History tells us that Gatland’s ‘warning’ is no hollow threat
Psychology must be spot on to ensure England do not join list of World Cup final fallers, writes Tom Cary in Tokyo
The tit-for-tat between Eddie Jones and Warren Gatland has provided an amusing backdrop to the build-up to Saturday’s World Cup final. But the truth is that Gatland is right. When the Wales coach noted on Sunday that teams “sometimes play their final in the semi-finals and don’t always turn up for a final”, it was a timely statement of fact. For proof, you only need to look back through the World Cup archives.
France have been serial culprits. In 1987 they beat hosts Australia in an incredible semi-final in Sydney in which the lead changed hands five times in the second half alone. Philippe Sella later called it “the greatest Test” he had ever played in. But France were unable to back it up in the final, going down 29-9 to New Zealand.
In 1995, Jonah Lomu ran in four tries as the All Blacks trounced England in Cape Town. It looked for all the world as if Sean Fitzpatrick’s team would win. But they fell flat in the final against the Springboks the following week.
France in 1999 are probably the most famous example of all; Christophe Lamaison pulling the strings as they came back from 24-10 down against the All Blacks to win 43-31. But again, they could not back it up, losing 35-12 against Australia in the final.
The list goes on. New Zealand in 2011. They won but they were unbelievably tight in the final, light years removed from the team who had beaten Australia 20-6 at the same venue the previous week. The pressure and expectation clearly weighed them down against France.
A great semi-final performance is no guarantee of a great final performance. So how do England try to make sure they peak when it matters?
Andy Lane, professor of sport psychology at the Centre for Health and Human Performance, says it is about building South Africa up to the same extent as they did New Zealand.
“I’m not in the camp, so I can’t see what the players are going
through, or assess the mood,” he said. “But it’s definitely not easy maintaining the emotional pitch which they found last weekend.
“England would have built that game up for years. They always knew they were going to face the All Blacks in the semis if things went according to plan.
“They had their response to the haka planned, they entered the game with a real emotional intensity and they managed to maintain those levels throughout. Can they get as up for South Africa, even though they are, on paper, inferior?
“I would keep reinforcing the message to England’s players that they haven’t won anything yet. South Africa are one game away from winning the World Cup and they are likely to produce their best game in the final.
“I would consider showing England’s players some of the big upsets of this World Cup or any previous World Cup, to remind them how dangerous this match is. I don’t think that’s overly negative. It’s not their negativity.
“They just need to realise that last weekend’s success is no guarantee of future success. The Springboks are still a massive threat.”
At the moment it is South Africa who are building England up. After scraping home against Wales, Rassie Erasmus’s players all queued up to sing England’s praises, saying they were sure that Jones’s men would hit the heights again in the final.
“They left some tries out there and there are still a lot of things they could be better at,” said fly-half Handre Pollard. “They could have put a few more points on the All Blacks. They were unbelievable.”
Forward Lood de Jager agreed: “England are the favourites,” he said. “If you look at it, their performance last weekend, they deserve to be favourites.”
England must beware of this flattery. They must stay motivated and they must stay hungry.
“Their goal at the start of the tournament was to win the World Cup,” Lane said. “That hasn’t changed. They have not won anything yet. They need to re-establish their goal and build South Africa up.”