Testing Times: The campaign to save Test cricket

Australia captain Michael Clarke's lonely display of defiance against South Africa at Cape Town made for gripping viewing on Wednesday, giving the Test game a shot in the arm. West Indies' battling display against India in the first Test of that series also hinted at a welcome revival. Otherwise, however, the perception is that the five-day game is like South Africa's lions, leopards and giraffes – an endangered species, its territory being continually encroached upon by the Twenty20 game.

Australia captain Michael Clarke battles back against South Africa

Frustratingly, this series between South Africa and Australia is comprised of only two Tests. Next summer's clash between England and South Africa – effectively the world No1 title decider – is to be played over just three, even though England and Wales Cricket Board chairman Giles Clarke gave meetings between the two countries 'icon' (five-match) status in 2008. Pakistan are being forced to play their 'home' matches in Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Sharjah (they have just beaten Sri Lanka 1-0 in a series at those venues). And crowds outside matches in England and Australia are dwindling.

A hotel receptionist called Rebecca Duffy, from Hastings, and her friends want to do their bit for their cause, though. The group, which also includes James Corrigan, Lawrence Epps, Libby Leonard and Mat Richards, have initiated a campaign called 'Testing Times'. "Our aim," says Duffy, "is to find 28,000 people – the number of people who would fill Lord’s Cricket Ground – to sign our petition to show that people care about Test cricket.

"Our long term-goal is to persuade boards to ensure the protection of Test cricket by granting it greater emphasis in global schedules. However, our interim goal is to persuade the ECB to add an extra Test to next summer’s key clash between the world’s top two nations, England and South Africa."

In a short space of time, 'Testing Times' has recruited nearly 1,400 (at the last count) Twitter followers, and the cause seems to be taking off. They have been 'retweeted' by Jimmy Anderson, Ben Stokes, Jonathan Agnew, Henry Blofeld and Lalit Modi among others. "We were especially pleased with the Modi one. I suspect he didn't read it properly before retweeting, bless his cottons," Duffy said.

The 32 year-old says she fell in love with the game at the age of three. "I remember cheering for the wonderful, late Graham Dilley at Canterbury at that age."

Not to do the boards – who are responsible for how many matches there are in a series – a disservice, it is obvious why they make these decisions. The majority of cricket fanatics on the subcontinent prefer it short and sweet. I love Test cricket more than the abbreviated forms of the game, but that doesn't mean to say everyone should.

I would love the iconic old England Test jumper with a single lion in the middle to return. I hate the new whiter-than-white fleeces. I loathe the sponsor’s logo. I despise back-to-back Tests. I think matches should start on alternate Thursdays throughout the summer. And there should only be five or six. Not seven. As Rebecca teased me on Twitter: "Aaaah . . . and everyone sips lemonade on the village green whilst the Vicar's wife prepares the tea . . . if only!!"

I'm also glass-half-empty when it comes to England walloping India 4-0 in the Tests this summer. One of my colleagues told me to revel in it; it wasn't so long ago we could not beat 'flippin' Zimbabwe, or New Zealand, he said. But all I can think of is, if India are trounced, that is going to put even more of their fans off the Test game. And so on.

It is good to know there are plenty of others like me.

As the Stones used to sing, 'You can't always get what you want'. But you can try …

Rugby World Cup 2011: five reasons why South Africa lost to Australia

Going nowhere: Pierre Spies breaks blind off a scrum and gets bundled into touch

The quarter-final between South Africa and Australia was one of the best games of international rugby since the Lions Tests of 2009. Actually, there's no maybe about it. It was.

It had everything: skill, commitment, heart, tension, and some of the most robust collisions you are likely to see on a rugby field.

After the match I spent nearly four hours in the pub picking over the bones of the defeat with my cousin and we couldn't find too much to fault in South Africa's tactical approach, or their performance.

Now I've had a chance to re-watch the tape of the match in the cold light of day there are a few things to be critical of from that Springbok performance, but also plenty to be positive about.

I must also add that I think it's too simplistic to boil this game down to South Africa's attack not being good enough to beat Australia's admittedly superb defence. Here are my five reasons why they lost:

1. Bryce Lawrence

I have put this at the top because having watched the game in its entirety twice it is clear that Lawrence is the dominant figure of the match. As Mark Reason has blogged, Lawrence made a complete hash of the breakdown and a complete mockery of the IRB's directives. They were handed down to make sure the breakdown was strictly refereed with no funny business. This, the IRB hoped, would lead to a more attacking game as there would be less turnovers or defensive penalties at the breakdown. Lawrence failed in this. As he failed to award two clear high tackle infringements from James Horwill and Quade Cooper in the final 10 minutes. As he failed to spot Dan Vickerman's hand in the ruck with the Boks three metres out from the line. The lack of consistency in refereeing styles continues to blight Test rugby.

2. David Pocock

The openside made 26 tackles and was a force of nature at the breakdown. He must be given credit for his chutzpah. He realised pretty damn quickly that Lawrence was not going to penalise him very often at the tackle area, and he certainly wasn't going to bin him. He rode his luck for the full 80 minutes, using his physique, fitness and technique to slow down or pilfer the ball at every opportunity. It's going to take some performance from Richie McCaw to keep this boy quiet next week.

3. Heinrich Brüssow's injury

Prior to this match Brendan Venter wrote in his column that while Pocock was clearly an exceptional rugby player he would not been given a free pass at the breakdown because South Africa had stumbled upon a great balance in the back row, with both Brüssow and Schalk Burger there. Burger went on to produce another incredible Test match performance (in fact, he is so good and plays with so much heart I have noticed a few Lions fans forgiving him for fiddling with Luke Fitzgerald's eyes) but without Brüssow there he was unable to neutralise Pocock. Francois Louw had a super game off the bench but he is not in the same class as Brüssow when it comes to pilfers. I have no doubt that had Brüssow not gone off after the first quarter Pocock would not have exerted nearly as much influence over the game.

