We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Australia in the Rugby World Cup Final – and New Zealand hung out to dry

Well, as Samizdata’s token Australian, I guess it is my job to do a little bit of cheering from the point of view of England’s opponents in the final of the Rugby World Cup on Saturday. Like Brian, I have also been writing about the tournament on ubersportingpundit, but if he is going to bring it here and the commenters are all then going to complain about Australians I might as well use my God like Samizdatista powers too.

For in the other semi-final on the weekend, Australia versus New Zealand, the Australian side that have looked second rate all year suddenly came good, and played superbly to beat New Zealand. Sydney is getting excited. The final is Australia v England, a great grudge match.

Which leaves me with two things to discuss. The grudge, and the match. First, the match. Very well as Australia played on Saturday (and they really were terrific) I think that if they play equally well and in the same way in the final, they will very likely lose. Why do I think this? Well, Australia won the game by going on the attack in the first half, getting a lead, and then defending ferociously as New Zealand attempted to score tries in the second half. At half time I was quite disappointed that Australia had not scored more than one try given the amount of possession they had had. Australia have the best defence of any side in the tournament, but I wasn’t sure that they could hold New Zealand out for the second half. But as it happened, the defence was even better than I expected, and they did hold New Zealand out for the second half.

However, if Australia get an early lead of a few points and try the same strategy against England, and find themselves defending against England in the second half, it just won’t work. Every time Australia concede a penalty, Jonny Wilkinson will kick the ball over the crossbar for three points. If Australia don’t concede penalties (and in Rugby this is very difficult for prolongued periods), Wilkinson will start kicking drop goals. England won’t score tries, but they will score enough points to win just the same. (They didn’t score any tries against France, but won comfortably).

The more I think about it like this, the more I think England will win the game. The Australian team and coach must be thinking the same way. Therefore, I think they will not play with quite the same strategy they did against New Zealand. To win, Australia is going to have to score more tries, hopefully in the first half, than they did against New Zealand. While only scoring one try from lots of possession in the first half was okay against New Zealand, it will not be against England. Look for Australia to come out, and hit England’s defences extremely hard in the first half hour. If they can break the defence, and score two or three tries, Australia will likely win. If not, England will.

Secondly, the grudge.

I have a copy of today’s Times in front of me. On the front, I see a picture of a sheep, with the words “The bleating Aussies”, and a suggesting that readers turn to the sports section. When I do actually turn to the sports section. Upon doing so, I find “England bored by the sniping but buoyed by the challenge” on page 42, followed by an article discussing how “ill informed” Australian sports jounalists are criticising England for playing “boring rugby” and generally bashing the English team. On page 43, 42, and 37, I find much the same thing. (“Whingers of Oz keep myth alive and kicking” is particularly good). In all the other newspapers I find much the same thing. In the comments of Brian’s article here on Samizdata I find much the same.

Which is odd. Because there hasn’t actually been very much Pom bashing going on in Australia. Oh, certainly there has been some. Ribbing the English is always fun, so some people do it just for the sake of it. And of course, England play very effective rugby, and criticising it as “boring” in an attempt to get them to change their style is always worth a try. (It worked in 1991, but it won’t work here. England are far too professional this year). But Pom bashing hasn’t and isn’t the focus of Australian attention on the World Cup. It’s been way down the scale. Prior to the semi-final, Australians were far too busy writing off their own team’s chances to really focus on it, and they are still too busy enjoying the semi-final victory over New Zealand to do too much of it this week. (In Rugby, beating New Zealand is generally a bigger deal than beating England anyway). However, the English press seems utterly obsessed with it, to the extent that there is far more whinging about Australian whinging in the English press than there is actual whinging going on in Australia. I don’t know quite why? Perhaps the English are so traumatised by losing to Australia at everything for a decade that they see it even when it isn’t really there. However, having been reading the Australian press throughout the cup, and having spent a couple of weeks of the World Cup actually in Australia, all I can say is that what I have read in the English press is entirely different to what I have read and seen actually in Australia. All I can conclude is that the English press are seeing what they want to. If England win, it will be much more enjoyable if they can believe that Australia lost with bad grace.

