With eleven minutes left in the first half of the 2019 Rugby World Cup, England won possession at South Africa’s 22-metre line.
The score was remarkably 3-6, despite the Springboks having starved their opponents for the ball.
For the next three minutes, the English forwards kept ball in hand, forming 26 consecutive rucks, winning two penalty advantages, stayed inside the Bok 22, went forward and went backward, but at one point came within one inch of scoring a pivotal try.
If England were to have won the final, and the good medals worth accepting, they had to score. They did not.
If they had scored, and gone up 10-6 with less than seven minutes left, and controlled the restart, we might be analysing how England won its second Cup, and it would have been Jonny May in his budgie smugglers befriending Prince Harry and a beer-filled trophy.
During those vital 180 seconds, with English fans on their feet, the Bok forwards scrambling, Faf de Klerk flying over bodies, and mismatches galore (Cheslin Kolbe one-on-one with Courtney Lawes twice, in space), the much-vaunted super-athlete and ferocious competitor Maro Itoje almost disappeared.
Where did he go? Why did he shrink?
Itoje did not carry
England carried 30 times in those three minutes. It was no picnic. The pathway was into the teeth of the biggest Boks.
Thus, we only saw four backline carries. There was no space and time for passes, for the most part. It was halfback to forward with a head start; or pick-and-go from the base. This is when a mobile lock proves his salt.
But here’s the thing. The only English forward to carry less than Itoje in the Three Minute Assault was Jamie George.
Billy Vunipola carried seven times; his brother trucked it up three times in very heavy traffic.
Both had the same ratio of strong carry-to-being-dominated (Billy was 3:3; Mako was 1:1).
Lawes carried five times with less success: one good carry; but dominated three times. Sam Underhill was the best carrier with three strong carries out of three.
Maro Itoje runs the ball for England. (Photo by Adam Davy/PA Images via Getty Images)
Overall, I rated 13 of the 30 English carries as ‘strong’ (over the gainline and resulting in quick ball), with 11 as ‘dominated’ by the Boks (turned or smashed or easily slowed); six carries were just neutral.
Itoje missed his opportunity to turn momentum as a big carrier during this period. He only put his hands on the ball twice (he was not even involved as jumper or lifter or a jazz hand clapper in the lineout which started the phases): at 29:39 he picked up 13m out, and was immediately squashed by Pieter-Steph du Toit, who turned him back on to the previous ruck.
The next phase started two metres behind Itoje’s attempt.
The second time Itoje carried was at 31:42, twenty-two rucks into the attack.
He was fourth to the ruck after a strong Billy Vunipola carry almost to the try line.
He picked up static ball from within the ruck, and tried to muscle it over, but was absolutely stymied by Frans Malherbe, who is more of a bear-wrestler than a dynamic tackler.
Itoje did not find his inner Ardie. His legs did not pump. He did not chirp.
Itoje abdicated. He deferred. He handed it to poor old Dan Cole to try for glory. If you add an ‘e’ to Dan’s first name and an ‘s’ to his surname, it might have worked, but the bald prop had no juice in his legs, after being pumped by Beast Mtwarira in the scrums, and all he did was resemble a bald pancake with PTSD. One metre to go but no glory.
The English were pushed back to the 22 after a few more phases.
Itoje did not feature as a carrier thereafter. in the Big Three Minutes. He did not even offer himself as a carrier. If he got off the deck, and wandered into the backfield, he put himself flatfooted in a poor position, and watched.
Most of the time he joined rucks as a third or fourth arrival, and merely lay down or rested a hand on a Bok or Pom after collisions.
Maro rarely saw space against the Boks. (Photo by Craig Mercer/MB Media/Getty Images)
Itoje did not meet the moment. In that situation, inches from the line, with the only try of the match yet to be scored, and the half ready to be stolen, against the run of play, Itoje failed to be a leader, and he cannot claim to be in the same category as Brodie Retallick, Alun Wyn Jones, Eben Etzebeth, Lood de Jager, and Sam Whitelock.
Itoje was ineffective
I looked at all of Itoje’s actions at the 15 rucks he joined. I classified them as strong or passive.
The final tally was 0-15.
In addition, four times he did something that some referees would have whistled. I am not saying he shouldn’t have done those things.
Jerome Garces was letting attacking sealers belly flop two or three metres beyond the tackled carrier. I am just saying that he put his team at risk of being turned over deep in the attacking zone.
Itoje no-showed at 10 of the rucks in which he was not the carrier (he picked and went twice and was smashed back).
He did not clean one Bok. He flopped on Vermeulen once instead of cleaning him. He tried to clean Malherbe but failed miserably; Owen Farrell had more success.
