By Spiro Zavos
June 15th 2009 @ 7:00am
It’s all grey for the inexperienced All Blacks
French teammates celebrate Maxime Medard try as dejected New Zealand's Luke McAlister in the international first rugby test at Carisbrook, Dunedin, New Zealand, Saturday, June 13, 2009. AP Photo/NZPA, Dianne Manson
France, once again, created a huge surprise when what they thought was their number 2 team on paper defeated an inexperienced All Blacks side on a cold evening at Dunedin 27 – 22.
The scoreline flattered the All Blacks who played more like the All Greys.
Especially in the first half the New Zealand national side was slow and passive at the rucks and mauls, inaccurate with their tackling, lacking in nous at the scrums, leaden-footed and lacking in options in the halves, and seemingly without real pace on the wings.
The grey All Blacks.
Down 17 – 3 at half-time (the same score line, ironically, at Canberra but with the Wallabies in the lead against Italy), the All Blacks focused their play better and struggled their way to 17 – 17, with a strong chance to win a now unexpected – and undeserved up to this stage – victory.
But here a fatal flaw in New Zealand rugby revealed itself once again, as it did at Cardiff in 2007 in the quarter-final of the Rugby World Cup tournament. That flaw is a chronic inability to finish off a side that has been dominate but is slipping in a calm and methodical manner.
Instead of taking charge of the match at this juncture and putting the All Blacks into a position to lay seige on the French try line, Stephen Donald opted for a short 22, and just got away with it with the All Blacks being awarded a fortuitous penalty.
Then when the All Blacks did finally get field position, they did not have any plays to break the French tight, almost-offside defensive line except the risky kick over the top.
The psychology of the moment given the French outstanding defensive effort (152 tackles made, only 13 missed compared with the All Blacks (83 and 17 missed tackles) was to drop a goal. But where was the captain’s call for this? Or the five-eighths call?
And perhaps just as importantly, did the All Blacks have a system for a field goal attempt?
The point about a field goal at this stage of this particular game is that France was essentially living off New Zealand turnovers and mistakes. Once the All Blacks were in front, France would then have to make the game something that was beyond them after the first 30 minutes when they scored 17 points.
As it was France led throughout the match, except when the score was tied at 17 – 17. The All Blacks made mistakes like Luke McAlister’s pass to the French fullback Metard who ran away for a 50m try.
Even at the end of the match, with the All Blacks needing a try to draw and a converted try to win, the wrong call was made with the last lineout throw. Instead of nailing the throw and taking it from there, the ball was thrown long, too long in fact and was knocked on.
Phil Dine, an academic working in Ireland, has written a fascinating essay on French rugby called ‘The Great Exception: Reflection on a Century of French Rugby Genius.’ He argues that there are two strands in the distinctive French approach, le beau jeu (the beautiful game) and le jeu dur (the hard game).
The beautiful game comes from Paris and expresses itself in visionary and daring attacking play. The hard game is basically the style of the heartland of French rugby, the south-west, ‘l’Ovalie,’ the region of the oval ball, where an uncompromising dedication to winning is the means and the ends of victory.
Either of these approaches when played well make France a formidable side on the given day. When these two approaches are meshed as they were in the first 30 of the Dunedin Test, France becomes almost unbeatable.
The merit of the victory, France’s first in New Zealand since 1994 when both Tests were won, is that in the professional era the All Blacks had played, up to Saturday, 37 Tests in early-season matches, for one loss. That loss was a 2-point defeat to England in 2003, the side that went on to win the Rugby World Cup a few months later.
The record for the All Blacks now is 2 losses out of 38, with France getting its best players back for the Wellington Test after their recent club final.
The French have a phrase for it, deja vue – will we have a repeated of 1994?
Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, register you interest and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(33)
Bay35Pablo said | June 15th 2009 @ 8:18am | Report comment
I would hardly say it was France’s 2nd team. They were only missing the players from the 2 Top 14 finalists, which I don’t believe was 15 or 22 players. In essence they were a French team missing a umber of important players, but that is all. It does mean they can improve.
More importantly was the All Blacks’ weakness. They looked lost in the 1st half before Henry clearly ripped them a new one at half time, and they cam out with more direction. They played much better, but also made some silly mistakes which showed the lack of experience in the team.
