E-mail Article 
Print-Friendly Version 
Man of the tournament: Habana
Email Stuart Barnes
No fairy tale end for England; in fact not much of an end for the World Cup.
South Africa had such control at the line out and such confidence in their ability to close England out that any ambition was withheld for fear of giving away an interception, anything that could get England into the game.
It was almost like a football World Cup final, with Italy of old scoring early and then forsaking their flair to trust their defence. John Smit, the captain said after the match, "3-0 would have done." Short term, he is absolutely right, but long term the game missed a chance with millions and millions of new viewers tuning in and - in the cold light of day - probably tuning out.
The line out, like the scrum, is an integral part of the game but when there is so little open play (I include tight forward play as well as flashing backs) union resembles a club for the initiated. There were many uninitiated who will have watched England, admired their bravery and underdog snarl and go back to Arsenal (well if football is your game, Arsenal are surely the only act in town).
England were heroic in their determined fight back but a lack of penetration and attacking skills had to cost them in the end. Their lack of try scoring ability was always going to count against them in the end. It was to their credit they went so far but there are English issues that need resolving.
A national team which develops along structured lines is one of them and Rob Andrew can address that by giving Brian Ashton at least a two-year contract to eke out those skills that are running around beneath the surface.
Clubs
England's success would rub off on the style of the clubs and if we can maintain a more ambitious club game England will be a tough team to beat.
That is the main issue. Clubs like Bath have shown a transformation from the dour to balanced attack is possible; they are playing some smart stuff under Australian coach, Steve Meehan. It is not a matter of law but philosophy changes; it will come and not just in England.
Take away the term `World Cup' and some of the enthralling latter stage games would have been hard work to watch. But rugby is cyclical. This tournament lacked imaginative rugby from the more successful sides who concentrated on using powerful defence to create broken fields (this plan cost the All Blacks the tournament) but lessons will be learned and the game will turn.
Not pretty but passionate and superbly supported, I defy anyone to say this was not a magnificent tournament even with the lack of ambition in the latter rounds. Fiji played some sublime and winning stuff, Tonga tore at even English heart strings with their tough-touch combination. Georgia - limited in tactics - were huge in heart and then there was Argentina. They set the tone for the tournament on the first night, beating France, and on the penultimate night they thrashed them again for third place.
South Africa deserve to be champions and in Bryan Habana had a player who ignored the tyranny of defences. But Argentina broke the monopoly of the old establishment forever and for that reason are, in many ways, the team of the tournament.
Now let's take a look at your email...
UNDER THE POSTS - STUART ANSWERS YOUR EMAIL
Email Stuart Barnes
FLOOD WARNING
Stuart, I would like to congratulate you on your expert commentary during the World Cup but I have to take you to task on a comment you made during the final. I was shocked to hear you condone the unprofessional push of Toby Flood on Percy Montgomery. It was a cynical foul in a dangerous position and should in no way be condoned. It could have resulted in a very serious injury to Percy and your applauding of Toby sends out the wrong message to all our young players. Toby knew exactly what he was doing, in a very congested area of the pitch. In my opinion he was extremely lucky not to be carded for that. That aside, I do think you brought an air of professionalism to the commentary team during the World Cup and look forward to hearing more of you over the season ahead. Michael Duckfield.
STUART SAYS: Michael, Thank you for the kind remarks. As for Flood and Montgomery, had the ball stood up and remained within in goal he would have had a legitimate chance of a try. I believe the unfortunate camera position and the television replays worsened the act but the Montgomery failed to react showed nothing malicious was intended. Had I thought otherwise I would not have commented as I did.
FAILING THE FINAL FRENCH TEST
Hi Stuart, I've just watched the France - Argentina game in the company of St. Quentin rugby club (in the South of France). Well done Argentina for winning - we all applauded their handling and finishing skills - very impressive. However, the incompetence of Paul Honiss was shocking. Argentina had a game plan to slow down the French ball and to frustrate them - they succeeded very well in doing both, but only by doing it illegally. Tempers flared and there was a lot of 'afters'. If Paul Honiss had penalised and then sin-binned the Argentinians, that would probably have calmed things down. As it was, there was a return to the bad old days with the French taking the law into their own hands and Ibanez, for whom I have the greatest respect (he is wider than me!), ending up rucking a player in the face (or so it seemed at the time). It was a real shame that the penultimate game of the best World Cup was marred by this. Ben Bourdillon
STUART SAYS: Ben, Do you not think France were out-thought and fought at the breakdown? Argentina were the hungrier and smarter side and I cannot help but wonder if the ill discipline of Ibanez and his team was not symptomatic of a frustration borne out of their flawed campaign and disappointment at the loss to England.
JONNY GO?
Stuart, Well what a great World Cup and hats off to England for getting to the final. They showed they were not going to give their title away without a fight, and what a fight it was! But what now for England? What do you think England should focus on now? Obviously we can start rebuilding for the next World Cup, but what about the shorter-term goals? Are there any changes in the England coaching staff you would like to see? Best, Adam Lewson.
STUART SAYS: Adam, The coaches did a heck of a job getting this team to a World Cup final. The changes that must be made are on the pitch. I am no advocate for 15 fresh faces but a balance between achievement in the World Cup and long term vision for the future must be made. Matthew Tait's growing maturity is a starting point. I also think the overdependence on Jonny Wilkinson must be addressed. He is a magnificent match-winner in tight games but he failed to ignite the backs and an alternative ten would help rid England of their excessive dependence and, frankly, improve Wilkinson himself, who should be no more immune to rival contenders than anyone else. Some of the old guard who performed heroics should also be thanked but cast aside; ie learn from the errors of the last tournament. If Ashton stays at the helm I think the first England 6 Nations selection will be both exciting and successful.
Thanks for your mails as ever, I am taking a week's break in Rome after the World Cup and before the Heineken so I will be back the week after next.
Stuart
