Can Ford’s foot propel England to glory?
Perish the thought! Yet the magic of the Rugby World Cup was encapsulated in the fly-half’s boot
Meet George Ford, England’s fly-half. Ford is neither a journeyman nor a rugby celebrity and, although he’s played 86 times for his country, he’s often been lost in the shadow cast by Owen Farrell’s more headline-grabbing talents.
But with Farrell in rugby limbo, the result of his dangerous tackle on Wales’ Taine Basham in England’s pre-world Cup friendly, Ford has moved up a place or two on the starting grid. On 9 September, during England’s eagerly anticipated clash against Argentina, he took advantage of his new position by striking three first-half drop-goals that bisected the posts as neatly as scissors cut paper.
Ford was clicking along rather nicely when he goaled the three drops and subsequently eased his way to a further 18 unfussy points as though he was helping himself to another beer at the neighbourhood bring ’n braai.
With him directing matters in Farrell’s absence, England put a potentially tricky tie in Marseille behind them in steady increments. They won 27-10, and it wasn’t even close.
Ford’s decision to rack up points for the taking was a little cameo of instinctive savvy with flanker Tom Curry yellow-carded at the time (Curry’s infringement was later upgraded to red) and England down to 14 men. Experts call this “game management” in the jargon of the day and George managed things like the old pro he is. As he said afterwards: “With a man down early on, we had to come away with as many points as possible [at that stage]”.
Ford was spot on because, one, England’s running ability was compromised by having one player less than Argentina and, two, Ford recognised that, if you can’t run past a side, you can at least paralyse your victim with the slow drip of points.
Yes, you can go for the quick green strike of the boomslang but better by far (if you’re down a man), is the slow suffocation of the python. It’s old-fashioned, and takes time, but it’s mightily effective.
As the match in Marseille progressed, so the pressure of England’s lead through Ford’s drop goals and penalties increased. Argentina rallied briefly in the second half but the power of England’s pack finally squeezed the living daylights out of them.
That’s game management for you. And that’s why England, with the experience of current skipper Courtney Lawes (34), allied to that of Jamie George (32), Ford (30) and Farrell (31), look like a team on the move. England? On the move? I can hear you spluttering with shock into your chai latte.
That’s the thing with World Cups: they’re their own unique ecosystem, where previous form only provides vague hints of what’s to come. England’s form leading up the tournament in France was rotten, with a scrappy win over Wales and a loss — wait for it — to Fiji.
Further back, under Eddie Jones, current coach Steve Borthwick’s predecessor, Jones ran out of ideas after an exciting start to his career and a World Cup final loss to South Africa in Yokohama. In last season’s Six Nations, in the twilight of Jones’ tenure, England beat only Wales and Italy, finishing fourth out of six.
Along the way they lost a humdinger to Scotland but were trounced 53-10 by France. If the losing margin wasn’t indignity enough, the venue of the defeat made it doubly bad — it happened at Twickenham, the temple, no less.
It’s a cliché, but all that’s forgotten now. With Argentina out of the way, England have bonded, and look to top their group. That means a likely quarter-final against either Wales or Australia, both of whom England have the beating of. Who would have thought? Dour, under-cooked England, as likely semi-finalists?
Coach Borthwick still has questions to answer, to be sure. The main one concerns what to do with Ford once Farrell gets back from suspension; the second has to do with England’s apparent fear of the tryline. They don’t like going there, it’s clear for all to see.
They’re a bit like the teenage boy at his first dance in the community hall. On the other side of the room is a group of girls. He’d love to ask one to dance — he knows just the one — but how does he get there? His feet won’t move in the direction he wants them to go and that doesn’t factor in the anguish of not knowing what to do with his hands when he arrives.
Dancing aside, World Cups are opportunities for self-fashioning. On the one hand they’re chances for teams to immortalise themselves but, on the other, they’re like moving cities or houses — opportunities, à la Jay Gatsby, for breaks with the past.
New beginnings are badly needed by both France and New Zealand — for entirely different reasons. The French, slightly surprising 27-13 winners over the All Blacks in Paris on Friday night, need a new beginning because they’re habitual beaten finalists, having lost the final on three separate occasions.
Such “close-but-no-cigar” moments sit above their berets like a curse.
At the inaugural World Cup in 1987, they lost 29-9 to the All Blacks at Eden Park, doing so again 24 years later at the same venue against the same opponents, 8-7. Their other appearance in the final was in Cardiff in 1999, when they came second to a gifted Australian team of Stephen Larkham, John Eales, George Gregan and Totai Kefu.
As one of the most talented allround teams on the planet, they badly need something tangible for all their sweat and toil. But they are trapped on the wrong side of the draw and will need to beat either South Africa or Ireland in the quarter-final if they’re to progress.
The All Blacks need a new beginning because the rugby world has a sneaking suspicion that the mantle of greatness is slipping — and fast. They’ve been losing quite a bit in recent years, something the great All Black teams of yore seldom did.
First it was a series loss to Ireland, then a once-off loss at home to Argentina. More recently they shipped 35 points against the Boks in a pre-tournament friendly at Twickenham. The charitable view claims that both sides were well below their fighting best but the loss resonated, and came at a bad time.
New Zealand is also far away from everywhere except Antarctica, and, in rugby, it’s beginning to show. Modern sport is often about the overlap of money, intellectual capital and physical proximity, a case in point being the juggernaut that is contemporary European football, and the Kiwis are far, far away from the centres of rugby power.
New Zealand rugby is out on a limb physically and having allowed the South Africans to throw their lot in with the north, regional competition for the Kiwis is watered down. This might mean nothing but is playing against a side from Samoa or Fiji the same as playing the Stormers or the Sharks?
South Africans would argue not. Such strategic faux pas might all count for nothing come the final blow of the whistle in the final next month but we might yet see a new rugby World Cup winner. It could well be a team from the north: Ireland, France or — perish the thought — Ford and Farrell’s England.
World Cups are their own unique ecosystem, where previous form only provides vague hints of what’s to come