Rugby World Cup: England crushed by the Springboks
“It was the mother of all anti-climaxes,” said Nik Simon in The Mail on Sunday. So much was expected of England in this World Cup final: their extraordinary victory over New Zealand, a week earlier, made them the clear favourites against South Africa. “But in truth, they never turned up.” Having “gripped the nation” en route to this match, Eddie Jones’s men were “gripped by the throat”: they didn’t lead for a single second, and lost the match 32-12. “By the time English bodies dropped to the floor at the final whistle, it was the biggest final defeat since 1999.”
We’re used to England starting matches well, said Owen Slot in The Times. Not this one.
“I cannot recall a game in which they started worse.” And it didn’t get much better after that: this was a performance of spilled balls, stray passes, lost line-outs. But with the Springboks in this kind of devastating form, no team would have stood a chance, said Gavin Mairs in The Daily Telegraph. It was one of their greatest performances. They produced “a blistering mix of forward power, which hammered away at England”, before the pace of their ball “enabled their back line to cut loose”. Almost every South Africa player outdid their opposite number, said Stephen Jones in The Sunday Times. Up front, Tendai Mtawarira, the South Africa prop known as “the Beast”, was “ferociously good”, Damian de Allende, the inside-centre, “went steaming at England’s midfield, while Willie le Roux and his wings were “glorious”. In the face of such a mighty display, all England’s “rhythm and rugby nous” seemed to disappear.
The foundation of South Africa’s win was the scrum, said Brian Moore in The Daily Telegraph. Being beaten in the scrum doesn’t just deny a team possession – “it turns simple errors, like knockons, into potential penalties”. And the Springboks made the most of it, forcing five penalties from England in scrums. Their line-out was supreme, too, which led to yet more England errors – and
“once a side struggle in the set piece, they struggle everywhere”. In short, this was a “tactical masterclass” from Rassie Erasmus, the South Africa head coach, said Ian McGeechan in The Sunday Telegraph. Thanks to “flawless planning”, his side’s defensive system “functioned perfectly”. By committing fewer men to the breakdown, he ensured that when England’s ball carriers turned infield, they faced “waiting pods of defenders”.
Erasmus has truly turned this side around, said Paul Rees in The Observer. When he took over, in 2017, South African rugby had sunk to a new low: the national team had lost eight of their 12 matches in 2016. But in just two years, Erasmus – a man with the “demeanour of a jovial landlord” – has transformed them into world champions. What a contrast with Jones, said Martin Samuel in the Daily Mail. Winning the World Cup is precisely what he was hired to do. On those terms, he has failed. As brilliant as England’s head coach may have been in the New Zealand match, he was woefully “ineffectual” in the final. He knew what to expect from the Springboks, yet did nothing to stop them; he brought on substitute after substitute, with barely any impact.
Yet it would be wrong to make too much of this defeat, said Robert Kitson in The Guardian. Few people were tipping England to win this tournament before it began, and their campaign “panned out exactly as might have been expected”: they produced spells of brilliance, but they have “a frustrating tendency to take their foot off the gas”. And this is still a young side, said Mick Cleary in The Daily Telegraph – the youngest ever to compete in a World Cup final. When the next tournament comes around, all but a few of these players will still be in the mix; the likes of Maro Itoje, Kyle Sinckler, Sam Underhill and Tom Curry will only have improved. The sun has set on this particular group’s “quest for glory”, but England’s future is “bright enough”.