20 June 1987: date of the final of the first edition of the history of the Rugby World Cup. Location: Eden Park, Auckland, New Zealand. Teams in the field: the All Blacks and Les Bleus. New Zealand versus France. Final score: 29-9 for the hosts.
Exactly 24 years and 4 months later, 23 October 2011, history repeats itself: same stadium, same teams on the pitch, same stake. The title of world champion, which has eluded both teams ever since. In this period of almost a generation, in fact, this final had never been repeated, even if both Blacks and Les Bleus had also had other occasions.
One each, to be precise: the all blacks in 1995 in South Africa, defeated by the hosts to the delight of Nelson Mandela. THE transalpine cockerels instead in the following edition, in 1999, held in England, where, however, they were outclassed by Australia.
The two teams, however, that yes, they met up against each other again. How can we forget, for example, the 1999 semifinal, where the French surprisingly eliminated New Zealand led by the phenomenon Lomu, repeating the exploit 8 years later in the 2007 edition in the quarterfinals. Defeats that left the All Blacks, favorites of both editions, in bewilderment (but in which edition did this legendary team not start?).
Defeats only partially avenged in this edition's group match, which last September 24, the kiwis took home with a score of 37-17. Same difference as the victorious final of the first edition: 20 points.
Will it be a signal? The hosts hope that there are no twos without threes, even if they would be satisfied with just one point difference in order to embrace the trophy which would be theirs by tradition and talent and which has been missing for too long in the parts of Auckland. Smack even more difficult to digest if we consider that the hated neighbors of Australia, meanwhile, have waved it in his face twice (91 and 99).
But for their part even the transalpines can wish for the rule of two without three. In fact, they have already shown twice that if there is one team that can hurt New Zealand, it is theirs.
This time, however, it seems that New Zealand has no intention of missing yet another appointment. There will be an entire nation chanting the haka when it's 21pm on Sunday (10am in Italy). And this time no one will accept that the haka becomes harakiri.
But beyond the technical prediction, which necessarily says New Zealand, let's see how the two teams get to play this final (Sunday, 10am in Italy, Eden Park in Auckland).
NEW ZEALAND
Because yes:
-The field factor, which could prove to be a double-edged sword, has so far dragged the blacks to the final, bringing more energy and enthusiasm than pressure. And this year there is one more element to complete the player-audience symbiosis: the Christchurch earthquake is an opportunity to dedicate victory to the victims and consolidate the pride of an entire population.
-La victory in the group chased away the nightmares of 2007, when huge favorites were defeated by France in the quarterfinals. Now the freshest memory of Chabal and his companions is that of an easy victory not less than a month ago.
Why not:
– The absence of the leader Carter and other big names (Muliaina, Sivivatu and Rokocoko) and the consequent fallback on many (too many?) young players could weigh in the management of the key moments of the match. The very young Aaron Cruden (22 years old, only 6 caps) has to replace the talisman Carter (All Blacks never defeated with him on the field in the world cup) in the very delicate opening role: so far he has managed fairly well, but he certainly isn't a warranty.
FRANCE
Because yes:
- The “having nothing to lose” quintessential: on the other side of the planet, against an entire nation that can't wait to celebrate the coveted triumph and a team that already outclassed you a month ago. Need anything else? The only hope remains to play it openly, without the obligation of the result.
Why not:
- The tensions between the senators in the locker room and coach Lievremont, which characterized the initial group stage, seem to have subsided, but are always ready to resurface. The last hint of controversy, a few days ago when the coach defined his "sales gosses", i.e. "bad boys". According to the transalpine press, a simple way to load them, but some of those directly involved would seem not to have liked the epithet too much.
- Results and cabal: France, objectively speaking, has struggled too much in these World Cups, never proving to be convincing. From the clamorous (albeit irrelevant) defeat against Tonga, to the lucky semi-final against Wales, which with one man down for an hour would have even deserved to win. But even the single defeat against New Zealand in the second match is enough to condemn Les Bleus: in fact, in the history of the World Cup, no team has ever won having lost even a single match, however irrelevant that was. All the winners have always made a clear path. Like the All Blacks this year…
