Jim Telfer must have had a wee smile to himself when he heard that the Wallabies had banned referring to their World Cup final opponents as “the All Blacks.”
It must have been around four World Cups ago that the great guru of Scottish rugby was said to be attempting something similar in a bid to demystify the world’s greatest rugby team as we latched onto the fact that players were referring only to New Zealand in response to our questions.
Just for the record the All Blacks duly knocked a Scotland team that did not really start playing until the second half of their 1999 World Cup quarter-final, out of that tournament, just as they had in 1995 and 1987, just as they had beaten them in the 1991 third place play-off, just as they beat them in the pool stages of the 2007 tournament and just as they have beaten them on all bar the two occasions when the sides had drawn in the course of 30 meetings since 1905.
Mental preparation is a major aspect of international sport and belief is central to that, however in recognising that there is something special about the name “All Black”, just as in getting as uptight about allowing them to perform their pre-match ‘Haka’ as European commentators in particular do from time to time, only seems to strengthen the power of these things.
"They can call us what they want. Being Aussies, they probably will," was the response of Steve Hansen, the All Black head coach, to being told of this policy, but you can never imagine the Kiwis worrying about such things.
Their concerns are internal and to that end he expressed satisfaction at being able to name the same team as won their semi-final for the final with Nehe Milner-Skudder having, as expected, shaken off a shoulder injury to be fit to take his place on the wing.
The Wallabies have, however, made the expected change to their side with Scott Sio returning after recovering from his elbow injury to strengthen their front-row and, they hope, their scrummaging after their reversion to having problems in that department against Argentina in the semi-final.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel