SPIRO: Rugby World Cup was great but not the best ever

On Sunday, some hours after the exciting 2015 Rugby World Cup final between the All Blacks and the Wallabies, World Rugby chairman Bernard Lapasset hailed the tournament as “the biggest and best Rugby World Cup”.

The biggest? Yes.

There was a record total attendance of 2,474,584 at all the matches: a final watched by an estimated 120 million across the globe. About 250 million pounds were generated in ticket revenues, a surplus of 80 million pounds for World Rugby and 15 million pounds surplus for the Rugby Football Union.

There were 460,000 overseas visitors to England, a record TV audience of 25 million in Japan to watch the Brave Blossoms’ match against Samoa, and 11.6 million to watch England versus Wales, the highest peak audience for a sporting event in the UK since the 2014 FIFA World Cup.

The best? No.

Three other World Cup tournaments, South Africa in 1995, Australia in 2003 and New Zealand in 2011 have strong claims for being the best.

All of them were superbly organised. All of them involved the active participation of every part of the community.

Nelson Mandela greeting the finalists wearing the Springboks No.6 jersey of captain Francois Pienaar is the most dramatic and historic moments in Rugby World Cup history.

The ARU created the fine precedent of working to include local communities in the game. New Zealand’s “stadium of four million people” gave a new meaning to the notion of a rugby nation.

In its totality, I would rate the 2003 Rugby World Cup as the best ever tournament.

Where the hosts of the 2015 World Cup fell down badly was the poor management of the on-field and off-field issues, often to the detriment of the southern hemisphere nations.

Let us begin with the act of bastardy against one of World Rugby’s acknowledged leading referees, Craig Joubert.

Joubert’s international career has been severely compromised, if not destroyed, by the decision by World Rugby to publish a damning criticism of a decision he made, in favour of the Wallabies who trailed Scotland by two points in the dying minutes of their quarter-final match.

The criticism saying that Joubert had made a mistake in his ruling actually repudiates the laws of rugby which state unambiguously that “the referee is the sole judge of fact” in a match.

It was done to appease mob protests from former Scotland players, the players on the field and northern hemisphere diehards who could not accept that for the first time in a Rugby World Cup all the teams competing in the semi-finals were from the southern hemisphere.

Joubert was accused by fleck-mouth Scottish supporters, including shamefully Gavin Hastings, for running off the field like a coward at the end of the match.

This is another defamation imposed on Joubert on top of the accusation of poor judgment over his controversial ruling.

In fact, Joubert explained that he got off the field as quickly as he could because some of the Scottish players looked agitated and spectators nearby were throwing bottles in his direction. He did not want television pictures of a crowd insurgency to taint the coverage of the match that was being televised around the world.

The World Rugby executive committee, which includes the ARU chairman Michael Hawker, needs to explain to the rugby community why they allowed Joubert’s career to be shattered in this way, why the precedent was set for an instant denigration of a referee’s reputation, when an apology will be formally made to Joubert and who in World Rugby will be sacked for this gross example of mismanagement.

Then there was the own goal shot by the RFU, the England host union, in refusing to wait until six months before the tournament before setting out the pool schedule. FIFA does this with its World Cup, why doesn’t World Rugby insist on it?

The upshot of the early pool schedule was the Pool of Death with England failing to make the finals. This is the first time a host nation has failed to get through to the finals.

You can’t have a best Rugby World Cup without the host country at least playing in the finals.

In the case of England in the 2015 Rugby World Cup where can youngsters in that country gain the inspiration to become rugby fans and players when they are confronted with the mediocrity, in the full gaze of the world?

Sir Graham Henry made this point that England’s early exit from the 2015 World Cup should create a “fallout” that will ensure no future pool features three of the leading teams in the international rankings. Given the incompetence towards the real interests of the stakeholders from the World Rugby officials, I wouldn’t hold my breath on this sort of outcome.

World Rugby officials were asked three times at briefings after England were booted out of the tournament whether the seedings would be held closer to the 2019 World Cup in Japan. Three times they refused to answer the question. Instead, they pointed out that the World Cup would be in competition with the 2020 Tokyo Olympics.

This meant, they insisted, competition in the sports ticketing market which suggested an earlier rather than a later schedule of matches being drawn up. Oh dear!

During the 2015 World Cup, too, there were several decisions regarding disciplinary matters that clearly favoured the northern hemisphere teams. Where is the notion of a ‘World’ Cup tournament in this?

Ireland’s Sean O’Brien got one week only rather than two weeks for punching the French player Pascal Pape. The usual punishment of two weeks was somehow reduced to one week because of O’Brien’s “good behaviour” at the hearings, his remorse, good character and clean record. How convenient!

Scotland’s Jonny Gray and Ross Ford were given three weeks for a lifting tackle against Samoa’s Jack Lam which put them out of the finals. Somehow World Rugby officials had a change of mind and both these players were available to play against the Wallabies in the quarter-final!

England’s Owen Farrell was sin-binned for a shoulder charge dangerous tackle on Matt Giteau. And the matter ended there. But Samoa’s Faifili Levave was sin-binned and cited for a similar offence.

Finally, there was the “bizarre” (Michael Cheika’s word) decision by World Rugby not to allow the Wallabies coaching staff to be on the field singing the national anthem with the players before the kick-off to the final against the All Blacks.

