Around 10.30 on Sunday morning I strolled through Centennial Park musing about the gripping Rugby World Cup 2015 semi-final victory of the New Zealand All Blacks over the South African Springboks.
On my mind was the question – what had really happened in the 20-18 All Blacks victory?
I noticed two good old boys, iPhones in hand, chatting about the match.
GOB 1: “It was a terrific match. Both teams went at each other hard. But best team won.”
GOB 2: “The rain didn’t help the teams, especially the All Blacks.”
This is true enough, as far as it goes. But for me the crucial factor in the result was that, despite the rain tumbling down at Twickenham, the All Blacks tried to score tries while the Springboks played for penalties.
The All Blacks had dared to be great. Great with the ball in hand. Great at playing modern 21st century rugby.
The Springboks had played no-risk rugby football to win the match. Winning rugby in the 20th century manner.
The Springboks had the courage of their restrictions. The All Blacks had the courage of their convictions.
So the All Blacks won because they scored two tries, both which were converted by Dan Carter. The conversions were from the sidelines and, in a real sense, turned out to be the crucial factor in the outcome of the match.
The tries had come at crucial periods of the match. In the opening minutes when Jerome Kaino smashed through Lood de Jager’s tackle to plant the ball one-handed over the try line, and not long after half-time when Beauden Barrett scored after a sustained series of attacks inside the Springboks 22.
That try and conversion completed a 10-point surge for the All Blacks, taking them to a lead that the Springboks were never quite able to overcome.
The Springboks got their penalties. They kicked all six of them. But they lost the match. They had played to win, certainly. But they had restricted their options for winning to the whim of the referee, Frenchman Jerome Garces, or to the occasional stupidity of the All Blacks, as when the other Jerome (Kaino) he kicked away the ball to stop a Springboks attack inside the All Blacks half.
As the SAS motto proclaims, however: Who Dares Wins.
It was the All Blacks who dared to be great who rightly claimed the victory.
Owen Slot in the Times of London expressed this notion in a compelling and convincing manner: “The semi-final was tight and tense, but only one team tried to play rugby. Hard, tense, compelling. And a victory for the team who tried to play. In this magnificent World Cup, where the rugby has been of such a soaring, entertaining level, the team that elected not to play nearly prevailed …”
Someone posted a Twitter before the match pictures of a sleek All Blacks speedster car and a chugging Springboks Volkswagon, with the heading: The Race is on…
This is a mechanical way of describing what the two teams brought to the match. On a dry field, say the Millennium Stadium under the roof, the All Blacks speedster game might have resulted in the sort of boilover inflicted on France a week ago.
But on the slippery Twickenham pitch that made running and handling parlous, the chugging Springboks game received its full value.
The All Blacks had to kick a lot more on attack than they would usually because, as their quick-silver halfback Aaron Smith explained after the match, the conditions favoured the side playing without the ball.
When you compare the two teams, there is no reason aside from coaching ineptitude and a chronic lack of imagination in South African rugby why the Springboks could not have done some running with the ball. In fact, in the opening minute or so, they worked a backline play that saw Jesse Kriel bolt through a gap and race towards the All Blacks 22.
But this was never tried again. Not even at the end of the match when they needed to get out of their 22 and somehow set themselves up for a penalty or a drop goal, or heaven forbid actually score a try to get back the lead.
But after eight phases of smashing the ball up, using strength rather than skills, Victor Matfield knocked the ball on.
Game over, and virtually no ground had been made.
You look at the Springboks back row of Duane Vermeulen, Schalk Burger, Francois Louw. Has there been a better balanced trio for the Springboks in decades?
There were two young outstanding locks, Lood de Jager and Eben Etzebeth, who is destined to be a Springboks great.
Bismarck du Plessis is the best Springboks hooker in decades.
Then you look at the backs. Fourie du Preez is one of the greatest halfbacks to play rugby. Before the semi-final he had won 7 of his 12 Tests against the All Blacks.
The youngsters in the backline, Handre Pollard, Damian de Allende (a bigger centre than Ma’a Nonu and possibly more explosive!) and Jesse Kriel, have the talent to shred any defence.
Willie le Roux is a rugby magician, if given the licence to play his natural, skilful game.
Bryan Habana is an all-time Springboks great winger. But, possibly because he is kept locked and bound in some tactical jail, he made several errors that went a long way to costing the Springboks the match.