4. Too late to use the boot

When did South Africa look their most dangerous in this game? When Fourie du Preez, Morne Steyn and Pat Lambie were aerially bombarding the Aussies. JP Pietersen also played a blinder in this respect, chasing and tackling like a man possessed. It certainly ruffled the feathers of Quade Cooper, who went missing in action yet again at the World Cup, but we didn't see enough of this tactic in the first half. Nor did we see enough territorial kicking, which is particularly surprising when you consider that the Springboks won all 14 of their line-outs and stole five of the Wallabies'. I know it sounds bizarre to say it about this Springbok team. But they probably didn't kick enough.

5. Selections and injuries

The biggest debate in SA rugby over the last year has been about what the superior starting XV was. And three substitutions yesterday showed what was the real best team. Bismarck du Plessis at hooker, Francois Hougaard on the left wing and Willem Alberts at No 8. The trio, who replaced John Smit, Bryan Habana and Pierre Spies respectively, improved the side to the extent that you wonder what might have been had they started. Smit's impact at the set-piece was clear but he didn't add much around the park other than a few routine carries. Habana took a bit of a battering with the ball in hand and a quick comparison between his contributions and those of Hougaard show who is the bigger attacking threat at the moment. As for Spies? Well Opta say he made 121 metres with the ball in hand, more than anyone in the four quarter-finals, but unfortunately for South Africa a high proportion of these were runs down blind allies. Alberts got through his fair share of carrying but he also hit rucks and tried to spoil Australia's ball. Spies could learn a lot from his work-rate.

Rugby World Cup 2011: Close encounters of the quarter-final kind… with wins for NZ, England, SA and Ireland

Twelve wannabe pretenders to the crown are already snugly tucked up in bed at home – and four more will have joined them come Sunday night. But who will they be?

At face value two of the weekend’s quarter-finals look to be safe bets, and two are absolute humdingers that only a fool would re-mortgage the house for to lay a bet.

But all eight teams, some more convincingly than others, have deserved their place in the knockout stage – and you just have to think back to Cardiff at RWC 2007 that no quarter-final is signed and sealed before the kick-off.

And while purely of academic interest, how different might the draw have looked if the outcomes of a few close games had been reversed… if Argentina had held on to their lead against England, if Scotland had not choked against the Pumas, if the world rankings had held sway between Australia and Ireland?? But that’s how this wonderful game goes, and now we’re guaranteed a southern v northern hemisphere final.

So here some thoughts and predictions… and would like to hear your take on the weekend.

New Zealand v Argentina One of the two ‘bankers’. Even without Dan Carter, even with Richie McCaw carrying an injury, the All Blacks should have far too much class for the enthusiastic but ultimately limited Pumas. There should be some parity among the tight five, the All Black loosies should secure plenty of fast ball, and the backs will have a field day. Game over. New Zealand 32 Argentina 15.

England v France The game between the two teams who’ve made more off-field headlines than set the world alight with their play. The drinking, kissing, lewd dwarf-tossers versus the bitching in-fighters intent on starting a new French revolution. Martin Johnson’s team have hardly been electrifying, squeaking past only reasonable opposition in Argentina and Scotland.

But so be it, they key is they stayed composed and won – and nothing else matters. France, in turn, have been a disgrace, and are the only team to have lost two matches and still qualified for the play-offs.

All signs point to a convincing win for England – and deservedly so. But this – need we any reminding? – is France. Tempestuous, arrogant mavericks that can lose by 50 today and beat the same opposition by two tomorrow. Supporters will hope, opponents will fear, that they have their customary 80 minutes of sublime RWC magic in them, when every bounce of the ball goes their way.

Just don’t see that happening. This France team make their 2010 Football World Cup counterparts look smart and disciplined, while England have enough grunt upfront to silence the calls of Allez Bleus. England 28 France 17.

Australia v South Africa Compelling, fascinating, thrilling… almost an injustice that the world No 2 and 3 teams should meet so early, and a match that won’t be settled until the final 10 minutes. If the Wallaby loose forwards compete like they did against New Zealand in Brisbane in August, and free up their hard-running backs, they could sneak this one. But the Springboks have shown in close matches against Wales and Samoa that they know how to hold their nerve. South Africa 21 Australia 18.

Ireland v Wales To neutrals surely the match-up of the weekend. Ireland, so brilliant against Australia, have gone about the business with understated grit and determination, throwing the pre-RWC form book right out of the window. A true all-round side, boasting presence upfront, a magnificent back-row and hard-running backs. And there’s the rub… with slightly different emphasis, we could say the same about Wales, who’ve done well to overcome that heart-breaking defeat in their opener to the Springboks.

I’ve tossed my lucky 50p coin untold times – and still it’s even between tails and heads. A draw perhaps at full-time with the tie settled in extra time? Virtually impossible to call in on-field skill, so I’ll predict it on perceived mental strength. Ireland, I think, just have that bit more self-belief than Wales, so it’s Brian O’Driscoll’s team by a whisker. Ireland 24 Wales 22.

Prepared to put a tenner on each of the outcomes. How do you see it?

This blog is supported by Maximuscle, suppliers of sports nutrition to Courtney Lawes, Joe Simpson and the Welsh Rugby Team.

Rugby World Cup 2011: Predictions – Too little too late for Scotland, Samoa and Italy in battle of bonus points

Take your pick of headlines for this weekend’s rugby… Sweet and sour success for Scotland; Big hits but little luck for Samoa; Pasta and basta for Italy.

All three are tantalisingly close to the play-offs, but for different reasons they’ll all fall short of a quarter-final place.

Welcome to the start of the real world cup, a newspaper headline in Auckland read today, and they’re right. Come Sunday night and there will be elation and depression in almost equal measure. It’s the weekend of the bonus points.

Amazingly at this late stage in the pool games, only New Zealand are absolutely guaranteed a quarter-final berth irrespective of what happens in Pool A. Canada could still pip France to the runners-up place, but only a double-deluded dunce would see them beat the All Blacks with a bonus point in the process and France lose heavily to Tonga. So that’s settled.

