What were the Boks thinking?

It’s been damn strange being at this World Cup with the Springboks not here this past week and a half. Maybe journalists from other countries are used to it, but I tried to work out the other day when last I went to a World Cup game where the Boks were no longer in the competition and vying for the main prize.

As I missed the 2003 World Cup in Australia for personal reasons, it goes back to 1999 – that final bizarre week which started with a freaky France win over New Zealand at Twickenham the day after the Boks made their exit at the same venue and then continued through a low-key and subdued Bronze Medal play-off between the teams most had thought would be the finalists.

Is there an omen in all of this, perhaps a not very good one for the Kiwis? That’s clutching at straws; the All Blacks must start as overwhelming favourites to break their 24 year drought.

I am not quite so sure, though, that it is as one-sided as the betting would suggest. Just over one dollar for a New Zealand win, seven for a French. That’s crazy. France are the All Blacks’ hoodoo side after all and they didn’t look that interested in the pool fixture between the two sides earlier in the competition.

Maybe not enough is being made of the fact that that game was played at Eden Park, so, unlike the other teams the All Blacks have faced, France have enjoyed a full dress rehearsal. The match wasn’t always as one-sided as the eventual 20-point winning margin would suggest, and the All Blacks had Dan Carter in sublime form that night…

Bottom line for me: if the scores are close with 20 minutes to go, like they were in Cardiff in 2007, then we can still see the All Blacks choke.

Watching the All Black/Wallaby semifinal as a neutral was an interesting experience. Like back home, rugby is such an important part of the national psyche here, and throughout the tournament there has been an impression that the Kiwis have been anxious – maybe at times too anxious – to enjoy themselves fully.

Well on semifinal day it was particularly bad. I popped in to see some colleagues at a house a block away from Eden Park, and standing out on the back verandah it was remarkable how quiet everything seemed. And the walk towards the stadium was the same – you could almost feel the tension in the air.

As I said in a previous diary entry, I really do enjoy watching the haka when there aren’t 60 000 idiots crassly singing 'ole ole ole' over it and thus sending out the message that as a nation we may require a mass full frontal lobotomy, but even that was a bit more subdued than it should have been.

Then came the game, and the way the All Blacks started, surging all over the Wallabies, it was like a massive pressure valve had been released. You could sense everyone starting to relax and get into it, and as the match progressed, and an All Black win became more and more likely, so the crowd became louder, and louder, and louder…until eventually they celebrated at the final whistle as if they had won the World Cup itself.

Which they may have done, but the Kiwis should be wary of being too arrogant. I made the mistake of pointing out to a New Zealander the other day that this was a tournament they were always going to win – I wrote as much before the tournament too – because they were playing at home. Playing at Eden Park is such a major boon to them, and once they got to the quarterfinals, thus ensuring they play all their remaining games at their favourite stadium, they were always going to be strong favourites.

Yes, that would have been the case even if the Boks had managed to beat Australia and had gone through to the semifinal. If you disagree, tell me when last the South Africans won at Eden Park.

My point though is that home ground is a massive advantage for any team, particularly when that team represents a passionate rugby nation like New Zealand. If the boot was on the other foot, and the Springboks were hosting the tournament, I wouldn’t have bet too much against them had they played all their knock-out fixtures at Ellis Park, which is the South African equivalent of Eden Park.

So regardless of what happens on Sunday, to my mind New Zealand rugby still has something to do – they need to join Australia (twice), England and South Africa in winning a World Cup away from home, which is when you really affirm your status as the best.

Okay, there might have been a little bit too much unnecessary snip in that previous entry. Make no mistake, the All Blacks ARE the best team at the tournament, regardless of what happens on Sunday. That is because they have the most balanced approach, and what they have really got right this year is being able to flit between their attacking style and the more conservative percentage approach. Bottom line: they can strike from everywhere, but they are playing most of the game in the right areas of the field.

Which brings me to the point that has been bugging me ever since I watched quite a bit of the Bok/Wallaby quarterfinal again, on silent, at The Cloud, the place on Auckland’s Queens Wharf where media people hang out over a couple of drinks while also making use of the free wifi provided by the IRB.

It was an impression I got during the game, but maybe was too tense to confirm or note: the Boks played completely away from their usual template and in many ways aped England’s brain explosion in the 1991 final, when they got goaded by David Campese into playing a running game when that wasn’t the style that had got them to the decider.

There was no Campese in the Wallaby side this time so I can only assume the Boks got duped by the ease with which they were able to execute their running game in pool matches against weak defensive teams like Fiji and Nambia. Otherwise what the hell did they think they were doing with all that running, something they aren’t used to against top opposition? Had they played their usual game Bryce Lawrence would have been an irrelevance.