The 2nd Test will be very interesting. The French will have a full strength side, but the ABs will not. But the ABs pride will be wounded, meaning they will be a dangerous beast.
Perhaps this was the best thing that could happen to the ABs, as it may rouse the beats for 2011.
It also means the Wallabies Test against France could be very interesting. And here I was not buying tickets because I though it would be the usual 2nd rate side ….
Knives Out said | June 15th 2009 @ 8:30am | Report comment
You are correct, Pablo. That was not the French 2nd team at all. Not by a long shot. Lievremont has never established a favoured xv, but has developed/arrived at a core of 25 players who he rotates. The only guaranteed starter from the injured players would have been Nallet.
True Tah said | June 15th 2009 @ 8:36am | Report comment
Pablo – Im with you re: maybe attending the game v the French.
If they can beat the All Blacks next week, then it will definitely make the game against the Wallabies a lot more attractive.
I bet JON is willing for a French win!
Bay35Pablo said | June 15th 2009 @ 8:41am | Report comment
I’ve got my tickets for the Bledisloe, so I’m looking forward to it even more now. If the French can knock them off, then we are a good chance. Although by then they will probably have their missing players back and be in better form.
If we do get the Bledisloe back, NZ will get the dirts!!!
Brett McKay said | June 15th 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Guys, I’ve seen none of this game as yet, did Henry start McAlister or Donald at five-eighth??
Hemjay said | June 15th 2009 @ 9:17am | Report comment
He started Donald
Jeckerbonds said | June 15th 2009 @ 9:33am | Report comment
There’s a totally illogical but fun way to score the outcome of a game, and that is to award points to the scoreline corresponding to the talent of the top players on each team who didn’t play.
For example, I’m positing that had a non-concussed Richie been playing on Saturday night it might well have added 2 points to the AB scoreline. And if Carter had been playing, there’s another two. Add one point for Williams, and another for Sivi, and a half point each for Kahui,
Smith and So’oialo and that’s a total of 7 1/2 points in this admitedly suspect system.
The points for France? Tres dificile. But there have been games where Harinordoquy
has been outstanding, so he gets 2 points from me. Para, Bonnaire, Rougerie, Mas and Domingo each get half a point, and I’m giving Skrela a full point for a French total of 5 1/2 points.
So the AB’s win by two points. But France beat them by five points on the score board, so the ABs lose by three points (adjusted).
You buy it?
I thought not.
Untimelyzapped said | June 15th 2009 @ 9:43am | Report comment
Excellent post SPIRO – and I recommend Phil Dine’s essay to anybody interested in rugby, specially the French variety. You can Google it at The Great Exception: Reflections of a Century of French Rugby.
After the French win on Saturday night, and the hugely increased interest in the Wellington game, I think the essay will get a lot of hits.
JamesB said | June 15th 2009 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
2 out of 38 – not bad eh! This loss has exposed one thing – in the professional era with NZ having 100+ players plying their trade in Europe or Japan, they simply do not have the depth within their home based NZ player ranks as they could 2-3 years ago. The other very interesting point to emerge concerned some of the player comments relating to the physicality of Heineken cup versus S14 and lack of rolling mauls in S14. Rolling mauls are back, and the southern hemishere teams will have to “re-learn” this aspect of the game again. Having 3 sets of rules for the past 18 months has certainly been shown up by this match. The odd loss by the AB’s will be a blessing in disguise come 2011, and has allowed NZ to blood some young fresh talent. This may not have been possible if other senior players hadn’t succumed to injury. Barring Carter, all will be back for Tri-Nations, and once again NZ will be at the forefront. It’s early days yet…
CronullaKiwi said | June 15th 2009 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
While we have been shown up in the depth department – the side that takes the field in the 3N (injuries permitting) will be a completely diffrent beast. Im not sure why people are making such a big deal of the loss. Yes they played poorly and were out done in all departments but this is a fairly good French side and imagine a Wallabies team without Giteau, Smith, Mortlock, Elsom, Horwill, Palu and their best winger…this is the reality of it. Its still going to take a monumental effort to defeat the AB’s 3 times this year I wouldnt get to carried away yet if I were an Aussie.
