised that home advantage was key. There were trials and tribulations along the way, but once they reached the final at Ellis Park it was clear that fate would not allow anything but a win for the Rainbow Nation.
As for 1999, All Black coach John Hart’s decision to pick players out of position emasculated New Zealand’s chances, in sharp contrast to the sheer efficiency of Australia, whose impenetrable defence made them worthy champions.
Predicting the outcome of the 2003 tournament should be easy, then. Take the bookmakers’ favourites and put your house on them. Except that the bookmakers favour (albeit narrowly) New Zealand. The argument goes that the All Blacks are building yet another great team, that they are the Tri-Nations champions and that their only recent defeat was purely as the result of a poor kicking display by flyhalf Carlos Spencer.
Experience has shown that once the three or four sides who have a genuine chance to win a Rugby World Cup have been identified the key component thereafter is home advantage. The crucial form guide to 2003, then, does not concern the players, but the pathetic misadministration that allowed the tournament to be taken away from New Zealand.
The All Blacks will consequently have to play every match in hostile conditions and experience has shown that there is a delicate flower that wants to be loved lurking beneath that macho veneer. Accordingly, New Zealand may be good, but not good enough.
If we move one place down the bookmakers’ rankings we find the real winners of RWC 2003: England. There has been talk emanating from the Tri-Nations unions that England have gone the familiar route of peaking between tournaments. This is self-delusional nonsense, out of step with current trends.
The fact of the matter is that this England side is so far ahead of the pack that it stands comparison with any of the great teams of history. It has power, pace, intelligence and, above all, experience. No fewer than half of Clive Woodward’s squad did duty in the 1999 World Cup. To put that into perspective, the All Blacks boast eight out of 30, the Springboks a miserable three.
Given that South Africa and New Zealand contested the third-place play-off game in 1999, while England lost to both, one in pool play, one in that famous Paris quarterfinal, the rate of attrition is somewhat baffling.
Until, that is, you consider that both the All Blacks and the Springboks have used three coaches in four years since the last World Cup, while Woodward is still at the helm of the England side.
Although there was huge disappointment at the team’s performance in ’99, the baby was not thrown out with the bathwater. Instead the Rugby Football Union set itself the task of playing Tri-Nations teams far more often and of sending development teams on tour to places like Argentina and Canada.
The best-laid plans are frequently worthless without a bit of luck and it was when Jason Robinson moved to union from league that things began to fall into place. Suddenly England had a player who could make the outrageous seem commonplace and the rest of the formerly utilitarian back line has taken a quantum leap in his presence.
Now England have the best pack (by a mile), the best flyhalf (ditto) and a three-quarter line as good as most. They can’t lose unless — unless what? Unless they happen to meet France in the semifinal, something that is quite possible, for Les Bleus can do all the things that England can do and add a certain joie de vivre along the way.
Trouble is France are less certain of when they might put everything together than we unfortunate hacks. They might not even reach the semifinal. So ignore sentiment and xenophobic bookmakers and remember that the obvious team wins the World Cup: England by a country mile.