Tonight the attention of the rugby world will focus on Eden Park in Auckland as the final of the Rugby World Cup is played out between the All Blacks and the French rugby team. At the end of 80 minutes one of two narratives will have won out.
The first is that the All Blacks will have finally thrown off a 20 year hoodoo (I’m sure between 1987 and 1991 no one in New Zealand was aware they were in the midst of a World Cup drought – indeed they were current world champions) and the whole of New Zealand will be celebrating like, well, like they just won the World Cup.
The second is that the French will have succeeded against unbearable odds in beating the best team in the world and winning an unlikely World Cup on their third attempt.
Whichever team wins, you can be sure the news media on Monday (and Tuesday and Wednesday and Thursday in some cases) will be full of articles revolving precisely around one of those two narratives.
Because in sport – like in literature – narrative is king.
If tomorrow’s World Cup final was played between two teams with no history, no rivalry and no story behind them – then you would be hard-pressed to find anyone who cares.
Indeed one of the reasons why New Zealand is so keen to win the World Cup again is because the original World Cup – the one they won by beating France – had no history behind it because it was the first one. That combined with South Africa’s absence means it wasn’t a real World Cup with a real narrative.
We are lucky in one respect; whichever team wins tomorrow will provide the perfect conclusion to a fantastic narrative.
Beating France will be an extremely satisfying finish for New Zealand (if they can manage it); the only way this narrative could be improved is if they played Australia in the final – the World Cup we all dream of.
Sometimes, however, the narrative does not work so well.
The 2009, 2010 and 2011 NRL Grand Finals are the perfect examples.
In all three of those years, the Grand Final was played between one team who had been cruising at the top of their game all season and one team who had defied the odds to fight their way into the top eight and then fight their way into the Grand Final.
Now, in all three cases, the narrative would have been best served by Parramatta (2009), the Roosters (2010) and the Warriors (2011) becoming giant-killers and winning an improbable Grand Final. That would have been a killer story.
However in all three cases, it wasn’t to be. The Storm, the Dragons (who could at least lay claim to a semi-narrative of their own – 30 years without a Premiership – buy a coach who doesn’t know how to lose a Grand Final and voila!) and the Sea Eagles won their Premierships and the general sporting public was underwhelmed.
You can imagine if this was a Hollywood movie, there is no way the script would make it past the development stage with that plot.
(I know someone is going to mention Rocky. I will simply say Rocky 2, Rocky 3 and Rocky 4 – case closed)
Indeed, in the NRL the last time the Premiership provided a truly thrilling narrative, was when the Tigers and the Cowboys fought it out in an epic Grand Final showdown in 2005.
That year, it didn’t matter who won the game (although the Tigers did have the slight narrative edge) because in the end Rugby League would be the winner. It was a fantastic way to end a season and the power of the narrative is demonstrated by the TV ratings for that game, which have yet to be beaten by another Grand Final.
(Side note – this year’s NRL finals did provide the promise a thrilling narrative – but neither the Broncos nor the Tigers made the Grand Final and an opportunity was lost)
So I guess my point is – sport lives and dies by it’s narrative. If it is completely one-sided, then no one will really care.
The first 30 odd years of Rugby League World Cups demonstrate this. New Zealand’s win in 2009 has provided this joke of a competition, with the shot in the arm and the narrative it requires to make it a more meaningful sporting event.
So what administrators of every sport across the globe need to keep in mind is that the narrative will bring the fans, the narrative will keep the fans and the narrative will stick in everyone’s minds, long after the actual games have faded from memory.
Damo
Guest
The narrative has ended and a new one has begun. New Zealand won the rugby on the scoreboard at least. But as you said scoreboards are only ever part of the story.
League_Coach101
Guest
Wales is the Fourth Nation this year. Papua New Guinea was the Fourth Nation last year. Teams play to qualify as the Fourth Nation each year. Now that the most nerve wracking (and frustrating) World Cup Final is over - what was the narrative? i'd be interested in your perspectives. I could see one of two narratives playing out - either France achieving a magnificent underdog victory or the All Blacks steam rolling them onto a deserved win. I didn't see a game as close as that. Any ideas?
Alan P
Guest
What League world cups. They are promoting a 4 nations coming up. Who's the 4th nation, I'm sure there is one but no idea who. They be struggling to find a 5th.
League_Coach101
Guest
I didn't say they were the same - I said they both benefit from a strong narrative. And the most successful and most memorable sporting contests (in any sport) are the ones with the strongest narratives as mentioned in the article above. see if you can think of an exception...
peterlala
Guest
Literature takes place on the page, sport on the field. Saying they are the same is like saying cows are like fish...there may be similarities, but they are not like each other. If you are right, the Wallabies should head to the next writers festival to find some real players.