Bay35Pablo said | June 15th 2009 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
CronullaKiwi, where in all the above is there any getting carried away by us Aussies. At best we are saying this means we MIGHT have a chance of knocking you off for the 1st time in about 7 years. it was also stated that there are a lot of AB players out (by the Roarers other than Spiro). No way in hell are we Wallabies getting carried away. Just give us a glimmer of hope and we’ll be happy with that ….
Dopey said | June 15th 2009 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
The All BLacks may be facing a horrific injury toll but let’s hope the Wallabies don’t experience the same. At least the All Blacks have the luxury of pulling players up from the Junior All Blacks who are playing test-like matches agianst Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and Japan.
Where are Lote, Timana, Beale et al playing while they wait for the call up? Club footy against weekend warriors and nuff-nuff’s.
No Australia A program? Absurd.
Spencer said | June 15th 2009 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
I’m having what Jecker is on! BTW Spiro you got the spelling wrong for Medard.
Spencer said | June 15th 2009 @ 2:05pm | Report comment
James B – I thought the Wallabies handled the Italian rolling mauls with ease (surprisingly). It seems they have been well coached and prepared for the maul, which I assume is because Jim Williams has been in Ireland for several years. Whilst Steve Hansen looks like a one-man-rolling-maul it seems he didnt realize the laws had changed (back) again. Sorry, that was cruel, but how can the guy be so unfit when he is surounded by athletes and he can jog around a little each day.
I still maintain that the main issue from the NZ loss was the very puzzling selections. Why cant Henry simply pick the next best player in a position if the incumbent is injured. It becomes ridiculous when you have 3 x 6’s playing 6,7 and 8. Would Waldrom have let them down? Me thinks not.
Spencer said | June 15th 2009 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
Dopey – Beale is Japan, and is now injured (but he would be about 5th cab of the rank anyway). Lote and Phil won’t be required this year (or next). Actually playing club rugby is a very good option as it maintains contact fitness whist removing the severity of impact experienced at S14 and International level. I am not a fan of Aus A format.
I have observed that generally the Australians seem far more robust than the NZders. I would also contend that we have as much depth as NZ at the moment. Based on a expanded squad of 35 players.
Dopey said | June 15th 2009 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
Spencer – not sure I agree with your logic. S14 goes for 14 weeks and so the player welfare argument pales into insiginificance when compared to NRL and AFL schedules. Therefore I disagree that S14 players playing Club footy is a better preparation for the Tri-Nations and Test footy than playing in the Pacific Nations Cup. But to each their own – it seems the ARU and Robbie agree with you so I’ll pipe down……..
bennalong said | June 15th 2009 @ 2:55pm | Report comment
Spencer,
You make some good points though George had a shocking night and on the strength of Robbie Deans assertions that no-ones got a mortgage on his spot Phil Waugh should get #6 for the next game. He’s in the team,he’s senior to Pocock and his form in the S14s was good, arguably the best of the three 6’s
I agree about Waldrom. He was the best foreward for the Crusaders and should have got #8.
I still find it difficult to understand the lack of intensity shown by the AB forewards. No-one stepped up to take a leadership role. Same applies to the backs really. Neither Donald or McAlister (who didn’t impress with the BaBaas) are natural Captains.
That said , it’s here you see a difference with the Wallabies, where Robbie Dens has 35 players keen to play, and three captains in the forewards and two in the backs.
With Richie McCaw leading the pack I’d expect a reversal of form with no other changes. That might be enough to take the second game.
Rgardless of the outcome Les Bleus are here to play and I’ll be disappointed if there isn’t a good turnout for France v Australia, venue aside.
mother teresa said | June 15th 2009 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
spiro,do you feel rob deans would allow rokocoko(tuqiri) to rest on his laurels without earning his place currently;and what about mcalister.is he that good that he slots straight in—-dont think so;the kiwis are deluding themselves .supporters will talk injuries in defence.again the holy trinity got the tactics wrong;anyone can win with all the top resources,so timely a reminder dont you think.the combos of various ab backs fail under pressure when mental agility is required;reminiscent of rwc.
stuff happens said | June 15th 2009 @ 6:33pm | Report comment
I hesitate to temporarily assume the role of the excellent Sheek , but you may be interested to know that test matches have been played at Carisbrook for 105 years – the first game took place in 1905.On Sat the AB’s lost their second consecutive match there, having lost to the ‘Boks in that great game in last year’s TN.This is the first time ever that the AB’s have lost two consecutive games at Carisbrook; indeed few teams have won there there all. Australia once, The Lions twice and the ‘Boks.
