Japan and Fiji could spring the big surprise
THE 2023 World Cup draw that took place amid French pomp and ceremony at the Palais Brongniart in Paris on Monday at least looked good, even though most of it showed the chronic administrative flaws we have come to expect of these would-be showpieces.
It also bucked the current political trend because despite the presence of the French president, Emmanuel Macron, England actually got a good deal after being drawn in the most accommodating of the four pools, alongside Argentina and Japan.
It meant that they avoided the holders, South Africa (1 in the World Rugby rankings), the perennial favourites, New Zealand (3), and the resurgent hosts, France (4). England, who are currently at 2 in the rankings behind the Springboks, also sidestepped the remaining teams ranked in the top seven, Ireland (5), Australia (6), and Scotland (7).
For the record, England’s two main pool opponents do at least make the rankings top 10, with Argentina 8 and Japan 10. However, even though England were the beneficiaries, exchanging the “Pool of Death” in 2015 for what they hope will be the “Pool of Life” in 2023, there was a sense of staleness about the rest of the draw.
Australia, Wales, and Fiji were picked in the same pool for not only the second successive tournament, but also the fourth time in the ten World Cups to date. Add to that New Zealand and Italy being drawn together in the same pool round for a mind-boggling seventh tournament, and England and Argentina, as well as Ireland and Scotland, doubling up in the same pools in successive tournaments, and a sense of déjà vu is overwhelming.
It also flies in the face of the administrative lessons that should have been learned from the 2015 World Cup, when England became the first host nation to exit in the pool stages, due mainly to the three-year lapse between the draw and the start of the tournament.
The failure to do so was highlighted brutally when the 2015 World Cup draw was made in 2012, with England drawn in the same pool as Australia and Wales, with the latter having dropped to 9 in the rankings. Yet, by the time of the tournament, the Welsh had risen to 4, while England were 3 and Australia 2.
When England were eliminated after losing to the Welsh and the Wallabies, the Wales coach, Warren Gatland, savaged World Rugby’s organisation.
Gatland encapsulated the widespread dissatisfaction when he said: “Everyone is making a thing about the first home country to hold a World Cup to miss out on the quarterfinals, but the stupid thing, as we all know, is why was the World Cup draw done three years ago? That’s just ridiculous. As far as I’m concerned, if they had followed the football model, then we wouldn’t be in this position. There are people outside this who need to have a look at themselves and why those decisions were made…”
Even in the build-up to the 2015 tournament World Rugby chief executive Brett Gosper conceded changes had to be made to the draw process: “We’re going to review what the ideal timing is. We would endeavour to make it a bit later… you want it to be a true reflection, I guess, of the position at the time of the tournament. We’ll look at that next time (Japan) to see if it’s possible to make the draw closer to the tournament.”
Despite the subsequent fiasco, and the criticism aimed at World Rugby, Gosper, who will leave the post next month to become head of the NFL in Europe/UK, has failed to live up to his undertaking. Although there was an improvement when the draw for the 2019 World Cup was made just over two years before the tournament, it is incomprehensible that the France 2023 draw has reverted to being three years before the event (see sidebar).
It is essential that the rankings and the draw are as up-to-date as possible, and therefore made only a year before each World Cup, as it is in football, mainly because it is the best public relations opportunity available to the international game in the four-year gap between tournaments. It should be timed to keep interest in the international rugby bubbling away and ensure it is red-hot by the time of the big event.
Yet, here we are again with three years to go, and this time either South Africa, Ireland or Scotland destined for an early exit in Pool B. It is also worth considering that if France, who ended up in Pool A, had been unlucky enough to exchange places with fellow second seeds Ireland, it would have been the hosts facing a pool of death against the reigning South African world champions, and a Scottish side which beat them in the 2020 Six Nations.
That would have put a dark shroud over the proceedings, and Gosper, controversial French Federation de Rugby president Bernard Laporte, and indeed Monsieur Macron, must have breathed a huge sigh of relief when one of the the celebrity draw-makers, the French ballerina, Alice Renavand, placed the France ball in Pool A.