Then it becomes interesting. Pools B and D will require bonus points to upset the current standings. Argentina will no doubt smash Georgia, so Scotland need not only beat old foe England at Eden Park on Saturday, but do so with four tries and deny England a losing bonus point.

A haggis or two too far? Absolutely – as Scottish fans here in Auckland readily admit. And yet, will this required hell-for-leather approach liberate the Scots for once and see them throw all caution to the wind?

I’ll predict Scotland to actually score a try or two – despite their lame duck performances at RWC 2011 so far – but to fall short in the end (and possibly even get beaten by England at the death as the clock ticks down and the dream dies fast). Scotland 21 England 19.

Likewise in Pool D, where the current table topper could still depart home on Monday. On most days I’d say smash-and-run Samoa have four tries in them, but they’ve looked hesitant at RWC2011 while South Africa are showing sharp and ruthless signs. Wales will do the business comfortably against Fiji on Sunday, so it’s goodbye Samoa at North Harbour on Friday. South Africa 37 Samoa 22.

The biggest and most intriguing battle looms in Pool C, where unbeaten Ireland could still exit early. And Italy don’t even need to score four tries to make that happen – though they’ll have to deny Declan Kidney’s team a losing bonus point.

But that’s poppycock. Italy's forwards are mostly awesome, but their backs often make a plate of spaghetti look orderly and organised. So Ireland 28 Italy 13.

Fair calls or ramblings of a madman as we start this weekend of shock and awe? Your calls please…

This blog is supported by Maximuscle, suppliers of Creatine to Courtney Lawes, Joe Simpson and the Welsh Rugby Team.

England squad face Dad’s Army Test

Roller on the floor laughing: two British comedy greats of yesteryear

In which England's South African-born cricketers get some cultural education on a sad day for British comedy

Graham Gooch shepherded the England squad into the room. A sign on the door read: “Batting Coach’s Office and Haircare Laboratory. NO Ethereal Leicestershire Left-Handers.”

Gooch looked hangdog and upset. More than usually so.

“Boys,” he said. “The announcement of an England squad is a happy day, particularly when we can welcome a new player into the fold.”

Stuart Meaker was patted on the back by his colleagues. Jonathan Trott began to lead the traditional team celebration anthem: “Ek gelofte my groen en aangename reis vanaf Heathrow lughawe na jou” (“I vow to thee my green and pleasant journey from Heathrow airport”), but Gooch shushed him.

“But this is also a sad day. David Croft, who wrote the immortal British sitcom ‘Dad’s Army’, has passed away.”

There were blank looks all round.

“As I have said in the past,” sighed Gooch. “Nobody minds where a player is born these days, as long as he can pass the Dad’s Army test. Does he find Captain Mainwaring and the rest hilarious? If so: that's English enough for me.”

He wrestled an Official Team England analysis laptop from the grasp of Ian Bell.

“Championship Manager later, Belly,” said Gooch. “Once you’ve practised concentrating really hard and done 2000 squat thrusts.”

He inserted a DVD. ‘Don’t Tell Him, Pike’ played.

Gooch laughed. Alastair Cook watched the coach carefully, and then joined in.

“I’m writing a sitcom,” shouted Graeme Swann. “It’s about a brilliant comedian trapped in the body of a sporting hero, and he’s got a pet cat called Tweet who drives him around in a car when they’ve all had a few drinks.”

Jade Dernbach raised his hand.

“Mr Goochie, bru. I mean sir. I don’t understand why it’s funny,” he said.

“Is it because that bossy old man has got a silly moustache?” asked Craig Kieswetter.

“There is nothing funny about that at all, you stupid boy,” shouted Gooch.

“No, you okes,” said Jonathan Trott. “It’s funny because they are laughing at foreigners.”

“I don’t think that’s very nice,” said Stuart Meaker. “Not in this day and age.”

“That’s the problem with you lot,” said Gooch. “You have absolutely no sense of humour.”

New Zealand Threaten to Boycott RWC2015 – How to Dump in Your Own Backyard

What was NZRFU chief executive, Steve Tew, thinking when he revealed a veiled threat to boycott the 2015 Rugby World Cup in England? Talk about  injecting a sour note into the party. Cross refer to Wednesday's Telegraph for full story. The essence, as ever, is that they want more money. World Cups are a costly business. All the major unions lose money because they're normally filling their coffers at that time staging test matches. Much of the money from a World Cup gets ploughed back into developing the game worldwide.

 

That's for the likes of Samoa and Namibia and Canada and Japan and Russia, all those tier two nations that have brought so much noise and colour and distinctiveness to this World Cup. Some of them are no longer here because they had the schedule from hell foisted on them, 4 games in 14 days. The All Blacks or England or South Africa or France would soon be bleating about that. Instead the minnows gave it their best shot, making the most of adversity. It's not fair and it's not a level playing field. You get on with it.

 

So, go ahead Steve, pull the All Blacks out of the 2015 World Cup. It will still take place, it will still be vibrant and inclusive as this World Cup has been. Will anybody miss the All Blacks? Only the All Blacks themselves.

Rugby World Cup 2011: Fiji v Samoa… far from the hype we expected but it keeps Pool D wide open

First all the hype, then the drabness, and finally some drama and partial redemption for this match. But it was far from vintage Pacific Island rugby.

For almost 60 minutes it seemed we'd witness an extreme rarity – neither Fiji nor Samoa scoring a try – and there was little show of the traditional flair, the sleight of hand, the blistering pace or the bone-shuddering hits.

Rather, it was bad handling, kicks instead of passing and a complete lack of spark that had the crowd resorting to Mexican Waves after only 26 minutes.

But then the sun came out and the match lit up, to give the vocal 60,327 crowd something to remember this encounter for.

Samoa's Paul Williams was sensational while Netani Talei and Gaby Lovobalavu tried to smash and bash their way through everything to salvage something for Fiji. Alas, too little too late.

