Kenny Rogers - his message for England v France

Kenny is getting behind the team! But only if they win!

Last minute penalties

Oh, how nice it would be for a re-run of 2003, when we knew we had the game won going into the final few minutes. But unfortunately I'm not sure it will be like that....most likely it could come down to a crucial passage of play towards the end of the game.

Last week, with 3 minutes remaining and with England looking relatively safe in defence, Joe Worsley decided to scoop the ball back with his hand in a ruck, thus giving Australia the chance of a match winning score. This may be a little (or a lot!) harsh, but I wonder if Worsley is the sharpest tool in the box. His clapping to the crowd as he was substituted having just injured a Uraguayan in the last World Cup being another example.

So at the end of the working week and with nothing to worry about this weekend other than preparation to take in two huge games of rugby, what did I find keeping me from sleeping past 6:30 this morning? I couldn't help but fear Worsley will do it again!

As all players who have played the game will know, as an attacking team goes through phase after phase and is making ground, particularly in the opposition 22, there is a gradual need for the defensive side to take more risks to stop them. As they go through the phases, 3 points against sometimes is the best option, if you can get away without a sin bin as well. So the players need to use common sense to decide when to take risks that could result in a penalty or even a sin bin. And the impact of not having any common sense is magnified in those last 5 minutes with 3 points or less between the teams.

Before the tournament I would have thought Lewis Moody could be the one to cause us concern when it came to giving away vital penalties in the final few minutes of a match. What woke me up with a start this morning was the realisation that Worsley is far more likely to give a vital penalty away, and given Ashton's use of the replacement bench so far, Worsley is more likely to be on the pitch in those last few minutes than Moody.

I can only hope that it was a dream and not a premonition!

How England can win

1) Up front.
All the talk has been of the England forwards' performance against the Wallabies, but that was last week. The French are bigger, stronger and more streetwise than the Aussie pack. This is no more so than in the front row. Andrew Sheridan's career is built on two performances against weak Australian scrums. It's time for him to do the same against a much better outfit, the likes of De Villiers and Milloud will be much tougher. England will have to give the forward performances of their lives in the tight.

2) Jonny.
Carter and co. missed goals against the French, the points would have won them the game. Jonny's been strangely off-target in the tournament so far. There does seem to be some oddity with the balls since other kickers have struggled too (Paterson excepted), but this week he needs to return to form. If he kicks 100%, England have a real chance in what will be a very tight game.

3) Kicking from hand.
The All Blacks missed several kicks to touch in the first half last weekend, giving the French a platform for their tactics of choice, i.e. their own kicking game. Wilkinson and Catt need to find touch, and give their pack a chance to get downfield and compete for posession.

4) Stop Jauzion.
France's second half comeback centred around Jauzion. He was involved three times in the run up to Dusatoir's try, and scored one himself. He was putting runners in space, and was regularly popping up at first receiver, with Beauxis reduced to a spectator before he made way. Stop him, stop France, find out if they have plan c. This probably means Michalak coming on, in which case all the pressure will be on him to deliver, and it will be up to Lewis Moody to make him feel it.

Three points on each of the disappointed sides

Part I
New Zealand:
The Kiwis probably don't need to overreact as much as they are going to. They actually didn't go too far wrong. In fact their three main failings stem from the same point:

1) Rotation.
It's a sound idea, giving backup players of experience so that they are ready when called upon. But in World Cup year, it's time to bring out your best XV. Though they were close, I'm not sure that Henry and his staff were ever 100% certain of their best side, and the selection was a little out last Saturday. Where was Aaron Mauger, the man who opens up holes for the runners? Where was Howlett, who offers a different kind of threat to the more physical players? Surely Robinson didn't bring that much more of a physical presence than Chris Jack? Next time, pick the best side and run with it.