He charged at Carter before he had moved in to convert the first All Blacks try. Carter missed his first shot but converted his second. The All Blacks try had come when Habana had shot out of the defensive line.
In the second spell, Habana was sin-binned when the All Blacks had the momentum of scoring 10 unanswered points.
You have the feeling with Habana’s play that he gets cabin fever from being isolated out on the wing with no plays specifically created for him. He seems to look for opportunities when they are not there that make him force the issue and create problems for himself and his team.
Imagine what a New Zealand coach like Vern Cotter or Joe Schmidt would do with this Springbok talent?
Imagine what Steve Hansen would do.
Even with the non-coaching from Heyneke Meyer the Springboks have won 70 per cent of their matches. But against the brilliantly coached All Blacks, this ratio plummets down to Meyer’s rugby IQ level, which decency requires me not to reveal.
The crucial fact for the Springboks is that they won the 2007 Rugby World Cup tournament with a great lineout, the accurate goal-kicking of Percy Montgomery, the incessant use of the rolling maul, the lineout genius of Victor Matfield and an obsessive defensive attitude that eliminated any desire to play expansive, skilful rugby.
Before the 2007 Rugby World Cup tournament, the Springboks coach Jake White predicted that the best defensive team would win the Webb Ellis trophy. So he devised Jakeball, which remains – unfortunately – the essential Springboks game to this day.
Sir Graham Henry, speaking as the All Blacks coach, said that he refused to try to win the Webb Ellis trophy with a defensive, unskilful, smash-barge game plan.
The All Blacks were bundled out of the tournament by a French side playing its version of Jakeball.
New Zealand rugby took stock. There was a painful and painstaking review. What was decided was that the whole culture of New Zealand rugby had to change.
Total Rugby. The All Blacks would go back to the inclusive game devised by the famous 1905 All Blacks that led the British writers to hail the team as “all backs,” in the same manner as Owen Slot’s tribute
Culture. Better people made better players.
Passing The Ball. A high tempo, skills-based, smart game based on passing the ball would take the All Blacks towards a standard that other teams might not be able to match. Greg Mumm on The Roar has pointed out that a game sense coaching philosophy, developed by Wayne Smith, requires the All Blacks to spend 25 per cent of their practice time on catch-pass skills in decision-making scenarios.
In football, this method was created by the Pope of Football, Johan Cruyff, for his Holland team in their losing 1974 World Cup final.
It was later taken to greater and more successful heights by Barcelona where their academy is called “the university of the pass.”
The big idea behind the Cruyff method in football – and the All Blacks method in rugby – is the notion of dominating the ball. The journalist Simon Kuper explains the method this way: “Pass and move, pass and move, create space out of nothing for effectiveness and aethestics.”
The new post-Rugby World Cup 2007 All Blacks came together as a winning side under intense pressure, just, at the 2011 Rugby World Cup.
In the four years since then the All Blacks have been virtually unbeatable, having lost once to England, Australia and South Africa.
It is telling that the great strength of the Springboks in Rugby World Cup 2007, their lineout, was exposed by the All Blacks who won a crucial turnover against Victor Matfield, the king of the lineouts in that tournament.
And it was Matfield who handled, rather mishandled, the ball in the very last Springboks touch of the ball at Twickenham. And his era was well and truly ended with that mistake.
It was Sam Whitelock’s mighty lineout leap and steal that was hailed by Richie McCaw, the defeated All Blacks captain in Rugby World Cup 2007, as a “decisive” moment in the semi-final.
The beauty of the All Blacks skilful ‘pass and move’ method of winning matches is that it is easier to come down or ease down in plays in difficult conditions, as the All Blacks endured at Twickenham, than it is for restricted sides like the Springboks to skill up, as their failure to make any headway at the end of the match revealed.
As David Campese famously remarked about the England side’s decision to try and play expansive rugby in the 1991 Rugby World Cup final: “You can’t learn to play running rugby in five minutes.”
All this is not intended to put down the Springboks. They played a mighty match. They could have won it, too, with a bit more luck.
But things have changed since Rugby World Cup 2007. The laws have been opened up more to allow more space for attacking play. Attacking techniques and systems have been developed that allow sophisticated attacking sides like the All Blacks more options and opportunities to make breaks.