As it is, France are guaranteed a place in the quarter-finals alongside their main Pool A rivals, New Zealand – bar the USA/Canada or Namibia/ Tunisia springing the biggest upset in World Cup history.
France coach Fabien Galthie was quick to grab the role of the underdog against the All Blacks, highlighting that they have yet to lose a World Cup pool game. However, the 2023 World Cup should at least start with a humdinger when Galthie’s garcons confront New Zealand in the opening match.
Meanwhile, England coach Eddie Jones, who has made a quick flit back to Japan, acknowledged that while the Pool D draw was not the worst, both Japan and Argentina have shown how they can rise to the occasion. In Argentina’s case, he said the recent evidence was posted large in their landmark Tri-Nations victory over New Zealand, while Japan’s 2019 World Cup wins over Ireland and Scotland are still fresh in the memory.
Jones believes that Argentina’s win over the All Blacks shows what they are capable of, and noted that it represented a step-up in terms of power-play rugby, saying it was “probably the most physical game of rugby we saw in 2020”.
The England coach said that this contrasts strongly with the challenge presented by Japan, whose all out high-speed attacking game – which Jones initiated when he coached them into the 2015 World Cup, and has been taken on since then by his Kiwi successor, Jamie Joseph – is a handful for anyone.
Jones added that Joseph will have a huge advantage compared to other national coaches, because the Japanese club season is formulated so that after it finishes the national coach gets a sixmonth training window with the ‘Brave Blossoms’ every season.
Should England progress from Pool D their likely quarter-final opponents from Pool C will be either Wales or Aus
“Either South Africa, Ireland or Scotland are destined for an early exit in Pool B”
tralia – although Fiji cannot be overlooked.
Wales have come a cropper against Fiji before, tumbling out of the 2007 tournament as a consequence of a 38-34 loss which shook Welsh rugby to the core – and although they set the record straight in Japan just over a year ago with a 29-17 win, they will be taking nothing for granted against the Pacific Islanders.
The signs that Fiji are getting their set-piece right means that no one, Wales and Australia included, can expect to qualify by right – especially as backs with the match-winning gifts of Semi Radradra and Joshua Tuisova will still be in their prime.
Which brings us back to the prospects of Scotland and Ireland in Pool B, and their chances of ambushing the Springboks, and bringing their world champion reign to a halt.
The South African Union has probably not done its international players a favour by not engaging in any Test rugby over the past year, with the prospect of their return to elite action having to wait until the 2021 Lions tour – which will be 20 months after they lifted the Webb Ellis trophy in Yokohama.
South African rugby has great intrinsic strength-in-depth, but while teams like the Irish and Scots have been rebuilding, any repairs that the Springboks needed to make have been put on hold. It is possible that the ‘bomb squad’ powerhouse tactical approach by coach Rassie Erasmus that played such an important part in their victory over England in the 2019 final could work again, but this time the Irish and Scots – and the rest – have been forewarned.
It is also possible that before the 2023 World Cup changes to the substitute law could defuse the bomb squad in any case. However, any temptation to write South Africa out of the script would not just be premature, but very unwise given their World Cup record.
In reality, it took Erasmus only two years to assemble the team that won in 2019, and it was the same with Jake White when the Springboks won the last World Cup staged in France in 2007, so the precedent is there.
There is also a precedent for there being very few changes when it comes to who is involved in the knock-out stages of World Cups. In 2023 it is hard to look past New Zealand, France, South Africa, Ireland, Australia, Wales, England and Argentina.
However, it comes with the proviso that if Japan can find enough powerful forwards to unleash their backs against elite opponents, or if Fiji find the discipline and set-piece focus to spring the big breakthrough they have threatened since giving South Africa a scare in 2007, the old order could be ruptured.
If there are two changes required urgently it is a draw made a year before World Cups, and the arrival of new nations, rather than them being forever on the horizon. Both have been too long coming.