2) Leadership.
A knock on of poor selection is a lack of leadership. Leadership is not just about having a good captain, it's about having leaders around him. In 1999 and 2003 Australia and England had leaders all over the pitch. In 2003 New Zealand fell apart, because when the going got tough, Reuben Thorne (never the best captain anyway) had no-one to back him up, no experience, as Mitchell had jetissoned everyone apart from Justin Marshall. This time, the absence of the players mentioned in point 1, Mauger and Jack were absent. Should Umaga have been allowed to retire? He may have been past his prime, but the side responded to his leadership. England were ridiculed for selecting the likes of Dallaglio, yet they provide direction, and know how to seize the initiative at the key moment. Lesson for 2011, get your experienced leaders on the pitch. Getting this right is critical for losing that chokers' tag. Replace the side with youngsters, and they might be overawed by the situation. Stick with all old timers, and the scars of the past might be too much to overcome. Build a balanced side, with experience in key areas, but youthful energy, and dispatch that unwanted label.

3) Tactics.
Again, this stems from the above points. When their tactics didn't bring the reward they expected, New Zealand decided to go for the direct approach, with a little success, but not enough. Without Carter on the pitch, they seemed to lack the nous to change their game again, and apart from a badly timed effort from McAllister, the drop goal never seemed to be in their minds. They need to have players who can do plan a and plan b, but who can make plan c up on the spot when necessary.

I think the All Blacks got a lot right off the pitch, so get these things right on the pitch, and in fours years time, they will be favourites (again). But who wins against New Zealand in New Zealand?

Funnies

Sorry to all Antipodeans but I felt I had to post these. The bottom one should be captioned "born to rule"!

France played better?

Interesting talking to people in my office about the rugby. The general consensus seems to be that France played better and deserved to win. I thought the All Blacks shaded it (despite playing poorly), as the "real" scoreline would have demonstrated, if the forward pass had been given. I also thought they showed in the first half that if they had clicked they would have won by 40 points, they were a pass away from a score a couple of times.

In the UK at least, I think I may be in a minority of one in suggesting that the All Blacks were the better team.

The rules of the game by Wayne Barnes

Needless to say the emails have started already. A Kiwi mate has sent me one titled as above which shows how they feel about referee Wayne Barnes' performance on Saturday. In addition to the point about forward passes, I also agree with the obstruction point - France got away with one in the middle of the field that looked very similar to what was a sin-binnable offence for New Zealand.

"Hello, my name is Wayne Barnes. For those of you who do not know me, I was the referee in the France versus All Blacks quarterfinal at the 2007 Rugby World Cup. I wanted to be a referee since a young age when my dearest Daddy sent me to a nice little all boys school in southern England. The big boys (and even the little boys) picked on me and turned me into the wiener that I am today. One of those mean little boys was a New Zealander; he made me cry to Mummy all night after poking me with a small twig. I was going to be a lawyer but my eyesight became so bad I had to give up that career to become a referee. I never lost my passion for English Rugby and I have developed my own set of rules to give the English Rugby team the best chance of winning the World Cup, and of course, New Zealand the least.

1) Being run into is a yellow cardable offense if it’s between the 55th and 56th minute of a match. See Soccer for an example of this rule.
2) A forward pass must travel a least ten metres forwards for it to be deemed forward, otherwise it shall be considered 'flat' (it's only applicable in a blue jersey).
3) A player is only deemed to be offside if he is at least 2 metres in front of the hindmost feet (naturally only applicable if in a blue jersey).
4) If a player is in front of the kicker, he need not retreat if in a blue jumper.
5) A team wearing gray cannot be awarded a penalty in the second half of a match.
6) A team in blue can use their hands at anytime, regardless of whether a ruck has formed, where they enter the said ruck or whether they are on their feet.
7) A ruck is only a ruck if it has been called as such by the blue team’s captain.
8) Touch judges may only enter the game to rule on "penalties" committed by players wearing silver. At no other stage must they interfere with the referee's running of the game.
9) If a try has been scored by a player not wearing blue, the video referee must spend at least 10 minutes trying to find a reason to not award it.
10) A scrum is only deemed to have been wheeled 90 degrees if it has been in fact wheeled 180 degrees.

Disclaimer: These rules have been written in order to destroy southern hemisphere teams and give England an easier path in the world cup. They could be dangerous if found in the wrong hands."