And the skills levels of all the players, especially with the All Blacks, has risen to the such levels that Steve Hansen can set out game plans that are as sophisticated as they are effective.
Some thoughts jotted down during the match:
“Good call, Johnnie,” from Jerome Garces to the Irish assistant referee Johnny Lacey when he spotted an All Black offside allowing Handre Pollard to kick his second successful penalty.
I noticed, too, that Garces tended to warn the Springboks defensive line, “back, back!” which he did on numerous occasions. But he never warned the All Blacks. The result was a penalty count of 6 to 1, at one stage, that threatened to lose the match for the All Blacks.
The All Black great and current selector Grant Fox, usually very reticent about these matters, confined himself to noting that the All Blacks discipline was “good enough in the first half” before adding, “I’m going to get into trouble for saying this but we didn’t much in return on the other side for all the pressure we built.”
The Springboks, the commentators pointed out at half-time, have won 21 Tests since 1999 when they have led at half-time. At Twickenham, the Springboks were leading 12-7 at half-time, Kaino in the sin-bin. This was the fifth successive match the All Blacks have lost a player to the sin-bin.
I thought that the turning point in the match came just before the start of the second half when the All Blacks came out early and started doing their pass-catch drills.
During half-time, the television pictures showed an agitated Meyer addressing his players a bit like a headmaster talking to recalcitrant students.
In the All Blacks dressing room, the players and the coaches were in groups. You could see that they were working out how they could wrest control of the match back from the Springboks.
Then they came out early and did their drills. This was a sign to the Springboks that the All Blacks were ready to play, and to play skilfully. As it happened, they were totally dominant in the second half.
The Springboks got two more penalties and the All Blacks scored a converted try and a drop goal. That drop goal by Daniel Carter was a telling strike. Kaino was still off the field. It gave the All Blacks the lead, which they never gave up.
It was taken early, too, just after half-time. I have often argued that during the match, and not at its end, is generally the best time to boot over a drop goal. Carter’s strike had no one charging at him. It was not expected. So he had time to set himself up.
By way of contrast, in the last minute of the game when he tried to set up a second dropped goal, he was bustled out of it. The All Blacks were forced to run the ball. Sam Cane dropped a pass. This gave the Springboks their last scrum and last chance to snatch a victory.
In the 52 second minute of the match, these telling statistics were put up on the screen: Carries SA 40, New Zealand 92, Metres gained SA 118, New Zealand 335.
Throughout the match, the All Blacks were smart with kicking off to the Springboks. Not once was a short kick-off used. Why? Because the Springboks never run the ball out from deep in their territory. So by kicking deep from the kick-off, but just outside the 22, Carter was ensuring that the All Blacks got the ball back in Springboks territory.
During the match, too, it was obvious that the Springboks were making many head tackles, with Bismarck du Plessis being a serial offender. After some time of this, and with no penalties coming, McCaw talked to Garces about it, making a gesture of an arm around the throat.
From the next play, Joe Moody was penalised – for a throat-tackle clear-out.
But later in the match, towards the end, the Springboks won a penalty from a lineout about 40m out. Patrick Lambie had booted over a longer penalty just before this. It was in the context of the game a relatively easy shot for the Springboks to snatch the lead with 10 minutes to play.
But the TMO, George Ayoud, spotted a throat-tackle clear-out from Matfield and the penalty was reversed. Justice, perhaps, for the many similar tackles missed by Garces.
Towards the end of the match, with the All Blacks on attack, it was very clear that Garces was not going to award them any penalties to entrench their lead. The Springboks, on desperate defence, made early tackles, got on the wrong side of rucks, and went early in the scrum (conceded but unpunished by Garces).
The Springboks, too, were allowed to send players to the ground in the last 20 minutes as they tried to conserve energy from their drained bodies.
I don’t often praise something that Phil Kearns says. But he was spot-on when asked before the match why he thought the All Blacks would win: “New Zealand have many facets to their game. The Springboks have one facet, and when that doesn’t work they do it again, harder.”
Too true. South African rugby has to go through the soul-searching New Zealand rugby went through after Rugby World Cup 2007. For New Zealand the pay-off for facing up to the hard reality that dramatic changes were necessary, on and off the field, has been to win the Webb Ellis trophy in 2011 and to be in the final to win again in 2015.
