I am watching England being slowly ground into humiliation by an astounding Argentinian team On the second day of the biggest contest of the world’s most important sport. It’s a war of attrition out there but the Argentinians are proving once again that the future of sport lies in the southern hemisphere. Sadly I am neither in the south nor the east for the first two weeks of this titanic struggle: I am in scungy, embittered London for a (great!) course on mathematical modeling of disease[1]. This means I have to watch the games in the morning and will miss most, but I can at least enjoy this weekend’s.
I love watching rugby. It’s the perfect synthesis of physical contest, teamwork, bravery and skill, and it happens at a pace and intensity that other contact ball sports lack. I love also the special tactics that derive from the specialization of the players when they are forced to mix it up in a chaotic melee. It also lacks the posturing and false machismo of soccer, and the nationalism of rugby doesn’t come with the nasty violence or racism of that sport. It’s culturally a million miles away from the other British code… It’s the best side of sport.
In today’s other game in a remarkable upset, Japan stood up to France right up to the last 10 minutes, even looking like they might win at one point, until their fitness gave out and les bleus marched home. Fans all around the world were hoping for a miracle there, but it didn’t come. However, I have hopes that this time around they will be able to get some victories. In 2007 they got their first ever points in a cup; this time they can hope for victories.
And of course I am hoping for a NZ victory, but they are famous for choking at the last. Can they do it in their home country in 2011? And if they can’t should Australia annex them?
—
fn1: one of my fellow students is the Australian Nobel laureate Barry Marshall, who identified the cause of stomach ulcers[2]
Fn2: and thus proved that the future of science is also in the southern hemisphere
Compromise and Conceit 
September 10, 2011 at 10:37 pm
Er… Too bad England won, eh?
September 10, 2011 at 10:58 pm
I wrote that when Argentina were 9-6 up and squandering a penalty every 3 minutes. For England to win 13-9 and be desperately defending in the 79th minute is a humiliation, have no doubt about it – just as France having to wait for Japan to fall to fatigue in order to get their bonus point is also an embarrassment. unfortunately for Argentina this near-miss cost them dear in men and materiel, as the generals would say. Still, on the back of this performance Scotland should be worried.
Things are just going to go up from here for Argentina. They join the Tri-nations next year, I think, so their players are going to be drilled annually against the best three teams. This time around they won’t get past the quarter finals (they will most likely face new Zealand) but I expect they will be even stronger in 4 years time. And they were really good today – this was a loss that really was just bad luck, and England need to sort themselves out if they want to get to the end!
(I should add that I really like English rugby at the moment, and hope they don’t go out as soon as today’s performance implies they ought to)
September 11, 2011 at 3:34 am
I’m from the AFL part of Australia, but I’m watching bits of it- Canadian television is covering the tournament properly. It should be noted that rugby is a small but growing part of the Canadian sporting landscape, and they have admirable ambitions in this field.
If the IRB are serious about expanding the game, investing some money in Canada might produce some encouraging results.
September 11, 2011 at 9:46 pm
Why is it a humiliation to have to grind out a win against the team who finished third in the last world cup? Argentina are one of the strongest teams in the world and have been for a decade now. They’re not as strong as last time around, but 13-9 is a decent result – opening games are always pretty cagey and tight (look at the other big results so far – New Zealand/Tonga, South Africa/Wales, France/Japan, Scotland/Romania, Ireland/USA; none of them were walkovers for the favourites).
History shows that early form in these tournaments doesn’t say all that much about the final result. Last time England were shit for the entire group stage but eventually went all the way through to the final, whereas Australia were awesome in the group stage but lost in the QF. It’s more important to build momentum slowly, I think.
September 13, 2011 at 6:15 am
My comment about the southern hemisphere was just shit-stirring btw. And south africa were doing their best to prove it on the weekend… But I disagree that Argentina are one of the strongest teams. They aren’t even ranked in the top 8, and I think some of their players aren’t pros.
I agree about peaking too early, one of the many reasons given for nz’s perennial failure to win. Particularly when combined with the enormous a punt of good luck required to survive all the rounds in a game as brutal as rugby. Maybe that’s the excuse south africa will give for struggling against wales…
September 13, 2011 at 7:29 pm
I’m not sure whether they’ll meet at an earlier stage but if it’s a possible permutation (i.e. they don’t all play each other in the QFs and SFs) I’d be willing to bet that the final will involve two teams from England, France and South Africa – just because big teams often do well after a struggling start. It helps them shift through the gears.
September 13, 2011 at 7:29 pm
By “two teams from England, France and South Africa” I mean “two out of those three”.
September 13, 2011 at 7:37 pm
I propose that putting all three on the pitch for the final could be quite interesting.
September 14, 2011 at 8:15 am
I think England and South Africa would unite in pummelling the French and then turn on each other. South Africa to win 27-13-0.