The pre-match hype fell well short of the reality, but at least the result keeps Pool D extremely honest. Barring a massive upset in the other remaining games, South Africa v Samoa at North Harbour on Friday will decide the fortunes of all three. SA are in the driver's seat, but it could still come down to bonus points.

Who of the Springboks, Wales or Samoa will top the group – and who'll be heading home early?

This blog is supported by Maximuscle, suppliers of sports nutrition to Courtney Lawes, Joe Simpson and the Welsh Rugby Team.

South Africa Training Camp, Location: Classified

Probing: Dale Steyn prepares to aim another truth missile at those who would keep things covered up. Like stumps. Picture: Getty

Dale Steyn removed his tin foil hat and turned off the computer.

“That’s how they get to you,” he muttered to himself. “They track your movements down the internet.”

Jacques Kallis came up behind him. Dale jumped in alarm. He patted Kallis down to check that he wasn’t wearing a wire.

“I’m just big-boned,” said Jacques sadly. “It’s deceptive.”

“Sorry china,” said Dale. “You can’t be too careful.” He offered Jacques a conciliatory piece of biltong. Kallis chewed it thoughtfully.

“I saw you’re doing the twittering about 9/11, bru,” said Jacques. “Do you really think it might all have been made-up?”

“Oh ja,” nodded Dale. “Could be. They found a passport of one of the hijackers at the scene? Come off it.”

“Maybe that’s how Trott got to be English; finding one in the wreckage of something or other,” suggested Morne Morkel.

“Could be, Morne,” said Dale. “Put it on the list of things to investigate.”

Morne got out his special Conspiracy Theory Felt-Tip Pen Set and began to write carefully. The list read:

“9/11.

Was Diana killed by the Royal Family?

Are shape-shifting lizards controlling the world?

Has Graeme Smith been eating too many lizards?

Or is his fuller figure another consequence of the Magic Boerewors Theory?

Was moon landing really staged and filmed with tiny miniature models using Lance Kluesener’s backside as lunar landscape backdrop?

Is Paul Harris a plant by shadowy international cabal of other international cricket teams?”

“I’ll get AB to pray for you,” said Jacques. “I think you need help.”

“I’m giving up tweeting, anyway,” said Dale. “I heard that’s how Shane Warne mind-controlled poor Daryl Cullinan. He tapped into his brain with the internet and brainwashed him with a ZX-Spectrum and a transmogrifyer and a pet rabbit,”

“Don’t be stupid,” said Jacques. “The internet wasn’t even invented then.”

“Or WAS it?” agreed Dale. “Me and Morne are investigating that as well. We’re like Mulder and Scully.”

“Ja,” said Morne. “But with less of the ‘will they-won’t they?’ sexual tension.”

“That’s right,” nodded Dale. “Unless the lizards get their way.”

Rugby World Cup 2011: South Africa showed they are still a force in big win over Fiji

Huge: Schalk Burger put in another impressive performance (Photo: GETTY IMAGES)

In the 'Group of Death' South Africa are the chief executioners, brushing aside the challenges in front of them and bringing an abrupt end to any fanciful ideas of upsets and fairytales.

Wales produced one of their best ever Rugby World Cup performances against South Africa, but they were denied at the death by a team who knows how to win.

The 'Flying Fijians' came out of the blocks at a fearsome pace early on and tried to run South Africa off the park. The Boks' first-up defence was poor, but the scramble was excellent and this meant that all Fiji's efforts added up to nil.

Come the second half, with the defensive job emphatically done, the Boks were able to unveil their attacking game for the first time since the opening 10 minutes against Wales, adding four more tries to the two scored in the first half, and winning by a much bigger margin than people were predicting.

For context's sake they beat Fiji by 17 points in 2007, when the Islanders were arguably a much better side. Today the difference was 46, so perspective is needed.

There are still things to work on but there is also plenty to suggest that these Boks will not be giving up their title without an almighty fight.

The good:

Defence: getting better and better. First-up tackling is still a bit ropey, with 26 missed in total, but the scramble continues to be excellent. Star performers in defence were Heinrich Brussow (21) and Schalk Burger (17).

Offloading: South Africa's forwards were particularly impressive in this respect with Burger, Danie Rossouw and Brussow always looking up for the pass. If the Boks forwards can come to the party with the ball in hand in the knock-out stages then they could be difficult to stop in attack.

Discipline: referees are stricter than ever at this World Cup and the Boks only leaked seven penalties. In this context that has to be considered a bonus.

The bad:

Errors and execution:  the Boks made 11 handling errors and still looked a bit scratchy at times in attack. They will be particularly annoyed at not scoring a seventh try at the end when they had several chances to go over. Still, this can only get better.

Selection headaches: does Pieter de Villiers know who his best team is yet? Frans Steyn looked quality at No. 12 but Jean de Villiers is hardly going to get dropped if he is fit enough to play. Morne Steyn missed three kicks at goal, but to his credit came back into the game well with the ball in hand. Pat Lambie also made a big claim to be included in the run-on team. There are so many question marks for the coaches to deal with and I'm sure they'd prefer to have a definitive idea.

The ugly:

Bakkies Botha: he went off at half-time. Was this to wrap him up in cotton wool? Or is 'The Enforcer' actually way off match fitness? They could do with him when they come up against the big boys in the knock-outs.

Thoughts?

Rugby World Cup 2011: a mixed bag of good and bad, of deserving winners and desperately unlucky losers

What an opening weekend! After a fairly meek and predictable start to proceedings on Friday, the tension and intensity just got better and better, and it's fair to say there were some very deserved winners and some very unlucky losers.

A quick 'soundbyte' on each of the big teams – who's starting to look good and who's not – and then let me have your thoughts please.

New Zealand Pretty flash in the first half against a very plucky Tonga, pretty flat and sloppy in the second – something they simply can't afford to be against better teams. Still, will be happy to have had a proper workout and to have survived opening night without major injuries. Will need to step up seriously.

