Part 4 in a 10 Part Series celebrating the upsets and classic matches at Rugby World Cups.

This instalment: 1999 – back in Britain (the all you closet French supporters have been waiting for …)

As previously, I wrote this mostly from memory so feel free to point out the factual inaccuracies.

1999
Major
Samoa 38  v Wales 31
For the second time in two Europe based tournaments Manu Samoa upset the Welsh at home.  The win was enough to propel them into the knock-out stages for the third time is as many tournaments.  The finished pool play on two wins – the same as both Argentina and Wales – allowing all three to advance, Wales directly to the QFs and Argentina and Samoa to the strange repecharge system in place in this tournament.

I stayed up all night to watch this, and several other top games the same night, – and I recall being glad I did as it was an enjoyable game of footy – I just can’t tell you anything about it.

Argentina 28 v Ireland 24
The weirdness of the draw – the IRB had decided that 20 teams in five pools was an efficient means of trying to find 8 quarter finalists – created the need for “Quarter Final Play-offs” or repecharges. 

Ireland – as the traditional IRB member country were expect to progress from this game.

Actually I can’t provide any more information on this game than the Samoa v Wales game – but this time because it was on during work hours and there was no radio commentary (except for he final few minutes when the RadioSport morning jock of the day, the one with the Irish surname, was watching tele and relaying it to us i.e., cheering for the paddies).

I definitely recall being rapt with the result, especially as another of the developing nations had made the Quarter Finals, in this case on their fourth attempt.

France 43 v New Zealand 31
It’s strange.  I have only blank where the memory of this game should be.

OK not entirely true – I have bitterness and loathing, sadness and anger.  It was an interesting contrast in emotions from the loss in the 1995 final – that was sadness and disbelief and pride in a team and organisation that did everything they could to win the cup, and played a magnificent brand of rugby along the way, only to be pipped by an even more magnificent effort (regardless of any questions of ill-health).  This result made me and many others angry – which, as much as I was a fan of John Hart, can be traced back to how the coach ran this campaign, or at least the perception thereof.

This was probably the biggest upset in the history of Rugby World Cups – but even a cursory review of the lead-in to this game indicates that observers should have seen it coming.

Much has been made of the NZ TAB’s odds on France ($8 in a two horse race!), and several New Zealand City Council’s fighting over the hosting of a victory parade.  As with most good legends there’s an element of truth and more than a smidge of “misinterpretation” – the latter usually in a degree that suits the storyteller’s own purposes. (France was a little over the odds on the NZ TAB as, being All Blacks fans, most of the money that was bet was placed on NZ.  And as for the parades if perchance the ABs did take away the silverware – actually goldware – there would be not time to organise celebrations after the fact – prudent planning “just in-case”.)

However it suited (and suits) those some were are not fans for New Zealand to claim it was/is hubris (I think that’s the right word – i.e., arrogance coming a gutser).

There were several remarkable aspects to this match.  Firstly that New Zealand were such overwhelming favourites in the first place.  The All Blacks were coming off their worst year in history, they had not fully recovered from the five losses on the trot in 1998 – and were still just displaying hints of the fragility that resulted.

Despite an improved ’99 Tri-Nations they failed to regain the Bledisloe in the infamous “Ambush at Homebush”.  New Zealand’s largest loss in a test match in their last hit-out before the tournament.

Coach John Hart’s selections were an issue.  Hart deserves the highest praise for revolutionising the game (along with Grizz Wyllie) in the 1980s.  He was looking for a similar quantum improvement come 1999.  It appears that he either read the trends wrong or did not have the talent available to play the pattern he wanted – or both – as the new generation of All Blacks re-built following the attrition from the successful mid-90s team was out-muscled far too often.  Hart was looking for mobility – while the world was moving to muscle – and the New Zealand public were vocal in questioning Hart’s policies. 

On top of that the backlines were reshuffled – and players did not look comfortable in their new positions: Christian Cullen, probably the best ever All Black fullback, was moved into centre; Jeff Wilson, the classy right winger was moved to fullback and the backline stuttered when the French amped up the pressure in the second half. 

Also the loose forwards lacked muscle.  Taine Randall – gallant as captain but lacking the command and mana of his predecessors – at number 8 brought effective defense and support play but was too much like Reuben Thorne – his back-row companion at blindside.  Too much glue, not enough power (more about glue in 2003).

According to the New Zealand Rugby Museum website France came into the game after coming last in the 5 Nations (I think it was still 5 in 1999?).

Also remarkable was that the All Blacks were leading by 14 points into the second half of this game.  Jonah Lomu, who greatest performances included both his RWC semi-final appearances, scored amazing tries on either side of half-time, eclipsing the early French try.

Then the French flicked the switch into “good France” mode.  Two drop-goals in quick time by Christophe Lamaison immediately following Lomu’s second try rocked the All Blacks confidence which had been badly bruised by 1998 and although still leading they were shaken, and the French could smell blood.  They pounced. 

They bullied and harried and forced All Black mistakes – and suddenly were in front capitalising on All Black mistakes created by their pressure.

The result was (rightly) celebrated throughout the rugby world – everybody loves an underdog – except in two poxy islands in the South Pacific, where anger at the selections and apparent aloofness and corporate speak of the coach (Did they have something to learn – wait for AllBlackCoach Release.2003 …)

In the lessons learned file it took at least one more Cup until the newly appointed coach would realize that the fans are actually on the same side, and would work hard to keep them there.  In that way should the unthinkable happen and the All Blacks not win later this year it is unlikely that the bitterness of 1999 & 2003 will be repeated.

As for the French, well the final was a bridge too far.  Like in 1987 some suggested that they had “played their final the week before”.  This is disrespectful to both the French and the Wallabies who went on to win their second “Bill”.  Although they could not reproduce the same form in the final nobody could deny they were unstoppable in that second half at Twickenham.