At half-time in the thrilling Rugby League World Cup final, Australia had established a 18 -16 lead over New Zealand and it looked to me as though they would run away with the match in the second half. So I turned on the video and went for our usual night-time walk with my wife.
We got back forty minutes later to see scenes of Kiwi players leaping ecstatically around, high-fiving, jumping into each other’s arms, hugging coach Stephen Kearney and Wayne Bennett, with the old stone-face cracking up with smiles.
It was clear from all of this that the Kiwis had won.
So I ran the tape back to see how the miracle had happened. And it was obvious watching the video that the Kiwis had harnessed the most powerful driver in big time – momentum – or the Big M, as US sports commentators like John Madden like to call it.
The momentum came right after half-time when the Kiwis decided to throw everything they had into the first fifteen minutes of the second half to see if, perhaps, possibly, hopefully, the Kangaroos might get rattled and give away points that would seal their fate.
On the first Kangaroo play, the ball was coughed up. Then after the relentless pressure of hard-shouldered running, tackling and field position, the Kangaroos did crack.
Billy Slater arrogantly threw the ball in-field near his try line, as if his side were 30 points in front. Minutes later the Kangaroos conceded a penalty try.
With thirteen minutes of play left, the Kiwis were 14 points in front.
They had the advantage of a big lead, which got bigger as time ran out. The Kangaroos tried to force plays, and played inpatiently, which in turn lead to mistakes and increased the pressure to force plays.
Listening to the Channel 9 television commentary, knowing the result, was a fascinating exercise.
Phil Gould particularly and even Peter Sterling had not really understood how the colour of the game had changed from green to black.
Here are snippets from the comments in the second half as the game, in reality, but not in the minds of the commentators, plunged away (rather than slipped away) from the Kangaroos:
Gould: “New Zealand has hit the wall mentally, they’re struggling at the moment …”
Gould: “Australia can sense the New Zealand run is coming to an end. New Zealand are out on their feet.”
Sterling: ‘The New Zealand body language is negative. They’re very vulnerable at the moment.”
It was clear that both commentators had missed the Kiwis Big M. Even with less than ten minutes to play, Gould was suggesting the Kangaroos could pull off a victory.
There were, to my mind, a number of similarities with the stunning upset victory by the Kiwis and South Africa’s victory in the 2007 Rugby World Cup.
These sort of tournaments do not actually reveal who is the best team in world rugby league or world rugby. They do tell us, however, who is the best team in the tournament.
Like the Springboks in 2007, the Kiwis found that the six weeks or so together for their World Cup created the chemistry to bond the players into that special entity: a team whose entity vastly outrates its individual parts.
As one of the oldest mantras in sports suggests that a champion team will always defeat a team of champions.
The Kangaroos, too, suffered the same sort of difficulties that the All Blacks faced in their 2007 RWC campaign: too many easy victories in matches that were not life and death encounters.
The Kiwis, like the Springboks in the 2007 RWC, had several must-win matches in the World Cup tournament, including the semi-final against England (while the Kangaroos were playing Fiji). These must-win matches gave the Kiwis (and Springboks) the experience of being tested and coming through the test, rather like the way steel is tempered by putting it through the blazing fire.
The other similarity was that the coach of the Springboks, Jake White, appointed Eddie Jones, a former coach of the Wallabies, to give him and his players insights into the culture of another successful Test side.
This role for the Kiwis was played by the greatest rugby league coach in the last twenty years, Wayne Bennett.
Bennett had a point to prove at the international level.
He was dropped from the Kangaroo job after losing a Tri-Nations tournament to New Zealand. Ricky Stuart was appointed to succeed him. Stuart proceeded to insist that Bennett had done a poor job with the Kangaroos.
This Kiwi victory over a Kangaroos side that had been proclaimed by the commentators, even during the final, as one of the greatest Australia has ever put on the field, was a sweet vindication for Bennett.
If the current Kiwis and Kangaroos played a sequence of ten matches, my guess is that the Kangaroos would win all ten of them.
But when the World Cup is on the line in just one match?
Anything can happen if the underdog gets the Big M working for it, which is what happened at Lang Park on Saturday night.
Westy
Guest
Lanky Probably ...although the contested play the ball and two less players probably made league a little more fluid ...yet you are right there was still much more of a genuine battle for possession and scrummaging in old unlimited tackle league....I know it is with hindsight but i cannot but think a little more courage from NSWRU.......alas....I note the NZers whilst not being professional had a much more generous approach whether officia lor unofficial to medical expenses and "injury compensation"....they seemed to just ignore some RFU edicts ...to their eternal credit.We followed all hook line and sinker.
Lanky
Guest
Why? Because the 2 games were the same so that was not an issue and the best players had gone to RL so it looked more appealing, but surely the biggest issue was the one of "fairness" wrt broken time payments???
Westy
Guest
Lanky I agree professional rugby has never been a poor cousin. My only comment however is that the exodus to league began at least 30 years before the advent of the pokies of the late 50's and 60's. By the late 1940's 2/3 of amateur union players had shifted to amateur league in the city and bush across QLD and NSW. Remember this was not at the professional end........From .Asquith to Mosman and Manly to Parramatta to Zetland across Sydney and it was worse in the bush Cessnock... Forbes ....Goulburn...Illawarra . Lithgow..Maitland ...Newcastle Tumut Wagga Wagga .amateur players shifted....we in rugby are not good at explaining why concentrating on the pokie revenue of the 60's onwards. From about 1920 to say 1950 rugby lost the battle of the amateurs. No rugby history I have read addresses this issue and NSWRU records are silent..........it holds the key........these areas were previously rugby strongholds...when the leaguies got the revenue streams from the pokies in the 60's they went after our best players with renewed vigour...but be under no illusion...we lost much well before and we are not good at explaining why ?