Scotland So nearly terribly embarrassed. Came into this tournament very confident after a good run of warm-ups, but will have feet very firmly on the ground again. Play like this against England and Argentina, and you'll have an early taste of Scottish sleet back home.

England Disjointed and slightly backwards for most of the match, but ultimately had the nous and seized the moment to deny Argentina. All credit to them for that. They have the bloody-mindedness to compete with the top boys, but still looked flat on attack and discipline could easily trip them up. Were deservedly on the receiving end of the penalty count and Courtney Lawes' penchant for being the enforcer may yet cost them dearly. Good enough for the quarter-finals, but then?

Argentina Brave, brilliant and battered – were in serious danger of clearing their bench by half-time – but continued to show magnificent commitment. Yes, profited from Jonny Wilkinson having a horror show with the boot, but also squandered a good few kicks themselves. Possible progress now depends on how well they mentally deal with this heartbreaking loss – and whether New Zealand has enough plasters to tape their broken bodies together. Alarm bells whispering.

 France Another embarrassment was on the cards but hey, this is France. Highly unlikely to lose any sleep over this. A typical French shoulder shrug, a nonchalant lift of the eyebrows, and it's on to the next match. Deep down Les Bleus will know that they'll have one of those magic days when everything clicks. Will hope it comes against New Zealand on Sep 24 or in the quarter-final. Jury still out.

Australia A bit flat in first half and well matched by the Italians, but take the weekend's points for a brilliant, decisive and clinical second half. Have the most reason of all to feel very optimistic.

Italy So much promise in first half, then fell off tackles and had no answer to the Wallabies' power and precision. Likely to have felt pretty miserable immediately after their match, but would have perked up on watching their most likely contenders for runner-up spot in the pool, Ireland, struggle against inferior opposition. Like Silvio Berlusconi, a dead man walking or will they rise up?

Ireland See the surprise  on the Irish faces at the end? They'd almost forgotten what it felt like to win. And let's be honest here, on this showing they're likely to forget it soon again. It simply beats me how so many fabulous players and individuals can be so average as a unit. Their showdown with Italy will be massive.

South Africa Would be harsh to call them the weekend's most undeserving winners, but very tempting to do just that. Looked tired, harassed and there for the taking – then showed just enough game management to prevail. No matter how ugly or how close, first blood and four points to the Springboks. Deep down, though, they'll know that big trouble could yet loom further down the line.

Wales Brilliant for the most part, clueless when it mattered most. And I'm not talking only about conceding that try, that contentious penalty or James Hook missing his last penalty attempt, but when, on the attack and only a few minutes to go, they were so desperate and so frenzied to attack that they failed to commit enough players to the breakdown and simply got bulldozed off the ball. Suddenly the Boks had the ball in their hands, the bit between their teeth and the points in the bag. Wales have worked hard on most aspects of the game and their fitness – now they must very quickly learn the meaning of composure. Their progress – or not – depends entirely on how they mentally respond to this gutting, galling defeat.

 As for the others, hats off to Fiji for an entertaining win, and all the other teams for entertaining, plucky defeats. Opening weekend is over and nobody's been disgraced. My only disappointment of the tournament so far is the seemingly big blocks of empty seats at some of the games (even some of the bigger ones). What's going on there?

Your take on the weekend's action please! And I'll name the winner of the Maximuscle gear and products tomorrow. 

This blog is supported by Maximuscle, the sports nutrition choice of Courtney Lawes, Joe Simpson and the Welsh team. For more information on how Maximuscle is the Team Behind the Team go to www.maximuscle.com/tbtt

Rugby World Cup 2011: Pieter de Villiers must drop the dead wood in his South Africa team

Sink or swim: Pieter de Villiers has a big decision to make (Photo: GETTY IMAGES)

If Pieter de Villiers and South Africa are to achieve anything at this Rugby World Cup he must realise what his best team is – and fast.

The substitution of John Smit, Pierre Spies and Bryan Habana, with the Springboks on their knees against Wales, brought about an instant change in fortunes for the struggling world champions.

Bismarck du Plessis lead the way in defence and carried well when called upon, Willem Alberts brought ballast and application to the back row and Francois Hougaard made more yardage with the ball than Habana had managed for the preceding 60 minutes.

If De Villiers can extend his mea culpa even further by picking young Sharks fly-half Pat Lambie at 10 then South Africa may have something resembling a competitive team.

If the marked improvement in South Africa's performance after those substitutions was not evidence enough for De Villiers then he should look to England's campaign in 2007.

They were also world champions and they also began the tournament in a mess. By the end of the 2nd pool game they had sneaked past the USA and been thrashed by the Boks.

Player power and cold hard reality sunk in and they adapated. Tactics were changed (actually tactics were employed for the first time having been missing in action before). Also, and most importantly, players like Shaun Perry who were quite clearly not up to the task of defending the trophy were removed.

Reinventing the wheel mid-tournament requires guts, but England showed it can be done, going on to reach the final when it looked impossible.

There is however a spanner in the works for South Africa: the fitness of Bakkies Botha, Victor Matfield and Jean de Villiers. If they are all unavailable (and it doesn't look good for Botha) then the Boks lose three towers of experience. If you also drop John Smit you are down four big, big leaders.

Does De Villiers have the courage to do what needs to be done? Will the players need to tell him so? Or will he carry on blindly with Plan A?

For what it's worth this is the team that I would pick for the big game against Samoa:

South Africa: Beast, Du Plessis, Du Plessis, Rossouw, Matfield (captain if fit), Brussow, Alberts, Burger, Du Preez, Lambie, Hougaard, De Villiers (if fit), Fourie, Pietersen, F Steyn

Thoughts?