Pretty amazing record.
Jim McDonald said | June 15th 2009 @ 9:35pm | Report comment
Spiro, you are a good writer of fiction, but….
On saturday the All Blacks will easily beat the French because;
Jim McDonald said | June 15th 2009 @ 9:45pm | Report comment
Spiro, you are a good writer of fiction, but ….
On Saturday the AllBlacks will easily beat the French because;
1. The blacks will be told the game is won on the groiund and not in the press
2. They will put twice as many forwards in the rucks as in previous ELV days
3. Assistant coach Smith will ask anyone to figure out for him how to attact against a backline that is always offside
4. Poor silly McAlistair will never ever again be asked to play for the All Blacks (just like Carlos Spenser)
ohtani's jacket, said | June 16th 2009 @ 1:24am | Report comment
“But here a fatal flaw in New Zealand rugby revealed itself once again, as it did at Cardiff in 2007 in the quarter-final of the Rugby World Cup tournament. That flaw is a chronic inability to finish off a side that has been dominate but is slipping in a calm and methodical manner.”
What do you mean by this? The French were dominant in Cardiff?
Henry’s record is 55-9. If you take away the Rustenburg loss in 2006, the All Blacks could have potentially racked up a 24 Test winning streak. Take away the Newlands loss in 2005 and it balloons out to 31 straight wins. Who’s catching that in the next quarter of a century?
In that time, they’ve won more close games than they’ve lost. They came unstuck at the World Cup and they’ve come unstuck on other occasions, but it’s a complete myth that they can’t close out games.
James Mortimer said | June 16th 2009 @ 1:40am | Report comment
I hear you OJ, that sentence by Spiro made no sense at all.
Would love to read his analysis when the All Blacks won a game, considering he could never once seem to jump on a kiwi teams bandwagon during the Super 14.
Also, a bit of a moot point talking about not taking a drop goal, it’s just not in NZ teams mentality.
Also this sentence
“Down 17 – 3 at half-time (the same score line, ironically, at Canberra but with the Wallabies in the lead against Italy), the All Blacks focused their play better and struggled their way to 17 – 17, with a strong chance to win a now unexpected – and undeserved up to this stage – victory.”
Well, the score was 17-11 at halftime, but you say then a strong chance to win?? Nothing that I saw ever had me thinking the the AB’s were in a position to win. French always had the upper hand.
ohtani's jacket, said | June 16th 2009 @ 1:54am | Report comment
The only irony there is how shitty that halftime score was against Italy.
Dan said | June 16th 2009 @ 8:32am | Report comment
JM,
“Also, a bit of a moot point talking about not taking a drop goal, it’s just not in NZ teams mentality.”
He does have a point though doesn’t he? Perhaps the ABs need to have a more all round game plan for those tough matches, because insisting on trying to get a try when you can’t string phases together, the defence is resolute and you’re behind on the scoreboard just doesn’t make an awful lot of sense…
Ytraboy said | June 16th 2009 @ 9:02am | Report comment
Drop goal smop goals if you want to see someone kick Oval balls through sticks we’ve got AFL, we even give you a point if you miss
pothale said | June 16th 2009 @ 9:19am | Report comment
Great idea, Ytraboy – maybe you could give them some training lessons. They badly need them.
Ytraboy said | June 16th 2009 @ 9:38am | Report comment
Pothale I was taking the mickey as you surely are now:-)
Ytraboy said | June 16th 2009 @ 9:40am | Report comment
Seriously though if you want to watch goals be scored surely Football or here in Australia AFL is the way to go. I like watching League and Union to see tries scored the more the better.