***
Not long after the match, Brian Moore, a former England player and now commentator, posted a video purporting to show Richie McCaw elbowing Francois Louw. “This might be interesting – ” Moore posted.
It was clear the mischief Moore was up to. He wanted to get McCaw out of the 2015 Rugby World Cup final. If McCaw is taken to the tribunal and found guilty, the punishment is two week’s suspension.
New Zealand journalists, though, were on to the nasty tactic. Duncan Johnstone quickly ran a story with the explanatory headline: Suggestions of a deliberate Richie McCaw elbow are insulting.
Stuff.co.nz quickly followed up this story with a slow-motion replay of the incident. The heading to the story makes the valid point. It is an illusion, there is no elbow from Richie McCaw.
When the video is slowed down it is obvious, and as you would expect, that McCaw did not elbow Louw, even accidentally.
He runs around the back of ruck as the Springboks are clearing it. He swerves to avoid Louw who is falling out of the ruck. Louw’s head hits McCaw’s hip.
“Forget the elbow, the panicked eyes watching this are blurred,” stuff points out, correctly. “There is no elbow, it is an illusion.”
Paul Cully on his whiskeycully twitter acount notes: “The technical term for what McCaw did is ‘running after the ball while other players are on the pitch.’” Quite so.
The main point I take out of this is how slack the Australian rugby media in England – together with the ARU – was in allowing World Rugby to smear Craig Joubert and, in doing so, put pressure on the Wallabies when they face up to the Pumas with a hostile crowd and a referee under intense scrutiny not to give the Wallabies the benefit of any doubt.
The Australian rugby media should have reacted as quickly, forthrightly and as intelligently as the New Zealand media to protect the interests of the Wallabies.
Charging Rhino
Roar Guru
Mac I think it's you who needs to take your blinkers off bud. You've got tunnel vision there.
Mac, lets start with those 150 years of oppression, then you tell me who was the "designers" of oppression?
USrugger
Guest
Agreed, mate. The toughest step in change is to recognize it is needed. That often takes a HUGE leap. Anyone who does not approach the failing status quo with an open mind, will never be able to make improvements. Facts are facts. South African rugby, for all its heroic moments, is in reverse. And accelerating. Its a mindset perpetuated by a Jurassic beliefs & coaching system. It seems universally accepted that we have the players. Therefore it has to come down to coaching.
USrugger
Guest
The Springboks had the courage of their restrictions. The All Blacks had the courage of their convictions. The PERFECT summary!! Quite poetic, Spiro...
mactheblack
Guest
This is not a political forum however, I have to answer you Vic and suggest you take off your blinkers. And, are you insinuating that when the oppressive regime of the past handed over reins to the new orderi n 1994, that everything was in order? Oh no, blacks confined to about 25% of the land, while whites lived in lap of luxury on the remaining 75%. Now that paints a sorry picture in itself Schools and sports were not integrated; There were no equal opportunities whatsoever. And we can go on and on... A new order changed the landscape - and though it might not be to our heart's desire, I for one say thank you that the bad old days of South Africa are a distant memory. Many people are still poor and disenfranchised, but far less than there used to be in the old order. Whether the present government have to struggle to make right more than 150 years of oppression brought on by apartheid designers - in a few years - is not so much the point as opposed to how SA is now integrated into the world on every level; - we are now a fully-fledged democracy and a bona fide one. Yes, things are not altogether hunky-dory, but no longer are we divided based on the hue of our skin. That's what matters to me. It is rather puerile to blame the present government for some of the disappointments in our sporting achievements - especially the rugby loss on Saturday. Maybe we should then put the blame on the "laager mentality" that still exists, like when Heyneke Meyer turns lock Pieter-Steph du Toit into a flanker to deny black player Siya Kolisi - a specialist loosie a chance at the World Cup. Maybe player of colour, Rudy Paige, should have had a run-on instead of Ruan "sleepy eyed" Pienaar, who many feel didn't deserve a spot in the side. Or was it because he is the son of Free State legend, Gysie Pienaar? I don't know, maybe you can answer that. We might be in a new dispensation but yes, the remnants of the "old order" still pervades, in my opinion. It is the new order that helped us to become integrated, accepted and a force in the international sporting arena. Don't ever forget that. If wise old heads did not realise that the selfish ambitions of a one-party state were going to take the nation down a precipice, rabid Bok fans like you would not have been able to shout for your team on the international stage today. There are hundreds of thousands of very talented sportsmen and women from previously marginalized and disadvantaged sectors who could not put on the Green and Gold under an apartheid order. Although it was grossly unfair - they have taken it on the chin. Don't let us make their battle to help realise "unity" a non-event. Vic, you and guys like Biltongbek and Mr Jones need to take off your blinkers - and count your blessings.
