Thanks for visiting

Rugby Burble is only live during the World Cup, so check back here in 2011 to see if New Zealand can lose their chokers tag.

In the mean time, if you are into cricket check out the Cricket Burble site.

The best team won

Well it wasn't to be was it? It would have been a bit of a travesty if a well oiled machine like South Africa had lost to a group of 22 thrown together over the last few weeks, despite the fact I was of course willing it to happen. South Africa deserved their win and an interesting stat I saw (but can't remember exactly!) showed that England had scored 12 tries in the WC, compared to late twenties for South Africa - 28 I think.

Another set of stats that it would be interesting to review is the lineout. Matfield was clear man-of-the-match - not only did he dominate the lineout, with the help of some accurate throwing in, but he also made the tackle on Tait that pulled him down just short of the line, before the ball went out to Cueto who narrowly failed to score. That was as close as we came to a try, but I'm not sure if I agree with the Syd Millar, the IRB Chairman, who is suggesting that rule changes are required to make the game more interesting.

One thing that seemed interesting in the knock-out stages, and particularly in the SA v Argentina semi-final was the fact that scores mostly came from turnovers. So to make it difficult for players without the ball to challenge at the breakdown wouldn't seem to be the way to go for me, that is a brilliant skill and one that is vital to the game. But without changing the rules of the game, what about considering the number of points scored for say, an interception try. Could an argument be made for reducing the number of points scored for an interception try to 2, with the conversion to follow? Sides could therefore be a little happier to move the ball wide, knowing that if the ball is intercepted and someone runs the length, it is less of a match-changing catastrophe.

Getting back to the final, I'm not sure why there is all the controversy about the "try". From the angle looking from behind Cueto, his foot looked clearly in touch, so unless there is another angle that I haven't seen, there was no doubt whatsoever. A triumph for the fact that technology was used as a wrong decision could have altered who were the eventual World Champions. Cueto's comments seem strange to me - he was quoted as saying that he will always feel that he scored a try in the World Cup final....clearly he didn't! Given that no-one seems to question the use of technology to check on the act of the try being scored, I hope that this is extended to look at the whole move in the lead up to the try - if that had been the case New Zealand would have gone through against France.

Still - a great tournament. And England got to the final - not even the most one-eyed Englishman would have dared predict that before the tournament.

Next time - 2011

Interesting to read Clive Woodward's comments at the end of this piece about how important Wilkinson is, when he talks about the preparations for this tournament. Of course, he would say that they were better prepared in 2003, but I don't think many people could argue differently. His comments were:

"We arrived at the tournament in poor shape compared to 2003 and whatever happens on Saturday, I hope England's preparation over the next four years is far, far better than the last four years," he added.

"It's not fair on the players because as an England player you may only get one chance at winning a World Cup and you want your union and your coach to deliver the best possible programme that gives you every chance of winning."

I hope that, whatever the result on Saturday, England do get back to a similar approach to the 2003 World Cup. That means consistency of selection and a really professional approach - the feeling I get is that the players have pulled together against all odds to get to this final, but have been horribly let down by all that has gone on around them. In 2003 there was a genuine confidence that England could win even if they didn't play well. The problem with the 2007 squad is that they have to play at their absolute best (perhaps with the exception of Wilkinson's kicking) to beat the best - their lies the diffence.

If England win on Saturday (a very large if), they will have been lucky, although no-one would be able to take away from the immense guts and effort the players have put in. In 2011, we need to get back to where we were in 2003 - winning even when the luck was against us, and a lot of that comes from outside of the players on the pitch.

Can't get enough rugby?

Only a few days to go until the end of the World Cup so if you can't get enough of rugby and want to go and see various rugby imagery, Getty have a rugby exhibition on. You can see the details here - the images were selected by Clive Woodward to "feature iconic rugby moments from around the world".

Normally going to a gallery would get the full support of my wife, but she may not be altogether in favour of the subject matter in this instance!

Gloating

As normal the odd email has been floating around gloating over England's win last week v France. I thought it my duty to post this one!

Doh!

So confident was I in England's inability to reach the World Cup final that I booked a holiday over next weekend. So now I am trying to find somewhere on the internet that will definitely be showing the rugby; whatever happens thou I'm gutted to not be watching it in England.

Best part of the game on Saturday, other than than the final whistle going and the ensuing collective sigh of relief, must have been 10 seconds after Lewsey's try, not the try itself, but the pat on the head he gave Traille as he wandered past him.

Tackle of the match, has to go to Worsley for his tap tackle that saved the game, althou Stevens on Chabal would have won it in any other match.

Shaw & Sheridan awesome. Moody was quiet except for the charge down and gather. Easter too many penalties althou its been suggested he was unlucky with the one through the middle of the ruck. Gomersall not as good as last couple of games and his service and kicking from hand after the first 2 minutes was poor. Wilko looks a shadow of his former self and to be honest people were calling for him to be taken off - his penalty was easy but credit must be given for the drop goal which made it safe(!) Robinson looked better than I think I've seen him play before. It's a massive blow for Lewsey but I think the Tait/Hipkiss option which I think is what BA has to go for is a strong one.

But the French played poorly althou not as badly as Argentina who let themselves down massively last night. The French always knew that 1 point wasnt going to be enough but didnt go about scoring more in the right way. Hopeful kicks rather than probing corner kicks weren't enough to convince the English to roll over and go home.

So my predicted victors are in the final playing England who i turned my back on at the start of the tournament, dismissing them as Quarter Finalists and no better. If England win next week it will be one of the biggest sporting come backs in history and will leave me with a smile on my face for a long time to come

Turnaround

Something that has amused me today has been the complete turnaround in everyone's views on the state of English rugby. Just a couple of weeks ago, the consensus was that England's players were tired, were playing too much attritional rugby in the Premiership, and that the All Blacks were lucky that they could pull their players out of the Super 14 to rest them before the big tournament. Now the perceived wisdom is that England's players are battle-hardened from relegation battles and competitive rugby, whilst the Super 14 lot are unused to elimination rugby and the toughness of the international game. The truth probably lies in maintaining a balance between the two, but I have just found it rather amusing how everyone's views have changed, almost overnight.