However, given that there is more complaining about Australians going on than actual rugby coverage, I can only conclude that the English media are at this point completely rattled. And although this is enjoyable, it doesn’t actually matter much. Because as Brian has said repeatedly, this English team is very well led and coached, and is by far the most professional team that England has ever had. And I don’t believe that anything in the Australian or English press is going to affect this. If Australia are going to beat England, they are going to have to simply play great rugby. Hopefully they will. More likely though, England will win. And if they do, we Australians will mostly congratulate England on a good job, still feel reasonably okay because Australia did far better in the tournament than we expected to, and console ourselves by laughing at the England cricket team.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrShare on RedditShare on Google+Share on VK

14 comments to Australia in the Rugby World Cup Final – and New Zealand hung out to dry

  • You mean to say that if England win on Saturday I won’t be allowed to gloat; that I’ll have to refrain from going into my local and calling out to the barman “Hey, loser, get us a beer.” Bummer.

    This is serious stuff. I had already put finger to keyboard to pixellate a wind-up on the lines of the Norwegian commentator. The line: “Skippy. Can you hear me Skippy? Your boys took one hell of a beating.” may never now see the light of day.

    Actually, I think this could be a sign of something to come. Already, what with being online and all, I have found it necessary to curb my foreigner-bashing tendencies. I can’t bash the Frogs (Dissident Frogman), the Aussies (you and Scott), the Jocks (Freedom and Whisky), the Germans (Ralf Goergens), the Canucks (Jay Jardine), the Micks (Slugger O’Toole) or even the Yanks (everyone).

    Who’s left?

    At this rate all this interconnectedness with people making contact with other individuals in all sorts of different places, sharing experiences and finding that they’re really all OK is going to lead to a new world of international understanding and global harmony.

    Double bummer.

  • DJS

    So sorry. Rude, crude, uncivilized American here. Would you please explain the “Pom” thing? Thank you.

  • I normally can’t stand sports but I hope that England absolutely pummels you lot. It would especially sweet if it were by kicking, instead of tries. I will be watching the game on Sat. morning (your cruel bastards!) and singing “Swing Low” in full voice.

    BTW I would have routed for France against Oz too.

  • David Gillies

    Damn you, Wallabies! I was looking forward with great anticipation to taunting my friend Lorissa the Kiwi when England swatted them in the final, and now that pleasure has been snatched from me. Now we’ll both be rooting for England, and it won’t be half as much fun (I think I’ll have to see it in replay as the match starts 3.30 am my time).

  • Julian Taylor

    But what better way to kick off the traditional Poms vs Wallabies World Cup banter with this little article.

  • Elly

    Oi, how about giving the Wallabies some credit!!

  • Joel

    Well, still celebrating World Toilet Day over here, here’s one Septic Yank for the Wallabies!

  • Andrew: When did you first realise you hated your horse?

    That’s okay, though. We would have cheered for France against you, too. We would have also cheered for France against New Zealand. On the other hand, New Zealand versus England would have been a hard one. I think we would have ended up (very reluctantly) cheering for England.

    DJS: Pom is a slang term that Australians use for the English. It can be either slightly derogatary, or affectionate, depending on how it is used. Nobody is quite sure of the origins of the word, although there are various theories that some people believe quite strongly.

  • Nobody is quite sure of the origins of the word, although there are various theories that some people believe quite strongly.

    I always thought that it meant “Prisoner Of Mother England” but that would make it POME.

  • Nancy

    Andy Duncan asked about this on Samizdata months ago and I emailed him the answer my English husband gave me. He told me that it’s an abbreviation of “Prisoner of Majesty”, mocking the royal subject as opposed to citizen thing. Whether that is correct, I don’t know.

    Go, England! I was never into rugby before I lived in London, and then I really grew to love it. I’ve enjoyed watching the English team improve year on year. Having moved back to the states, I still support them. The only bummer is that someone is going to be standing over me with a megaphone at 3:30 am this coming Saturday, until I get up and watch the final, as I am repeatedly told I would do willingly if I were a real fan. Maybe I should rethink this support.

  • This site argues that the “Prisoner of Mother England / Prisoner of His/Her Majesty” theories are not especially likely. (I tend to agree, mainly because there is no evidence that either expression was ever actually used). The other common theory (which the author of that site tends to believe) is that it comes from the word “pomegranate”, but I am not sure the evidence for that one is very convincing either. It’s one of those things that we really don’t know.

  • Um, Michael what are you on about?

    I have always supported England as a national side (well I do have a soft-spot for Wales too).

  • Dave The Australian

    Look, there is no doubt about the outcome, Australia will win again, like we do in about every sport, so you guys can stop your whining.

  • Can you say stuffed? And it was by a drop-kick too. Hopefully obnoxious Aussies in London will STFU for the next few months. Doubt it somehow.