Congratulations to the Kiwis. Even though the final was considerably closer than i expected, the All Blacks were certainly the best team over the tournament.
The final was quit a nail-biter, although it also somehow seemed that New Zealand had things well in hand for most of the game. Sort of a paradox, in that the game was always close but the result almost seemed inevitable.
Not really - your analysis is just much better and deeper than mine! I must admit (having not played rugby at a high level, nor being much more than a casual fan) that much of what you say did not even occur to me at the time, and it all makes sense - except perhaps the part about Yachvili having to move so far that he left such a big hole. I mean, if the French did steal it, it’s not as if they would be that bothered about getting quick ball off the top - their play would be to catch it, try to get a drive on if possible but go to ground if not, and then recycle slow ball back to the number 10 to clear their lines. So although it was undoubtedly an excellent move by the All Blacks, I still think it was criminal for the French not to cover it. OK, so Woodcock may have just trampled Yachvili anyway, but as I said it was the total absence of any opposition that I found a bit shocking.
I know what you mean, but when the French got up to 20+ phases inside the New Zealand half (albeit only just) with about 5 minutes to go, the whole tournament hung on a knife-edge and only very strong, and more importantly, disciplined defending from NZ meant that they were not put in danger. Something England would do well to learn from, if they can.
Yes, in theory. In practice, the ball that you steal against the throw is rarely caught - usually, it is tapped back one handed (I hated dealing with this type of ball when I played), so the chances are that it would be coming to Yachvilli quickly and he needed to be in position, otherwise it is a loose ball on your own line.
The other problem he would have had, if he had stayed put in the middle of the line is, assuming a tap back of ball directly to him, the ball would have come onto his right hand, with the pass needing to go right to his 10 to clear (he could of course have box kicked himself - but he is left footed, which would have necessitated turning around to perform the kick or risking shanking it off his weaker foot). This is a very difficult pass to execute quickly and likely would have resulted in either a bad pass or a delay resulting in extra pressure. By moving up to the back pod stolen ball is more likely to come to his middle (or even better onto his left hand - i.e. at the top of his wind up to get the ball away). On balance, it is obvious he made the wrong decision in retrospect, but at the time, I think his positioning was the one most SHs would have taken.
Yet again I must bow to your superior knowledge of the game, and thank you fighting a little bit more ignorance. I think I have worked out the conclusion: France lost the world cup because their number 9 was left-footed :).
On the whole New Zealand’s kicking for the entire game wasn’t that good - though there were some really good kicks from general play.
If Weepu had gotten even one of the misses, then I think the game may well have taken an entirely different track.
But New Zealand were REALLY disciplined which was great to see.
But I was worried about choke choke, although to my biased eyes the French never really looked like they were dangerous.
…just a few shots I took from the parade a couple of days ago through Wellington…
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.225657974163378.57609.174587205937122&type=1