 

New Zealand-France, now that would have opened the Rugby World Cup with a bang

Just after dawn here on the opening day of RWC 2011. The sun is already bright down here in Dunedin. It's had a bad press has Dunedin as a cold, distant place. Couldn't be further from the truth. It's been a great week's build-up to England's opening game. All looking forward to the stadium. I'm not a fan of the Aviva in Dublin, great from the outside, poor and lacking in old Lansdowne Rd atmosphere inside. I don't like the Millennium with its roof shut either. And yet the Otago Stadium, an indoor stadium, looks is if it might be the business.

Anyway, table talk from Thursday night. Why wasn't the opening game NZ-France,  the sort of attention-grabbing fixture that we had in 2007 when France hosted Argentina? The Pumas' victory put the tournament on the map straight away. Much as RWC 2011 dominates the airwaves here, it needs to make an impact in Europe. The All Blacks facing France would have ensured that.

A few thoughts.

1 ) England will win with reasonable ease on Saturday but will struggle against Scotland. I fancy Andy Robinson's side might be the surprise package.

2 ) Wales to beat South Africa. And if they don't, then they won't qualify from their group.

3 ) NZ will beat France and stroll through the pool. And that could yet be their undoing later in the tournament . They didn't get tested in 2007, and didn't test themselves in the build-up by their daft policy of rotation, and it cost them.

4 ) The Wallabies to win RWC 2011 ( maybe )  

5 ) Hats off to New Zealand. They've done a smashing job so far in staging the event. There's been a real buzz this past few days, everyone is getting involved, the volunteers have been wonderful and there's a freal sense of people swinging behind the entire event. Take a bow Kiwis!

 

New Zealand-France, now that would have opened RWC with a bang

Just after dawn here on the opening day of RWC 2011. The sun is already bright down here in Dunedin. It's had a bad press has Dunedin as a cold, distant place. Couldn't be further from the truth. It's been a great week's build-up to England's opening game. All looking forward to the stadium. I'm not a fan of the Aviva in Dublin, great from the outside, poor and lacking in old Lansdowne Rd atmosphere inside. I don't like the Millennium with its roof shut either. And yet the Otago Stadium, an indoor stadium, looks is if it might be the business.

 

Anyway, table talk from Thursday night. Why wasn't the opening game NZ-France,  the sort of attention-grabbing fixture that we had in 2007 when France hosted Argentina? The Pumas' victory put the tournament on the map straight away. Much as RWC 2011 dominates the airwaves here, it needs to make an impact in Europe. The All Blacks facing France would have ensured that.

A few thoughts.

1 ) England will win with reasonable ease on Saturday but will stuggle against Scotland. I fancy Andy Robinson's side might be the surprise package.

2 ) Wales to beat South Africa. And if they don't, then they won't qualify from their group.

3 ) NZ will beat France and stroll through the pool. And that could yet be their undoing later in the tournament . They didn't get tested in 2007, and didn't test themselves in the build-up by their daft policy of rotation, and it cost them.

4 ) The Wallabies to win RWC 2011 ( maybe )  

5 ) Hats off to New Zealand. They've done a smashing job so far in staging the event. There's been a real buzz this past few days, everyone is getting involved, the volunteers have been wonderful and there's a freal sense of people swinging behind the entire event. Take a bow Kiwis!

 

Rugby World Cup 2011: My predictions – Scotland to beat England, an early exit for Ireland, Wales to top Pool D

Under 24 hours to go to Rugby World Cup 2011 kick-off (at the time of writing), so time to spell out how I think the pools will develop. Is this what I hope will happen, or think will occur? Not entirely sure myself – probably a mix of voices from the heart and the head – but no matter, here goes.

And please let me know how and where you agree or disagree.

Pool A

Very much a two-horse race, with the only real significant match on September 24 between New Zealand and their nemesis, France. On paper you'd have to say the All Blacks, but then you think back to 1999 and 2007, and suddenly it's one of THE biggest pool matches imaginable.

Can Les Bleus upset the apple cart true and proper by beating the hosts? Both will obviously want to win the group – thereby, on paper at least, securing an 'easier' quarter-final – but Pool B is wide open and coming second in Pool A might ultimately not be a massive price to pay.

Being the hosts has huge pros and cons for NZ – possibly unbearable pressure and expectations, but also masses of support. The current All Blacks seem to be open and relaxed, mingling with the public and coming across confident. Compare that with the siege mentality of previous campaigns (and failures), and they may just be on to a good thing here.

Prediction 1 NZ, 2 France.

Pool B

One of two 'pools of death'. And gut feel says this is so tight to call that bonus points – for scoring four tries or more or losing by seven points or under – may just come heavily into play.

Yes, Argentina seem not to be the force they were in 2007, but I think they may still be good enough to trouble their opponents. Fence-sitting? No way! England to beat the Pumas by a comfortable few, before backs-against-the-wall Argentina rumble Scotland.

All which sets up the group perfectly for a killer clash at Eden Park on October 1. And in an ugly, messy, attritional slug-fest among the two packs, I predict the Scots to squeeze home by a point or two (all courtesy of kicks). And so we're back in bonus-points territory and possibly points difference.

Prediction 1 England, 2 Scotland.

Pool C

The most predictable in terms of who'll finish on top. Can't see any of the four teams remotely threatening Australia. The Wallabies are also in the comfortable position of having played their two 'big' pool opponents by September 17, allowing some rest for key players in preparation for the play-offs.

Who'll finish second is the exciting bit. On paper it would seem to be Ireland by a country mile – but Italy will fancy their chances given Ireland's lacklustre warm-ups and the narrow 11-13 defeat in Rome in February. Having both lost to the Aussies come October 2, I think the pressure will simply mess with the Irish players' heads. Their dismal RWC record will play on their minds – and continue.

Prediction 1 Australia, 2 Italy.

Pool D

The most physical, closely contested group of the lot – and the other one in which bonus points could determine the final standings. Spare a thought for Namibia, who will be lambs to the slaughter in every match. And much as I like the Fijian way of playing – and despite their heroics last year – this year they'll end fourth in the pool, leaving it to South Africa, Wales and Samoa to slug it out.

