AN HOUR or so after Japan’s extraordinary victory over South Africa on day two of the Rugby World Cup, a colleague was still burbling on enthusiastically about what a great occasion it had been. “Make the most of it,” I said to him. “Because it’s all downhill from here.”
The remark was meant to be humorous rather than a simple pessimistic prediction. But it could easily have turned out to be true, with that game in the pool stages standing out as an isolated high point of the whole tournament.
Instead, although Japan’s 34-32 triumph has taken its place as the greatest upset in this or any other World Cup, there were many other games that equalled it for quality if not for shock value. In fact, the longer the competition went on, the better the rugby became, which is as it should be in a 44-day event.
New Zealand made sure the quality of the tournament never dipped
Teams such as Ireland who came out with all guns blazing soon ran out of ammunition. Others who got off to a slow start improved steadily, giving themselves the best chance of lasting the pace.
We will except England from that last category, because they got off to a slow start against Fiji and continued in similarly turgid vein. And it was the poor quality of that first match on a Friday night at Twickenham that made Japan’s win the following afternoon in Brighton all the more gratifying.
You could be forgiven for remembering very little about the host nation’s 35-11 win over the Fijians, as it was a poor game that meandered on for close to 100 minutes thanks to constant referrals to the Television Match Official. But one thing that stands out in this observer’s mind was the number of comments on social media from people who said they had no interest in watching the rest of the World Cup if that was going to be the standard of playing and officiating. Japan’s win over the Springboks put an end to much of that negativity, even though England fans had to suffer a lot worse as the pool stages went on.
The deficiencies that would lead to England’s defeats by Australia and Wales were evident in miniature against the Fijians, and the problems with television replays would also rumble on throughout the tournament. Remember the “try” scored by former Glasgow scrum-half Niko Matawalu? The one that referee Jaco Peyper was happy to award without referring to the TMO - but then cancelled just before the conversion was taken, having noticed from a big-screen replay that the scrum-half had not landed the ball?
Craig Joubert attracted heat but World Rugby needs to review its disciplinary system
Peyper came to the correct decision in the end, but that set a dangerous precedent, as it gave TV directors the potential to influence the match officials by choosing to replay certain actions and not others. Fast forward to Scotland’s quarter-final against Australia, and you can understand the frustration when Craig Joubert erroneously awarded the match-winning penalty to the Wallabies. The match official was right not to refer the incident to the TMO, but he could have taken the time, as his fellow-South African Peyper did, to review it and revise his original decision.
Inconsistency in the use of replays was thus a running theme for most of the 44 days of the competition, as was an inconsistent disciplinary process. Scotland were again one of the nations most seriously affected, as Jonny Gray and Ross Ford were given three-week suspensions which contrasted harshly with the punishment meted out to others.
The fact that the two forwards were later cleared to play against the Wallabies only made the original sentence look all the more curious. World Rugby needs to conduct a thorough review of its disciplinary measures, and the sooner it does so the better.
Greig Laidlaw scores in Scotland's win over Samoa
Scotland achieved their primary goal of reaching the quarter-finals, and contributed greatly to the entertainment value of the tournament. Their last pool game against Samoa then their quarter-final against the Wallabies were two of the most dramatic and high-scoring encounters in the whole tournament, with 69 points apiece.
At the other end of the numerical scale but no less dramatic was Australia’s 15-6 win over Wales, a result that put them through to the knockout stages as pool winners. Spectacular tries always take pride of place in any highlights reel of a tournament, but the quality of the Wallabies’ defence when they were down to 13 men was arguably the single most impressive piece of rugby in the whole competition.
That defence’s shortcomings were then shown up by Scotland, and to a lesser extent by Argentina in the semi-final, but the Australians were still wholly deserving of their place in the final. It was no disgrace to come out second best against an All Blacks team who are now widely considered the best rugby union side of all time.
The greatest ever? Tell us what you think in our poll
The standard reached by New Zealand was awe-inspiring, and surely helped many people come to the decision that this was the best World Cup yet staged. So, too, did the organisation behind the scenes, which was impeccable.
And the fact that the competition took place in the best autumn for a generation helped massively too, of course. The unseasonal sunshine lasted all the way to the final, further brightening a tournament that was outstanding both on and off the field.
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