The general sentiment before the New Zealand-France Rugby World Cup final from the various previews I read was that France didn’t stand a chance. I for one found that a ridiculous. France had after all, reached the final, and you do not reach the final by just the grace of luck.
One could argue that New Zealand was too strong and had the home advantage but this was the French team which had upset the All Blacks in the 2007 Rugby World Cup quarter finals and the 1999 World Cup semi finals. If there ever was a Krajicek-Sampras (the Dutch tennis star holds a 6-4 record against the tennis ace Sampras) to be made in rugby, it has to be done when comparing France and New Zealand. France was not as strong as New Zealand but France had some thing which meant it could defeat the kiwis. What it was – the quantifiable sporting strengths and the unquantifiable mental and historic baggage would require another analysis.
The final as it played out, threatened to be a rout. The All Blacks took the early lead and one feared they would run away with it. This is where the French impressed. They did not let the game go out of reachable grasp at any stage. They held on and fought bravely. The French were excellent when they could pass the ball and one such occasion did lead to a try.
If the French showed resilience in the first half, it was the turn of the All Blacks to show their own forte in the same in the second half. It was a case of deja vu with the French trying hard but finding no window as the minutes drew close. Four years earlier at Cardiff, it was the French who didn’t allow the Kiwis to score as the minutes ticked and their world cup dream vaporized.
For me though, there were two big components. Firstly, the missed penalties were a deciding factor, there are no two ways about it. Both teams missed two penalties each and if either of the team had made one of them. Making even one would have changed the score and result in favor of France. Piri Weepu for the All Blacks and Dimitri Yachvilli for France had been stars but but had poor games. Was it just a bad day at the office or did nerves play a part? It is amazing how the unaccounted for factors in sport, which extend beyond sporting ability often make the difference between victory and defeat.
Which is where I come to the second component which was at the very beginning of the game. You have to watch the haka if you haven’t already (watch it here). France broke norm and charged towards the Kiwis with hands held as a statement of intent. It was a good showing and every one barring those who imposed a penalty on them for it applauded them. However, the way I looked at the game, the French were happy with just that -a good showing. The hurdle between a good showing and a win is usually fine but it is a crucial one.
For what it was worth, France coming within one point on the home soil of the All Blacks was admirable and the whole world has their respect. More importantly, they themselves believe more and would be better prepared if they make a big final again in the next 5 years or so. The lowest scoring final in rugby world cup history was certainly a very intriguing one, you have to give it that.
New Zealand won the Rugby World Cup final 8-7 to give the All Blacks their first Rugby World Cup title since they won it first in the inaugural edition in 1987 defeating France.