This may sound like a caveat, but much depends on whether Wales learn to play the full 80 minutes or stick to exerting themselves only in the last 40, which, against the Boks and Samoa, could mean both games are lost for them by half-time.

Much has been made of Samoa's win over Australia in July, but it was against a mix-and-match team, so I'm going to discount that slightly. Ultimately, then, I somehow believe Wales will win both matches while South Africa's rather boring but efficient kick-and-chase game will stifle Samoa (of course, and I expect some biffo from both, this match could be won by the team who earns the fewer yellow/red cards).

Prediction 1 Wales, 2 South Africa.

Now kick that ball in anger!

Finally, you can still enter the competition to win Maximuscle gear and products by predicting the England v Argentina and Wales v South Africa scores (see the previous blog).

And very finally, my predictions for the big opening matches: NZ 35 Tonga 13, England 22 Argentina 10, Wales 20 South Africa 17. Now let the games begin.

Follow me on Twitter @lookdownsouth

This blog is supported by Maximuscle, the sports nutrition choice of Courtney Lawes, Joe Simpson and the Welsh team. For more information on how Maximuscle is the Team Behind the Team, go to www.maximuscle.com/tbtt

Rugby World Cup 2011: My predictions – Scotland to beat England, an early exit for Ireland, Wales to top Pool C

Under 24 hours to go to Rugby World Cup 2011 kick-off (at the time of writing), so time to spell out how I think the pools will develop. Is this what I hope will happen, or think will occur? Not entirely sure myself – probably a mix of voices from the heart and the head – but no matter, here goes.

And please let me know how and where you agree or disagree.

Pool A

Very much a two-horse race, with the only real significant match on September 24 between New Zealand and their nemesis, France. On paper you'd have to say the All Blacks, but then you think back to 1999 and 2007, and suddenly it's one of THE biggest pool matches imaginable.

Can Les Bleus upset the apple cart true and proper by beating the hosts? Both will obviously want to win the group – thereby, on paper at least, securing an 'easier' quarter-final – but Pool B is wide open and coming second in Pool A might ultimately not be a massive price to pay.

Being the hosts has huge pros and cons for NZ – possibly unbearable pressure and expectations, but also masses of support. The current All Blacks seem to be open and relaxed, mingling with the public and coming across confident. Compare that with the siege mentality of previous campaigns (and failures), and they may just be on to a good thing here.

Prediction 1 NZ, 2 France.

Pool B

One of two 'pools of death'. And gut feel says this is so tight to call that bonus points – for scoring four tries or more or losing by seven points or under – may just come heavily into play.

Yes, Argentina seem not to be the force they were in 2007, but I think they may still be good enough to trouble their opponents. Fence-sitting? No way! England to beat the Pumas by a comfortable few, before backs-against-the-wall Argentina rumble Scotland.

All which sets up the group perfectly for a killer clash at Eden Park on October 1. And in an ugly, messy, attritional slug-fest among the two packs, I predict the Scots to squeeze home by a point or two (all courtesy of kicks). And so we're back in bonus-points territory and possibly points difference.

Prediction 1 England, 2 Scotland.

Pool C

The most predictable in terms of who'll finish on top. Can't see any of the four teams remotely threatening Australia. The Wallabies are also in the comfortable position of having played their two 'big' pool opponents by September 17, allowing some rest for key players in preparation for the play-offs.

Who'll finish second is the exciting bit. On paper it would seem to be Ireland by a country mile – but Italy will fancy their chances given Ireland's lacklustre warm-ups and the narrow 11-13 defeat in Rome in February. Having both lost to the Aussies come October 2, I think the pressure will simply mess with the Irish players' heads. Their dismal RWC record will play on their minds – and continue.

Prediction 1 Australia, 2 Italy.

Pool D

The most physical, closely contested group of the lot – and the other one in which bonus points could determine the final standings. Spare a thought for Namibia, who will be lambs to the slaughter in every match. And much as I like the Fijian way of playing – and despite their heroics last year – this year they'll end fourth in the pool, leaving it to South Africa, Wales and Samoa to slug it out.

This may sound like a caveat, but much depends on whether Wales learn to play the full 80 minutes or stick to exerting themselves only in the last 40, which, against the Boks and Samoa, could mean both games are lost for them by half-time.

Much has been made of Samoa's win over Australia in July, but it was against a mix-and-match team, so I'm going to discount that slightly. Ultimately, then, I somehow believe Wales will win both matches while South Africa's rather boring but efficient kick-and-chase game will stifle Samoa (of course, and I expect some biffo from both, this match could be won by the team who earns the fewer yellow/red cards).

Prediction 1 Wales, 2 South Africa.

Now kick that ball in anger!

Finally, you can still enter the competition to win Maximuscle gear and products by predicting the England v Argentina and Wales v South Africa scores (see the previous blog).

And very finally, my predictions for the big opening matches: NZ 35 Tonga 13, England 22 Argentina 10, Wales 20 South Africa 17. Now let the games begin.

Follow me on Twitter @lookdownsouth

This blog is supported by Maximuscle, the sports nutrition choice of Courtney Lawes, Joe Simpson and the Welsh team. For more information on how Maximuscle is the Team Behind the Team, go to www.maximuscle.com/tbtt

RWC 2011: a tournament too long? Predict the scores and win sports gear and products

At last! After waiting almost four years we can finally say: the Rugby World Cup starts this week! It seems like an eternity since the lights dimmed at Stade de France in 2007 with the announcer booming: “See you in New Zealand in 2011.”

Simply can’t wait for the action to start on Friday – and looking closely at the schedule, there’s not a week that doesn’t offer some cracking, intriguing match-ups. That said, there are also games that seem ideal to combine with doing the laundry or replacing expired light bulbs; some of them just leave me cold.

Which makes me wonder – just as in 2007 – is six weeks plus just too long for this tournament? Yes, I know it’s not tennis and teams can’t smash and bash the hell out of each other every second day. And yes, I agree with calls that the game must become truly global and that the minnows need exposure against the big teams to learn.

