No match for these Blacks
24 Sep 2011
RYAN VREDE watched New Zealand reaffirm that they are their biggest threat to finally ending their World Cup agony.
Who will beat this All Blacks side? France was vanquished from the list of contenders tonight at Eden Park. None of their northern hemisphere counterparts have a price either. Any threat will come of familiar foes, Australia and South Africa, but even they will struggle to repress this brilliant team.
As the whistle hailed the start of this eagerly awaited contest – with the energy generated by an inspiration rendition of Kapa O Pango still coursing through the stands – France played 10 minutes of outstanding football. They were repelled by the Blacks, who then produced an emphatic rebuttal that underlined just how far ahead they are of every pretender.
It was over as a contest after three tries in eight minutes, each breathtaking in its execution and featuring moments of the very highest skill level, the finest from Ma’a Nonu in crafting their second. He is a player transformed since his fallout with the Hurricanes. However, it would be remiss to discount the galvanising effect the emergence of Sonny Bill Williams has had. Rugby’s poster boy has injected a freshness into what was becoming a stale product. The Blacks’ coaching staff will be infinitely more grateful that he has done the same for Nonu.
There were others who shone. Dan Carter, outside of a careless pass that was intercepted, played like the rugby deity he is, off the back of a brutal performance from his pack. Richard Kahui’s rugby intellect is stunning. Israel Dagg vindicated his selection ahead of Mils Muliaina. He is undoubtedly the best fullback world rugby. Richie McCaw, in his 100th Test, reminded of his class. Sonny Bill Williams, with his unique repertoire of skills, is rugby’s answer to Cirque de Soleil.
With the exception of Kieran Read, the 22 coach Graham Henry selected tonight is his best combination and one without rival in the game.
That is, unless a team can resist them and begin to pick away at mental scars they wear every four years. In addition, Henry must now abandon his rotation policy and pick this side for the remainder of the tournament. This was his 99th Test as a coach. Surely now he must see the value in continuity in to selection at the World Cup.
If they remedy these ills (and keep their key players fit) there is no team on in this tournament to match them. Certainly Australia have the capacity to trouble them with their smart and innovative attack, but they lacked the physicality to set the platform to do this consistently. The Springboks won’t be bullied in this manner, but then are devoid of the Wallabies’ attacking skill. The Springboks’ routs of Fiji and Namibia shouldn’t be allowed to distort the perspective that those are opponents of significantly lower defensive prowess when compared to the Blacks. For all their panache in this match, to watch the Blacks live is to witness their defensive power, organisation and anticipation. Nothing the Springboks have offered on attack in the last two years will concern them.
This is their tournament to lose.
By Ryan Vrede, at Eden Park, Auckland
112 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 [3] Show All
25 Sep 2011, 20:20 pm
@David(David)-97:
The permutations are endlesss. Who are our strongest props…that’s the issue.
Guthro was good. Is Beast better…depends who you ask.
Bismark instead of Smit…we’re dreaming….de Villiers has other ideas.
25 Sep 2011, 20:43 pm
Only the referees can stop these All Blacks
25 Sep 2011, 21:20 pm
HG you conveniently forgot to mention that Barnes was best defender for France in Cardiff the last time these two met in a WC match.
25 Sep 2011, 21:30 pm
Oops meant to say in 07 instead of last time @ 103
25 Sep 2011, 21:37 pm
@rugby fan(rugby fan)-103: Piffle. Irrelevant. ABs played to potential that game and so did France… Barnes was irrelevant and still is. He is not likely to Ref a semi – Rolland, however, has one foot in the final already after yesterday’s “performance”, particularly in the first 10mins.
25 Sep 2011, 21:57 pm
@rugby fan(rugby fan)-103:
Please save yourself the effort next time and, always, remember that here, on Keo, the ref only “cheats” when the Boks lose or when the ABs win. And, of course, the ref is “brilliant” when the Boks win and the ABs lose.