The RFU and the World Rugby officials failed to understand that the importance of the word “World” in the tournament’s Rugby World Cup description.

From the chauvinistic opening ceremony through to the numerous decisions made in the running of the tournament, the emphasis was too much on England’s importance as rugby’s orginator and nowhere near enough on the success of the game as a worldwide sport.

***

Where the 2015 World Cup was great was in the play on the field. Chairman Lapasset has noted, for instance, that this was the “most competitive” tournament with an average winning margin coming down to 22. The average in the 2011 World Cup was 28.

What this statistic tells us is that the second tier countries are slowly and surely becoming more competitive with the first tier nations. This was thrillingly brought home to world viewers with the sensational victory of Japan’s Brave Blossoms over the South African Springboks.

The victory was not a product of some external factor like appalling weather or prejudiced refereeing. The Brave Blossoms produced their stunning upset – and set up the 2019 Rugby World Cup – with superb rugby.

They scored their final, winning try in about the 82nd minute after 19 phases of play, starting with a lineout. The excellence of every part of that attack was a tribute to the high skills of the players, their calmness in a stressful situation and the exemplary coaching by Eddie Jones.

There was also those historic and heroic (the rugby equivalent of Horatio on the bridge) seven minutes when 13 Wallabies, pinned inside their 22, held out 15 Welsh players without conceding a point in their crucial pool match.

Another statistic to embellish this pattern of the second tier countries becoming more competitive by playing what I call ‘real rugby’ – ball-in-hand, smart, skilful, confrontational rugby – is that during the 2015 Rugby World Cup the ball was in play 43 per cent of the time. This is an increase on 2011 figures.

You saw the impact of this in the final where both sides went at each by running the ball and, in general, when they kicked they did so with an intent to get the ball back.

The result was a final that featured five tries, the most in a Rugby World Cup final, and an enthralling contest that saw the Wallabies come back from 21-3 and throw a massive challenge to the All Blacks by clawing the score line back to 21-17.

The other feature of this increase in the time the ball was in play during the 2015 World Cup 2015 is that the number of tries decreased from an average of 6.1 in 2011 to 5.8 this year. World Rugby claims that this statistic highlights “the great strides in defence” made over the past four years.

This is true. It is also true, too, that the minnow nations are less likely to be overwhelmed by the top nations than they were in the past. So there are fewer blowouts. And I think this is the crucial factor here.

The point about the 2015 World Cup is that the All Blacks scored 13 tries in the finals. In 2003 England scored just two tries in the finals. Jonny Wilkinson kicked five drop goals and 15 penalties to boot England home to their only Webb Ellis trophy.

When I rail against northern hemisphere rugby and the pernicious influence of whistle-happy, rugby-destroying referees and laws (like the legalised illegality of rolling mauls) statistics like this need to be remembered.

The influence of the whistle-happy, rugby-destroying referee was still, unfortunately, present in 2015. The All Blacks, after scoring nine tries in their quarter-final against France, were kept to a solitary try and a small two-point victory over the Springboks.

This was despite the fact that they dominated possession (67% to 33%) and territory (57% to 43%). They carried the ball for 387 metres to 149, missed three tackles to 20, and won four lineout throws from the Springboks and won all of their own ball.

The crucial statistic in all of this is that the Frenchman Jermome Garces penalised the dominant side, the All Blacks, 14 to 6.

As Paul Thomas noted in The New Zealand Listener:

“This isn’t to say that French referee Jerome Garces was biased … although he does seem to adhere to the philosophy that a referee’s core task is awarding penalties. He also refereed the England-Wales pool game, another absorbing kick-fest. All up, these two Garces-controlled games featured four tries, two drop goals and no fewer than 19 penalty goals.”

It is because the Webb Ellis trophy should go to the team that scores the most tries and runs the ball best, in the mythical spirit of William Webb Ellis at Rugby School in 1823, that it was important that Nigel Owens refereed the final between the All Blacks and the Wallabies.

This is a vital decision that the organisers did get exactly right.

Owens is one of the only northern hemisphere referees who embraces the southern hemisphere vision of rugby that it is a running game rather than a kicking game.

It seems, too, that World Rugby is finally getting around to embracing this vision.

In Wales, now, and presumably in some southern hemisphere countries next season, World Rugby is trialling:

1. Penalties awarded after time has expired can be kicked into touch and the lineout will be played.

2. Revised points scoring: six points for a try, two points for a conversion, two points for a penalty.

3. Teams can choose which advantage they want to play if a side offends on multiple occasions.

4. No conversions after a penalty try, which is automatically worth eight points.

5. A maul must start to move within five seconds or the ball must be used.

6. A player who plays the ball while his foot is in touch but before the ball has crossed the plane of the touchline is deemed to have carried the ball into touch.

7. Scrum changes allowing a scrum-half to stand with his shoulder level with the centre of the scrum, promoting scrum stability.

8. Introduction of a five-metre line drop out as an alternative to a five-metre scrum for a defending team.

I see these changes, if they are introduced as they should be – although I don’t really understand number three – as creating further momentum towards a fast-flowing, free-running, perpetual-motion rugby game that does not stop and start at the whim of TMOs and officious referees.

The 2019 Rugby World Cup in Japan should be sensational on and off the field. The best ever, even. Bring it on!