Lanky
Guest
Michael C - based on the per match amount then obviously RU is getting the best deal, nevermind per minute, in which it is even further ahead. Of course the gross amount for rugby doesnt stack up because there is not enough product. And of course the ARU still earns revenue from the non SANZAR TV rights for the pre Tri Nations window and the European spring tour plus extra Bledisloe and Mandela Cup games. Not too bad for the poor cousin that is rugby.
Michael C
Guest
skull - well off. Even if you regard the entire SANZAR package - - the AFL is all over it. (~$780m over 5 years, across FTA, Pay etc) However, the thing when comparing AFL vs NRL that many forget to check out is the per minute dollar value, i.e. an AFL game runs for 80 mins plus time on, which makes it more like 120 mins - - when live, spread over 2.5 to 3 hours of telecast. A Rugby game is over and done with sooner, the telecast is shorter. Many NRL folk who believe their game short changed - irrespective of national 'footprint' etc, forget that simple little equation. What they might find is that the NRL is potentially over valued. But, for Rugby itself - - well, the Aust value proposition is ordinary compared to Sth Af and NZ were Rugby is much, much more prominant. Heck, even the wallabies struggle to make it to air in Melb pre midnight. It would be interesting to work the ARU cut of the SANZAR rights, relative to the Aust clubs, there 'air time' on pay tv plus the internationals. Reality probably is (well, my guess is) that you pay more annually than the rights deserve in Australia so as to ensure you get best access to securing the RUWC rights???
Pippinu
Roar Guru
That's for 187 matches, including finals, and probably includes the Brownlow medal and draft.
Pippinu
Roar Guru
The AFL contract is worth $780 mill for 5 years.
Lanky
Guest
Sol, again I certainly never said "rugby union doesn’t have the biggest TV contract within Australia". I said the SANZAR contract was bigger than any contract of any Australian Sport. The SANZAR contract is worth US$350m = A$540m. And it is for 5 years - 103 matches per year. Compare that to AFL and NRL and let me know what you find. You can divide by 3 roughly for the Aus value. Its about 1m per match average.
Sol
Guest
The total of the SANZAR contract may be more but you have to only look at the ARU's cut if fair comparison is to be made with the AFL and NRL. Shouldn't the SANZAR contract money be divided by a third? Or is the money divided up by the number of Super 14 franschises. Given Aust has 4 of the 16 then do they get 25%? Either way rugby union doesn't have the biggest TV contract within Australia.
Lanky
Guest
No mate, I said the SANZAR contract is bigger than any TV rights contract for any Australian sport. Dont misquote me.
skull
Guest
Which NSW RL Folk are you talking about Michael. What are their names, where do they live? By the way there is a bloke on another thread who reckons that Rugby has the biggest TV contract in Aus sport. Is this true?
Michael C
Guest
Sol - yeah, now, I wonder if Victorians will disclaim those kids as not being 'true' victorians, in the way some NSW RL advocates like to disclaim any AFL recruit from Broken Hill, Albury, Wagga, Finley, Hay, Deniliquin, Turvey Park, The Rock, Barooga, Moama, Wentworth etc etc as not really being NSW and any kids from Sydney must be sons of ex-pats.
oikee
Guest
Yes i think thats true Sol, i know they have juniors coming through. Those Basketball guys cant take a trick in this country hey M.C ,,, hope they never try to get Gridiron started in this country. :)
Sol
Guest
Michael C. From memory I think the Storm Toyota Cup team in 2008 had 8 or so players who came through the Victorian NRL junior clubs. Sure, many are sons of migrant Islanders, but they are no less Victorians.
Michael C
Guest
Midfielder - (back tracking to another back tracking comment) the West Sydney Razorbacks failure as the Sydney spirit should be a lesson to all - - to be very careful about attempting to be all things to all people. Thus, the AFL via WS18 need to be careful to not dilute it too much. However, again, if they can 'build' it from scratch similar to the GC17 with majority local kids...........then..........there's something special there. Actually, NRL should try that in Victoria, have a crack at building a Toyota Cup squad as 'Victorian' as possible for the Storm.
oikee
Guest
:)
Millster
Guest
Mrs Oikee is getting jealous....
oikee
Guest
The Cup, i call it She because its such a beauty. Unlike Bill, the Union cup, and why or who called it Bill, sounds like something you have to pay off, they should have called it Bruce. Yes everyone wants to touch or feel her, this lovely cup. Better stop talking about her, you guys will think i am obsessed. Isn't she a beauty.
CronullaKiwi
Guest
Sledger, I have a one of your birds mate....so no your not all that bad :-)
oikee
Guest
Well thats your opinion Cronulla Kiwi, but at least i stayed. It was a wonderful game and i thouroughly enjoyed it, but i was not crowd counting like some do. What i did notice was the cup itself, what a beauty she really is, they made that sucker when the game had a bit more money i think. Very nice and very enchanting , i see that its going over to Kiwi land now, next time i am over there i intend to pay her a visit. Cheers.