Vic
Guest
Mates, no one so blind as him who doesn't want to see. And unfortunately there appears to be an epidemic of blindness in Africa. The good news is, Quinton de Kock has matured, Faffie has found his form, and AB remains AB.
Harry Jones
Expert
Vic, that might have been one of the best posts of the year...
Vic, Mac still has that entitlement issues. I can think of no other reason why, from memory he is a South African who has left our shores, but still holds on to the mentality of entitlement, I may be wrong, but from what I have seen from him during the time he has been here, I suspect I am not far off the mark. Hence the continuous blame towards the few.
Vic
Guest
"The problem here in SA is that, and it includes fans, is that rugby is still seen as a bastion of a few. A certain select band who believe rugby was gifted to them from the gods, more than a century ago – so it’s a case of “we know the game, we’ve been gifted it – so you listen up!!!” That (that this minority group “owns rugby”) is in fact a lie – as rugby has been played by more than just one group for many many years in this country." Mac, when are the South Africans going to stop blaming the "few", and start taking responsibility for ourselves? How long is needed for an African government to take control of a country it runs? How long did it take the Boers to build South Africa up after the total devastation caused by the second Boer War, to what it was when they handed it to us? If black South Africans want to play, or coach, rugby- what stops us from doing so? You are blaming "the few" for having a hugely successful sporting team - what prevents South African "many" from being successful in athletics, swimming or soccer? Or any other sport for that matter? The decline of the Springboks has happened since the advance of the new regime - you continue to blame "the few" - your logic escapes me. Maybe "the few" are also responsible for the failure of Haiti, Somalia and Rwanda? There are many reasons why South African rugby is stagnating - none of which are to do with "the few" thinking that rugby is a gift from the gods. Let's face it - the only successful sporting teams in Africa are those sponsored by, supported by, and coached by, "the few". It is time Africa takes some responsibility and act like the adults we supposedly are.
lassitude
Guest
Certainly the Oz ownership of NZ media has dumbed down news and current affairs - from a reasonably low level anyway.
zhenry
Guest
Name calling is the only response, I am hitting the mark.
kick to kick
Guest
Reducing scoring from penalties will increase not reduce the physicality of the game. Sustained attack and defense as sides look to press a territorial advantage is the opposite of touch football. At the moment physicality is compromised because of another unfortunate byproduct of the penalty goal - the huge hiatus and downtime of each penalty attempt. The resulting rest time for highly structured but not very fit teams is another incentive for negative tactics.
Benny
Guest
Assuming we're talking about the same moment, it was BdP. He tackles Nonu, gets to his feet but doesn't release, elbows on the deck. The ref goes back for an earlier infringement but it should have been a card. Not releasing after a decent break, a few metres from the line already on penalty advantage, that's a card if lazy running and kicking the ball away is.
Tulogs
Guest
I recon it started with Mitchell. I would love to see him, Plumtree or Eddie Jones given a go with the Bok job.
Afroman
Guest
I'll start off by saying: Congratulations, All Blacks. You deserved your win. However, what bothers me more than the actual loss (I'm South African) is the sudden vitriol with which everyone hates on the Springboks' style of playing and act as if New Zealand was playing this marvelous running game. If anyone "played to win", it SURELY had to be the All Blacks, who kicked the s**t out of the ball and kept the Boks locked in their 22 for the entire game. It was "Jakeball" par excellence! And then I'll touch on perhaps a sensitive issue - something that I believe World Rugby has to address immediately: The All Blacks are leading a dangerous path towards what I believe will become a sad way of play going forward. The moment an opposing team gets the ball anywhere NEAR the All Black 22 they will break every possible rule rugby has in order to force a penalty instead of a try. You pointed out the Jerome Kaino yellow card incident, but I feel this isn't so much an "incident" as the norm for the All Blacks. And with modern defensive systems being as tight as they are, their risk pays off. Rather concede the 3 points, and perhaps even the man in the bin - than to suffer the opposing team score a try. I see Hansen complained about the penalty count being 13-6. What a joke. The Springboks led in penalties because every time they got the ball in close to the All Blacks' half, the All Blacks would come in the side at the ruck, or the maul, or pull a Jerome Kaino or some other red zone penalty. Normally, a sin-binning was good enough to deter teams from doing this as a general tactic. The All Blacks have shown that this is no longer the case. World Rugby should step in, and perhaps start instructing referees to award penalty tries against teams committing red zone penalties on a regular basis. The All Blacks are the best team in the world by quite some distance. But don't fool yourself (or other people) by pretending that they are playing "beautiful" rugby. They play smart, percentage-orientated, and, sadly, cynical rugby. And it works for them.
