England learned a painful lesson in World Cup defeat — it felt all too familiar

England's scrum worked well during the first hour of the World Cup semi-final against South Africa. When it failed, their Hopes plummeted Photo: Getty Images/David Ramos

England's one-point loss to South Africa could be any sporting cliché. «You have to play the full 80 minutes», «winners find a way to win» and «look at the scoreboard» are all valid comments, but they don't fully reflect how close England came to undoing a tough previous game. compare favorites.

In conditions that were much more difficult than they might have appeared to television viewers, England produced a physically outstanding and controlled performance that, for three quarters of the game, allowed them to dominate the Springboks in a way that most fans, including myself, would not have expected. Not only were their set-pieces more solid, they were much better at dealing with aerial exchanges, with Freddie Steward fielding everything that was thrown his way and their hand-kicks being superior to both midfielders.

There was also an energetic contribution from the England back line which allowed them to decisively win the battle for breakthrough, which in turn allowed Owen Farrell to do what he does best and get England into the right areas of the pitch.

< p>Farrell's management of the game gave England the lead and his superb second-half goal put them in what could, and perhaps should have, been a winning position. It's easy to suggest solutions after the fact or blame referee decisions, but thanks to the perfect 20:20 hindsight you can trace England's demise to specific moments, one of which had an air of inevitability dating back to their defeat by the same opponents four years ago in the 2019 World Cup final.

It may not be so common as to warrant a cliché, but there is nonetheless an apt saying that immediately made the rounds on Saturday night: no fight, no win. The point is that vulnerability in a fight leads to disproportionate problems for the team in trouble. In another standard rugby situation, the lineout, a loss can have serious consequences because you lose the ball, but it does not, as in the case of a scrum, invariably, and now almost automatically, result in you conceding penalties and therefore points. /p>

The respective contributions of both teams' substitutes had a direct impact on the final result, but it was the contributions of reserves Ox Nche and Vincent Koch against Ellis Genge and Kyle Sinclair that had the biggest impact. For 60 minutes, England's excellent form was reinforced by a solid scrum. It was 58 minutes longer than the 2019 final, when England were in trouble almost from the first whistle, but once that consistency disappeared there must have been a growing sense of dread among seasoned England fans and the same strange thought: » We've been here before.»

Ironically, the moment England began to decline came at a time when they had one of the best attacking positions in the game. The scrum entry they received around the 60th minute, just eight meters from South Africa's line, was their chance to put the game out of sight. As it happened, England hooker Jamie George was lifted and England were fined, and from that point on England never regained their previous parity.

Not only did this relieve that pressure point, but it set off a series of events that resulted in penalties that allowed the Springboks to fire into England's right corner. This created a lineout from which they scored their only try of the game, and ultimately the final penalty that won the game for South Africa was for the same reason.

You can and people will argue about whether the appropriate penalties in the scrum were correct. Although George was forced to his feet, England actually took the lead from the encounter. The final scrum saw both packs turn and it was not undeniably clear that both sides of the Springbok scrum were moving forward in parallel, which is technically necessary for a penalty. All of this only highlights the difficulties that referees face in this area of ​​the game. The rugby cliché here is that it is the picture you give the referee of what is happening in the scrum that will make the difference, regardless of whether what he sees is causation rather than mere correlation.

I don't think so. I think you can argue that the decisions made against England were wrong, given that the picture of previous stability was replaced by a picture of vulnerability in not one, but four encounters in a row. You could say that England should not have changed their props, but there is no guarantee that this would have prevented what happened, and if it didn't it would lead to criticism that it is obvious that fresh South African props will always have to get the better of England's tiresome starting props.

Let's end with perhaps the greatest of all clichés: «sport can be cruel» but that is one of its greatest qualities.