If you needed any further proof, you’ll now find that it can be so specific that the cheating can be ring-fenced in to periods of “10 mins” within an 80min match.
25 Sep 2011, 22:57 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-106: Ok then. How would you describe Rolland’s performance in that 1st ten min’s (I think it’s less than that)? Someone took Parra out after a chipkick into AB’s 22 and then there was Jane tackling Traille in the air, mtr’s from the line. Keep in mind the French had the AB’s at 6′s and 7′s at the time. Yet the AB’s ‘survived’ the onslaught, got stuck in and the rest as we know it, was history. I never thought the French would win. Not even in the opening minutes. I’m just pissed at a ref that denied France the start they deserved in this game.
25 Sep 2011, 23:07 pm
@UptheGuts(UptheGuts)-107: Do you think Janes intention was to tackle the man in the air? Everyone knows he was going for the ball, and got trapped up in the collision. To be divisive, and cantankerous reeks of your biased persuasion when making such comments.
I watched the entire start again twice yesterday – and even tho there were areas where Rollaind allowed ruck indiscretions to occur – he was consistent with these rulings throughout the match. As you well know, or bloody ignorant if you didn’t – you play the ref and push as far as he will allow. As a northern hem ref, surely the French would have been more accustomed to his rulings.
Nobody took Parra out – he chip kicked over Carter, Carter turned to run after the ball – as he absolutely allowed to do, and Parra ran into him. The ref was on the spot, saw it and waived it on. Whats Carter supposed to do – get out of his way? Wheres he going to go in the split second? Parra elected to kick the ball, therefore its his responsibility to find a clear path to chase.
25 Sep 2011, 23:28 pm
@KiaKahaNZ(KiaKahaNZ)-108: Since when is ‘intention’ to foul the criteria to penalise. Fact is he did. Outcome, penalty. Might even have been a yellow. Nothing divisive or cantankerous about it. Plain and simple. Re Carter…it just so happens carter was turning into Parra huh? I’m willing to wager you wouldn’t have had a problem (as much as could be expected of a loyal fan) had he penalised both these. Not even with a yellowcard. I saw it again too btw.
25 Sep 2011, 23:38 pm
@KiaKahaNZ(KiaKahaNZ)-108: What I’m saying is, I wouldn’t had anything to whinge about had the AB’s (like everyone knew they would btw) came back at the French from 6-0 down. But maybe, just maybe the Frenchies wouldn’t have waved the AB attackers through like they did when the heat was put on. I would’ve thought, as an AB fan, you would agree with me. That somehow a tough match, regardless of the final score was probably what they needed more than some misguided notion of ‘revenge’ or payback. Win or lose. Keep your eyes on the ball mate. You fellas are losing touch again
26 Sep 2011, 00:24 am
@UptheGuts(UptheGuts)-109:
Jane did hold the guy in the air. penalty, dont go all yellow card on it as we could see it was not intentional but a penalty should have been awarded.
As for Carters incident, he could have been penalised,which does not mean he should have. Carter does not have to pull out the red carpet and let the runner through. IF Carter stays on his line and turns on his line then fine. I believe the ref saw Parra leap 5 feet in the air,with a twist and a back flip and thought……Hollywood.
26 Sep 2011, 01:42 am
@UptheGuts(UptheGuts)-107:
I havent see the replay on tv yet – I was at the stadium – so cant comment on the Parra incident because I dont remember it vividly.
As for the incident where Tarzan was swinging thru the French forest, I thought it would be a penalty to France because Tarzan was clearly went up in the air, eyes on the ball. He clumsily wrapped his arms around Traille instinctively. It was clearly NOT intentional, the repeats showed he had his eyes fixed on the ball as he went up and only grabbed Traille on the way down. Touch’n'go decision, coulda gone either way, but a YC would have been harsh. Are you, then, saying it was clearly INtentional that he took the player out ?
Pages: « 1 2 [3] Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.