mactheblack
Guest
Spiro though you hit the nail on the head in this post - please tell us something new re: the Boks! The fact that the Boks are like the proverbial ostrich with the head in the sand when it comes to coaching "the modern game" and not necessarily through brutish forward strength, has been flogged to death on this forum for many years and matches between these teams now. Every single coach who seems to coach the Boks - is playing the 20th century style. It's as if they turn a blind eye to the plethora of highly-talented backs they have in their midst. Now I ask: Is just a South African thing - this stubbornness that harkens back to a bygone era in this country? Not sure? Guys like Jesse Kriel, Bryan Habana, Damian de Allende must be asking, what they are doing on the field anyway? It's a disgrace how Habana has been denied the ball over the last few seasons with the Boks and resort to foraging for the ball - which he has acquitted himself of brilliantly by the way!. I can say categorically anyway - Bok fans do not want to see this type of "route one" rugby. NOt that I am their spokesperson. But I know it. It's maul after maul after maul. Like watching a highlights reel of the same thing. It's killing their (fans') passion. Jake White stumbled on this plan by chance .. he saw the bulk in his boys and his eyes lit up! It worked for him in 2007. However just look at the pool they were in in 2007, quite like this one in England. The easiest by far. SA has a "massive pool" of talent to choose from in this country. It is true that the black players in SA of which there are many - especially at school level - are gifted in terms of running with the ball. They possess silky skills - that must be honed of course. It is an innate quality that must be harnessed. There are many of them at school level and at club and Currie cup level. There are the other players who have the bulk of course - and a rugby pedigree left by their forefathers. I think the current state of affairs has got a lot to do with misunderstanding issues of culture in South Africa by coaching systems, still dominated by the white minority. In fact if you consider how inconsistent the BOks have been under Meyer, then one realizes they have been going only one way - backwards! Defeats to Wales, Ireland and Japan (no offence to these teams at all) and of course los Pumas show that these teams, who they probably should be beating more often than not, are actually on the up compared to the Boks! If a coach - or coaching system - can bring all the elements together - and put the right players through systems and get to choose them when they are ripe for the picking so to speak - the Boks will have a better chance of not having to sit with the coming second syndrome to the All Blacks everytime they play the old rival. But it needs a system that can see these players, hand-pick them, select them through the systems and mould them properly. The problem here in SA is that, and it includes fans, is that rugby is still seen as a bastion of a few. A certain select band who believe rugby was gifted to them from the gods, more than a century ago - so it's a case of "we know the game, we've been gifted it - so you listen up!!!" That (that this minority group "owns rugby") is in fact a lie - as rugby has been played by more than just one group for many many years in this country. It's not about the talent or the game-plan as much as it is about the "mindset". People here who are gobsmacked by the NZ success should realize is that this "mindset" is not something you buy at the cornershop. It takes year to instill, to breed and to grow. SA better start now - otherwise we'll be singing the same tune from the same hymn sheet time and time again! It is actually a disgrace that SA cannot do better and select from a wider pool of players in this country ... given the rugby-playing numbers, which far exceed countries like Australia, New Zealand, Argentina and Ireland, England and Wales.