He latched twice, but ended up just falling down. He watched several rucks from a standing, contemplative position. Three times he failed to move from a prior ruck.
From Ruck 1 to Ruck 11, he never ran hard. He stayed on one knee from Ruck 11 to Ruck 13. He walked to Ruck 14. He was the sixth to arrive.
He trotted to Ruck 15 and took no part. He rested on Cole’s back at Ruck 16. He watched Farrell try to clean Malcolm Marx at Ruck 17.
He was beaten at Ruck 18 to the good carrier position by Mako Vunipola, even though Mako started from farther away.
At Ruck 19, he unnecessarily sealed despite no Bok contest. At Rucks 22 and 23, he was a statue on the side.
Crucially, at Ruck 24, he only ran ten metres, while Lawes ran 20 metres to be a carrier and try to rescue the chance to score a try.
Underhill ran a good 30 metres to be a part. Itoje never went from side to side, but Etzebeth went from sideline to sideline and tackled Tuilagi on a mini-break.
In the end, Farrell took the three after Faf de Klerk forced Garces to blow it up.
When Itoje declined to let Sir Bill Beaumont hang the medal around his head, perhaps he was dismayed at his own lack of fire in those three minutes.
He was a quiet lad in the final. But he was quietest when his team needed him to make a noise the most.
Pundit
Roar Guru
To be honest on a surface level Itoje seemed like he played a decent game with his lineout presence, but this article is rather damning for one
You need to separate the facts from the opinion. The facts were well analysed, you are welcome to disagree with Harry’s summation
Harry Jones
Expert
Big moments define big players.
Harry Jones
Expert
Correct. And I am completely sure Itoje agrees. He has the heart of a champion. He wants to be the Michael Jordan of rugby. He knows that 3 min was ‘championship time.’ He will be a Beast NEXT time
FunBus
Roar Rookie
'Not brave, just the English being English and massively overrating their man.' Yes, only the English do this.
FunBus
Roar Rookie
To isolate a 3 minute passage of play and state that a player can't be listed in the same class as several in his position because of it is a ludicrous analysis.
FunBus
Roar Rookie
So that 3 minutes means 'he cannot claim to be in the same category as Brodie Retallick, Alun Wyn Jones, Eben Etzebeth, Lood de Jager, and Sam Whitelock,' does it? Does the 80 minutes that Retallick and Whitelock did nothing against England count? How about de Jager's performance against Italy when you lost in 2016? Presumably none of these locks you mention have ever had a 'bad' 3 minutes let alone a bad match? My guess is that, seeing as you have constantly claimed Itoje is overrated, you were a little embarrassed after the England-New Zealand game and have over-reached in your analysis.
Harry Jones
Expert
Actually, it is easy for me to say that: Itoje tackled, pursued, and chased Bok carriers all match, and this probably depleted him. His tackles were not dominant as PSDT’s and Underhill’s, Lawes’, and other Boks’ were. He is super athletic, and has dominated matches against other teams. But (1) this 3-minute period was crucial; (2) it came after only a stop-start 29 minutes (injuries stopped play for 4-5 minutes) and all the Bok forwards had one day less rest, after a grueling Welsh fight; and (3) he contributed virtually nothing as a cleaner or carrier. Perhaps he was hurt. I don’t know. He’s in most teams of the tournament. He’ll probably be Man of the Lions Tour. He just didn’t rise to THIS particular occasion.
pm
Roar Rookie
Just rewatched the match and was struck by Itoje's tackling. Try watching his game as a defensive effort and i think you'd say he played pretty well. I say that as someone who was 100% behind S.A and was happy to see them win. I think we're recolouring his play based on the not very dignified way he accepted his medal.
Michael Duncan
Guest
Nicholas, You are spot on - but there is an Irish 2nd row called James Ryan who has not had a chance to shine on the world stage but is - to be frank - superhuman. He'll be in SA with the Lions. What the analysis of Itoje's performance illustrates is that every team or player has a total dud performance once in a while - i'd say one in every 10 -12 games. We will probably never know why or which ones - or else the bookies would be broke and I'd be living it up on my sunkissed island of hedonsim with my winnings. Itoje will shine again, he is gifted, on that I will bet the house
Yes, they taste flat, no body :shocked:
PeterK
Roar Guru
NB - Good reply I am aware of HJ's high opinion of EE. For the sake of the discussion on this thread and where we intersected, lets say I grant all your points are true (except perhaps the banner line since the editors choose those), I still maintain HJ took the high road to your post and did not rise to the bait, you never took the high road, you used inflammatory / emotional language which clearly is not the high road which was my point. Or you can take the high road -- forgive them or ignore them or not let it worry you. Now IMO HJ never said Eng lost because of Itoje however he did correctly point out a crucial 3 mins in the game and Itoje did not involve himself effectively during this time. I do not believe it was a hatchet job since it was factually and fairly presented but that is me. Personally on EE he consistently delivers BUT never has had the very high highs that Itoje had against AB's nor that Brodie or AWJ have delivered. Itoje IMO isn't a great yet however is on the right trajectory. I don't rate Whitelock or Lood de Jager in that great echelon either. Whitelock is another IMO who has been slightly over rated (not saying he hasn't been a great lineout general but it takes more than that). You may be right that HJ resents MI because he threw shade over EE, or he just rates different things from his locks that you do or others do.