But we’re bound to see some of the minors conceding 80, 90 or even 100 ponts – and how much do they really learn from that? All while a ‘classic’ like Georgia v Romania is likely to appeal to people in, er, Georgia and Romania, but probably not to that many neutrals – especially not at 7.30am UK time.

So what’s the solution? Let only the top eight or 10-ranked teams contest the RWC? Or have a separate ‘world championship’ for the lower-ranked teams? Or what about a hybrid? The top 10 in the world qualify automatically, while teams ranked 11-20 – irrespective what continent they come from – play a tournament a month or two before the next RWC, with the top two progressing to the real deal. That way, if nothing else, you find two relatively in-form minnows on the big stage – more likely to be truly competitive than hopelessly weak teams who happened to be best of a bad lot in their region at the time of qualifying. Would really like to hear your suggestions on this problem.

And so on to this weekend – and your chance to win choice Maximuscle gear and products. Maximuscle fuel England’s Courtney Lawes and Joe Simpson, and the Welsh rugby team, and they’ll be sponsoring this blog during RWC 2011 to get me out to New Zealand, to report on some matches, drink beer with the fans (from both hemispheres!) and hopefully let readers who can’t make it out there, share more in the excitement.

The competition is simple: predict the scores in England v Argentina, and Wales v South Africa, by leaving a comment on this blog. Winner is person to correctly predict both outcomes with the smallest total points difference in the two matches. So get your thinking caps on. Entries close 9am UK time on Saturday, September 10.

Coming up on Thursday: I do what only a fool will do, predict how the pools will pan out and who the likely quarter-finalists will be. And I’ll be asking you to also get off the fence! 

This blog is supported by Maximuscle, the sports nutrition choice of Courtney Lawes, Joe Simpson and the Welsh Rugby Team. For information on how Maximuscle is the Team Behind the Team, visit www.maximuscle.com/tbtt

Rugby World Cup 2011: All bets are off as jitters grip New Zealand and hope fills England and Australia

Crikey! Just as I thought it was becoming easier to predict the likely finalists for RWC 2011, along comes this weekend to blow many hopes, beliefs and fallacies out of the water. Only a fool would part with big money to bet on a winner (even though, as we all know, pre-Cup form does not necessarily mean much come the play-offs).

Take New Zealand. They would have woken up Sunday morning as the ‘land of the long black cloud’. Their early-season form has deserted them, and while their defeat to South Africa could be written off as their B team, their Tri-Nations loss to Australia in Brisbane is likely to cause serious self-doubt.

Entirely outplayed for the first 40 minutes – the Wallabies’ commitment was brilliant – the All Blacks should not be flattered by the final score. Many of their top players looked tired and well off the pace, and Graham Henry and his wise men have a massive task on their hands to turn their belief around.

They may just have to clutch at straws – and there’s a good one in looking at Tri-Nations history. The All Blacks won the tournament in 1999, 2003 and 2007 – only to fall flat at the World Cup. This year they won’t go into the tournament as champions, red-hot favourites or with bags of complacency. All good omens?

As for the Aussies, full marks to you. Your tight five were ok, your back-row magnificent and your backs created and exploited gaps, along with stellar defence. I suspect England – who think they have the Wallabies’ number after two successive victories – will face a possible clash with great unease.

So what about England? I make the victory over Ireland their best performance of the year. Lots still to work on, sure, but there was steel and grit in their game. Ireland stepped up considerably from their three-week horror show, but still England kept them try-less while scoring  two themselves.

Even the midfield – generally acknowledged to be England’s area of weakness – looked more than solid. I’m still not sure they have what it takes to smoke the Southern Hemisphere big guns, but on this showing they’ll fairly easily top their group and approach the knockout stage with great belief. And, as omens and portents go, England won the World Cup on the back of winning the Six Nations in 2003.

All bets are off and my only prediction will be that Romania or Namibia are not going to win this.

And then some random remarks after Saturday – and please let me know how you saw the weekend unfold:

* What a shocker for back-row forwards. Ireland’s David Wallace ruled out of RWC and Jamie Heaslip injured, New Zealand’s Kieran Read and Adam Thomson in serious RWC doubt, England’s Nick Easter and Tom Wood sidelined for Dublin but seemingly okay to travel to New Zealand and Hendre Fourie did not last long. Who’d want to be a 6, 7 or 8 given the ferocity at the breakdown nowadays?

* After keeping a close eye on Wayne Barnes (Aus-NZ) and Nigel Owens (Ire-Eng) and their colleagues, I have this horrible fear that match officials – rather than a brilliant kick or try – could overly influence tight matches in New Zealand. Both were guilty of substantial inconsistency at times and getting a few key calls incorrect. Hope they all have a proper workshop before September 9!

* Martin Johnson may just need to have a quiet word with his team over discipline (and not for the first time). Chris Ashton sin-binned (admittedly paying the price for team-mates’ repeated offending), Courtney Lawes’ stupid barge and Manu Tuilagi’s take on David Wallace – even if missed by the touch judge – was a shoulder charge rather than a legal arm-binding tackle (not that this ws the cause of Wallace’s injury). Any of them could be very costly in a close affair. 

* Why do British commentators struggle with pronouncing Samoan names? It’s Manu Tuilagi, not Tuilangi. Just as it was Tana Umaga, not Umanga. Easy to practise … the ‘a’ is pronounced similar to when you’re at the doctor, have a wooden spatula pressing down your tongue and have to say ‘aaahhh’.

* And finally, while we’re on commentators, thank God this World Cup is not hosted by Australia. That way the whole world bar the Aussies will be spared having to listen to Oz commentary. They can be funny and witty at times, but they’re blinkered and one-eyed to the extreme. Their non-stop carping at real and perceived All Black transgressions was already irritating, but then to stay mum when the Wallabies do exactly the same is simply biased. Lord, how I still miss Bill McLaren.

Your views please and follow me on Twitter @lookdownsouth