One loss seems to have really brought out the New Zealander bashers and egos. Ok they lost to Fance but lets get realistic this French team is close to their best where as the All Blacks are not. The mighty Wallabies only beat woeful Italy 31-8 yet once again we’re banging our chests about how great we are. I was expecting a scoreline closer to the 50+ mark. Much has been made about the All Blacks not being able to deal with the rolling maul and how Australia we managed very well. Ah hello I don’t know if anyone has woken up from dreamland yet but we were playing Italy people they’re not even in the top ten nations.
As for the training lessons I think Carter should be showing those AFL boys a thing or two especially the Tigers
pothale said | June 16th 2009 @ 9:52am | Report comment
There’s another possibility Ytraboy – dreadful as it may be to think. Maybe, just maybe, whisper it… the NH teams might have got a little better this year. On the other hand, France only came third in the 6 Nations, and were missing some of the players they had then – against NZ.
Dean Pantio said | June 16th 2009 @ 10:15am | Report comment
“France, once again, created a huge surprise when what they thought was their number 2 team on paper defeated an inexperienced All Blacks side on a cold evening at Dunedin 27 – 22.
The scoreline flattered the All Blacks who played more like the All Greys.”
What twaddle.
A) It can’t be considered their B side.
B) The All Blacks were decimated by injury.
C) Only a fool thought this test wouldn’t be competitive.
D) The scoreline was an accurate summation of the game, the French taking the chances offered and the All Blacks playing most of the game, but losing the collision.
The triumvirate have shown they are quick learners after being taught a lesson. I expect this week will have focus on the scrum, maul and collision. The back row will be better balanced with a true, if green, openside instead of the mistake of transforming a blindside. Additionally, Kaino may be back which means Reed can bugger off. He achieved the previously thought impossible mission of being more invisible than his Canterbury predecessor.
I expect a more competitive test in Wellington, with no certainty for the result.
Ytraboy said | June 16th 2009 @ 10:36am | Report comment
Pothale,
Yes your right the NH teams have got better but Italy are just not in the same class as their 6 Nations partners are they?
The French team were exceptional on the weekend and totally dictated the pace and style of the game. But for all their dominance they only beat a very weak All Black side by 5pts. Relaity has it seems to been let go at the first oppurtunity to put a boot into someone when they are down. We Aussies are quick to claim rugby greatness when we have strung together two very ordinary wins over inferior opposition. I wait with baited Breath to see how the Springboks and Lions go this weekend as I feel this will be the only game worth watching. Surely the Wallabies will post a cricket score on the Italians its a no brainer really and the All Blacks should come back and beat the French they will not be happy with their effort in Dunedin.
The big Uncertainty is how the Lions and Springboks will perform I’d like to see the Brits and Irish get one up on the South Africans.
I know it has been pointed out on various occasions already but the French team were nowhere near as weak as has been made out and the New Zealanders were missing 7 or 8 starting players thats half the team not to mention certain bench players. The French were in no way impacted to the same extent.
Greg Russell said | June 16th 2009 @ 3:16pm | Report comment
Here’s the opening sentence of an article from rugbyheaven on 19 May:
“French rugby bosses expect national coach Marc Lievremont and his side to return from their three-Test tour of the southern hemisphere in June with at least one victory.”
Now that said victory has been banked, will the French play like they are on holiday or will they play like emancipated men for the rest of the tour? (My suspicion: the former, certainly this coming weekend.)
Murray Deaker has made the (obvious) point that virtually all of Henry’s losses have come with McCaw or Carter (or both) injured, and Saturday was just another in that sequence. Remember that Carter started Cardiff in a crocked state, and came off early in the second half. This I think is the point Spiro is making about the Cardiff and Dunedin losses being similar, in that the All Blacks failed to bring the game home when they had got themselves in a position to do so. In both cases Carter was not on the field. Great players are called great for a reason.
What was most alarming for me about the All Blacks performance was that the “three wise men” had had 3 months to prepare a list of “things we must specially remember to practice before playing the French”. I would have thought “defending rolling mauls” would be very obviously placed at the top of this list (given that such have not featured in S14 for the last 2 seasons), but Steve Hanson has publicly admitted that they completely forgot about this.
Finally: guys, please loosen up and allow Spiro some literary licence!