Neil Back
Roar Rookie
OK, I'm back from the weekend, and thanks for your reply. Please allow me to retort. Here's the thing Peter, you do not understand Harry's history or agenda here - and why would you. The fact is, Harry carries a massive torch for Etzebeth. Has done for years, and it features regularly in his opinions. Without pointing you to the minutia of his years of comments, you just need to be reminded of this article a few years ago. It's fandom personified : https://www.theroar.com.au/2016/08/23/little-eben-etzebeth-grows/. Unfortunately, as his reputation grew, the younger Itoje's did too, and the simple fact is, he doesn't like the idea of EE being eclipsed on the world stage by him. If you'd paid attention over the years (and I repeat, why would you), then you'd know this to be the case. I half expected something from him after Itoje outshone the world's premier long standing locking partnership in the semi, although wondered how even he might down grade it. When the latest article praising Itoje came out, penned by Nic Bishop four days ago, even I didn't expect this rebuttal from Harry. But there it was. Yes I used the word 'assassination'. It was. It effectively blamed Itoje for England not winning the RWC, under bold banner headlines. That's, frankly, ridiculous. If you think my language is inflammatory, please re-read Harry's article. And as I've explained, I am 'deeply suspicious of his motives'. That's not an attack, as I've explained, it's a considered opinion formed over years of reading him. As for being 'unnecessary', perhaps I should have better said 'highly selective', since it chooses to focus on literally a few minutes. What it gives absolutely no reference to is the fact that in a SA performance lauded for the ferocity of it's defence, Itoje racked up more tackles than any player on either side. If you're looking for any semblance of balance, that omission tells it's own tale. And if you still doubt my primary premise as to Harry's dubious motives, he absolutely gives himself away in the line ' Itoje ..... cannot claim to be in the same category as Brodie Retallick, Alun Wyn Jones, Eben Etzebeth, Lood de Jager, and Sam Whitelock.' Lets' be clear. If you believe what I've written is attacking Harry, then you might want to consider his article a little more, and the language it contains. I'm simply calling this out as I see it, and have observed silently for quite a few years from him. Nor does it mean I won't continue to enjoy reading him.
Faith
Roar Rookie
Lol. Great piece. Even EJ and Mitch won't be taking the player through this kind of detail. Exactly the kind of wake-up call if he's going to be great. England bases their core play on a power game. But its not a power game when you come up against a more powerful team. And that's why the ABs never take the Boks physically - they use their wiles. In a spectrum looking at ABs, Eng and Boks the extreme ABs rely most on individual attack, counter, running game etc and while Boks can do all these things they rely most on the big forwards. England seem to have balanced these two kinds of play. They can do individual skill and forward power. So, on a good day they can thrash the ABs when they take this run, kick, bash game to the level they did in the semis. But to only rely against power against the Boks was pure madness. That 3rd game they played in the Republic with all sorts of wily kicks etc was they way to go. But then again this was a Final and England could not fix that ancient weakness i.e consistency of application ... possibly what Harry shows here so well if only mostly through Itoje.
pm
Roar Rookie
And it is very much a (play by play) analysis rather than just a twisting of the knife (in the chest) ... But I'm wondering, even in a good performance is it his ball carrying and moving bodies at rucks that he does well even in a good game? I would think the most comparable player to him in the S.A team would be Mostert - a lot of tackles and line-out presence but not a whole lot of grunt. Here it seems more as if he if he is failing to play an Etsebeth type role.
ClarkeG
Roar Guru
Your criticisms are not based on emotion though are they John. Good on ya.
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
I don't like virtual beers. Give me real.
PeterK
Roar Guru
NB - You tell me if you think these statements are taking the high road? This is an assassination piece from Harry I am deeply suspicious of his motives here. A totally unnecessary piece. Attacking HJ's character by questioning his motives. Attacking the whole article being produced when not many articles at this time of year , when it has been so thought provoking. In response I see HJ being conciliatory, not rising to the bait and offering an olive branch.
Neil Back
Roar Rookie
Care to explain why?
PeterK
Roar Guru
Neil - Lets just say you won't be getting a nosebleed anytime soon.