Harry Jones
Expert
Team of the Semi-Finals according to Planet Rugby: 15 Ben Smith (New Zealand): Taking on the mantle from Conrad Smith as the All Black player who never seems to put a foot wrong. When the rain started coming down on Saturday, Smith stepped up, and it was his ability under the high ball that negated the Springboks' tactical kicking. He does just enough to edge out Joaquín Tuculet, who has been a star in the Pumas back three. 14 Adam Ashley-Cooper (Australia): There won't be many easier hat-tricks, but as so often Ashley-Cooper was in the right place at the right time. On the end of two magnificent passes for his two first-half scores, he then popped up in support to finish off Drew Mitchell's breaking run. 13 Marcelo Bosch (Argentina): With Juan Martín Hernández shaken up early, the Pumas needed a spark from their other midfield playmaker. On his return from suspension, Bosch stepped up, constantly causing Australia problems. With some better support lines from his teammates, Argentina might have scored the try they needed to level matters in the second half. Edges out Conrad Smith. 12 Ma’a Nonu (New Zealand): Another blockbuster performance from Nonu, who's delayed pass sent Beauden Barrett over for New Zealand's crucial second try. A constant menace with ball in hand, he also shut down the young Springbok midfield duo emphatically. 11 Santiago Cordero (Argentina): Shifted across to the left wing, an early knock-on as he tried to take a mark might have shaken Cordero, but he bounced back strongly and seemed to break through at will. Cordero will be a star in Super Rugby next season, and with better distribution at the end of those breaks, he will be up there with the world's best. Finished with 100 metres to his name. 10 Dan Carter (New Zealand): It's tough to leave out Nicolás Sánchez after his performance at Twickenham, while Bernard Foley also produced a couple of sublime passes. But Carter was a different class, with a virtually faultless display including a snap drop goal that turned the tide and then a strip on Schalk Burger that set up Barrett's winning try. Now he gets to play his first World Cup final. 9 Fourie du Preez (South Africa): Not too many contenders at scrum-half, but we'll reward the bravery of Du Preez, who somehow played all 80 minutes despite what looked to be a serious cheek injury. Instrumental to the Springboks' chances, he just edges out Will Genia, who was solid for the Wallabies. 8 David Pocock (Australia): Regardless of the result next Saturday, Pocock will surely be named World Player of the Year. Nobody influences the game more, and if he gets a sniff at the breakdown, the opposition don't have a chance. Finished Sunday's game bloodied and bruised but expect him to be ready for McCaw and co in the final. 7 Francois Louw (South Africa): The flanker spilt plenty of blood at Twickenham, finishing the semi-final with 13 tackles and having won two turnovers. Now 30, he has plenty left in the tank and will become a key leader in the build-up to the next World Cup. Gets the nod just ahead of Argentina's Juan Martín Hernández Lobbe. 6 Scott Fardy (Australia): Unreal yet again. The top tackler in Sunday's semi-final with 18 hits, Fardy also produced three turnovers and made three key takes at the lineout. Right up there as one of the best number sixes at this World Cup. 5 Sam Whitelock (New Zealand): Has quietly gone about his excellent business all tournament in the All Blacks second row. 72 caps already at the age of 27. He sneaks in ahead of Rob Simmons despite the lock's excellent interception score against Argentina. 4 Guido Petti (Argentina): One of the most impressive young performers at this World Cup. We spotted Petti's talent with the U20s and now the 20-year-old has rubber-stamped his potential. Carried and tackled with intent and made an impression in the lineout to make our side. The best is yet to come. 3 Ramiro Herrera (Argentina): A mindless performance in the quarter-final was wiped out by Herrera absolutely destroying James Slipper in the scrum for Argentina as they won countless penalties in the set-piece. Also chipped in with seven tackles. 2 Stephen Moore (Australia): The captain departed in the second half after five carries and nine tackles. Michael Cheika is getting the best out of his Test centurion and Moore in terms has led the Wallabies very well throughout the tournament. 1 Marcos Ayerza (Argentina): At 32 we might have seen the last of Marcos Ayerza in a World Cup, and if so what a shame. Rarely less than outstanding, he has had a great tournament and once again dominated in the scrum.
Andy
Guest
Not Bothered knows Crockett didn't play, that is his point, making stuff up, oh, forget it.
Boris
Guest
Correct the calls were mostly fair, but all one way traffic. Close to blatant preference and coming from an Aussie thst's sad...
Boris
Guest
A large number of current AB's will retire after the RWC finishes (or play in France/Japan) as new blood comes in. Great way to recycle players and inject new blood, now they might lose a game or three during the transition process so please don't top yourself just yet!