The bigger the match and the higher the stakes, it is all too easy in rugby to overcomplicate matters. The truth is that the best teams narrow their focus and concentrate on the basics, in particular on the four what I call “rocks” of a winning performance.
They are the set piece, the breakdown, the kicking game and then, the most intriguing of all, a piece of X-factor brilliance.
Warren Gatland would always put an emphasis on that fourth rock. Whether it was for Wales or the British & Irish Lions, he would often say something along the lines of: “Someone in this room — you know who you are and you know you are a world-class performer — needs to step up at some point in this game and produce one of those world-class moments.”
That doesn’t necessarily mean a stunning 80-metre line break. It could be a turnover at a crucial moment, say 20 phases deep into a defensive set, or a lineout steal in your own 22, or maybe a phenomenal pass that splits the defence, but in tight matches such as this — and I’m sure that it is going to be mightily tight — one such moment can prove the difference.
So, let’s take a look at this match and those four rocks. For the first one I think South Africa will have the edge at the set piece.
Advertisement
The breakdown will be fairly even, though. The two sides attack very differently — New Zealand do so with speed, while South Africa use their physicality — but they are both very good at the breakdown on the attack, while both compete ferociously at their defensive breakdowns.
Brian O’Driscoll said about the quarter-final between Ireland and New Zealand that the breakdown would dictate that game, and I totally agreed with him. And it did.
So many of the things you can try to focus on do not actually happen that often in a game, but breakdowns do. You are talking 300 of them in a game — 150 in defence and 150 in attack. So, if either side can find an edge in this department, then it is bound to be critical.
The kicking game is also fairly even. New Zealand have a wonderful range of smart attacking kicks, but South Africa are superb when it comes to kicking for territory and competing in the air. They are susceptible in defence there, however, as England showed last weekend in exposing their wingers under the high ball. As for X-factor moments, I simply think that New Zealand have more players capable of those match-turning interventions.
So far, pretty equal then. Ball-in-play time fascinates me and coaches do not talk too often about it, but the All Blacks’ head coach, Ian Foster, certainly does. And he knows that there is going to be a huge disparity in what each side want in that regard.
Advertisement
South Africa are averaging 27 to 30 ball-in-play minutes per game. It was 28 against England and 31 against France.
But in contrast, in New Zealand’s past two games, because they have been able to thoroughly dictate them, that figure has been 39 minutes and 39 seconds against Argentina, which is simply incredible, and against Ireland it was 38 minutes and 20 seconds.
South Africa will want to play it slow, while New Zealand will want to play it quick, and I do think it will be easier for the world champions to keep that number down as opposed to the All Blacks keeping it high, simply because South Africa are so very savvy at not allowing teams to speed things up. They will take scrummages (even at free kicks, as we have seen) and kick balls out for lineouts just to make sure the game is being played at their pace.
But if New Zealand could somehow take South Africa somewhere near 40 minutes, it could be like an All Blacks side of old, who just used to tear teams to pieces in the last ten minutes (yes, we suffered that as a Wales team), simply because South Africa will not be used to it. At the hour mark it will feel like they have already played a whole game.
Saying this, it is worth remembering that New Zealand did win the Rugby Championship last summer and, when they beat South Africa 35-20 in Auckland in July, the ball in play time was only 30 minutes. So, they also know they can win when the game is slow.
Advertisement
But they also know that they were thrashed 35-7 by South Africa at Twickenham just before this tournament (and those seven were courtesy of a late consolation try). They just could not cope with South Africa’s physicality that day. Two breakdown penalties led to two yellow cards in the first half, for Sam Cane and Scott Barrett, and then Barrett was sent off for a second yellow; that was for a reckless clearout, but for me it was just another example of the physical pressure New Zealand were under.
That just highlights the emotional peak that the All Blacks must reach on Saturday if they are to match that South African physicality. England did that successfully last weekend and when people ask why they cannot do that every week, it is simply because it is impossible. You cannot get to that level every week, maybe only a handful of times a year.
South Africa are a way better side than we ever were as a Wales team, but I remember getting to a point around 2011 to 2013 when I was sure our physicality would beat teams. Opponents knew exactly what we were going to do but it is one thing knowing that and a very different thing being able to stop it.
That has long been South Africa’s mantra and they came into this World Cup thinking exactly that. They made no secret of it. They have always been of the mind that if plan A doesn’t work, they just try to do plan A better. So, they were going to be physical and they were confident that no one could stop that.
The problem for them now is that teams are stopping it. France and England have both done that. Yes, South Africa won both those games (by a point in both cases) but they have been seriously rattled. The early replacing of the lock Eben Etzebeth against England was a real sign of that for me. You just don’t take him off.
Advertisement
The captain Siya Kolisi has been coming off at around the 50-minute mark quite regularly but to take off arguably the best enforcer in the world game right now that early?
RG Snyman came on and actually did exactly what was required, but South Africa had taken off their playmaker (the fly half Manie Libbok was replaced after only 31 minutes), captain and most physical player, all inside 51 minutes. It was quite remarkable.
England went where South Africa are strong. They took away the scrum (until late on at least), took away the maul, took away the collisions. And South Africa had very little to turn to.
New Zealand will know that if they can match South Africa physically, they take away their whole game, and for the sort of emotional levels they must aim for, they can look at the work of the England wing Elliot Daly in that semi-final. His kick-chase work was astonishingly good. When did we last see him smashing someone like No 8 Duane Vermeulen as he did in that match?
On the flipside of that, though, New Zealand can look at the last five or six minutes and see what England did wrong to lose a game that they really should have won.
Advertisement
They will realise that if you are two points ahead and not long is left on the clock, your best bet when kicking in the middle third of the field is to kick long. If you kick short to compete, there is a high chance of a knock-on and that is exactly what happened.
The England full back Freddie Steward had a superb game under the high ball, but he really should have hoofed that ball long downfield when receiving Handré Pollard’s kick with just over five minutes to go. Instead, he decided to try to kick to compete. The kick didn’t go as far as he would have liked and then he knocked on when challenging for it. It was from that scrummage just inside England’s half that South Africa won the penalty and Pollard won them the game.
That is not hindsight talking. I said as soon as Steward kicked it that he should have gone long. I am not saying Steward cost England the game as there were a lot of other things that went wrong in those closing minutes, not least the scrummage going to pieces, but I’m sure it is something New Zealand will bear in mind.
There is an interesting contrast between New Zealand not having to reach a high emotional intensity in an easy semi-final victory over Argentina and the amount of ball-in-play time they have achieved in those quarter-final and semi-final matches, which could leave them with heavy legs for this final assignment.
But I’m convinced that because of the ease of that Argentina victory they can reach the emotional intensity required on Saturday to match South Africas’ physicality, and that their coaching and fitness staff will have been sufficiently mindful this week that they will have had to rest up more than usual.
It’s New Zealand for me. Just.
New Zealand v South Africa
Rugby World Cup final
Saturday, kick-off 8pm
Stade de France, Paris
TV: ITV
