Bad blood helps Wallabies come good

13 April 2012

The series decider at Stadium Australia will be about more than two teams of professional rugby players going at each other for 80 minutes.

It is about a collision of hemispheres - north v south - a confrontation on a philosophical, as well as a physical, level. This series, when it all boils down, is about legitimacy.

If the Lions can beat the Wallabies, as they did in 1989, it will be embraced from Twickenham to Murrayfield, from Lansdowne Road to Cardiff as proof that Australia are not the world leaders of the game, regardless of what the Bledisloe Cup, the Tri-Nations title and, of course, a shiny William Webb Ellis trophy might suggest.

It will also show that the game can still prosper in the northern hemisphere under an unwieldy administrative umbrella that the Australian Rugby Union has so consistently criticised.

If you doubt the existence of this cross- equator bad blood, consider what whispered barbs followed Australia's win at the 1999 World Cup.

Northern hemisphere officials referred to the tournament as the Creatine Cup, claiming the only reason the Wallabies won was because they bulked up on a wonder supplement which, incidentally, was not on any banned list.

They also panned the Wallabies for playing boring rugby. There was justification to the second claim. Defence won the Australians the tournament but were they anywhere near as tedious as the celebrated England side which reached the 1991 World Cup Final? Sitting in peak hour traffic was more entertaining.

Ever since, the only northern hemisphere side to win anything of real significance is the Lions. England have a champion side with a super record at home. On foreign soil, they are not always so impressive.

But the 1997 Lions went to South Africa and beat the Springboks 2-1. It has left the 2001 Lions with a legacy to carry. They are now charged with putting the colonials in their place.

Can they do it? It is like asking an Australian: 'Can Tim Henman win Wimbledon? ' He will snigger and suggest it is possible, provided there are no Aussies, no Goran Ivanisevic and no Pete Sampras in the field.

The Lions do have a chance, unlike England in the Ashes series, where calling for reinforcements from Scotland, Wales and Ireland would make not a jot of difference.

But the Lions have, I suspect, had their chance. When the Wallabies were under the cosh in the first half of the second Test, the tourists should have mounted a match- deciding score against them.

Instead, John Eales and his men went to the break just five points adrift. The Lions had wasted several opportunities - Dafydd James was more Daffy Duck as he butchered a certain try by failing to offload to his support. It was all the Wallabies needed. Joe Roff, the heavyweight wing, came out and delivered the knockout punches within seven minutes of the restart. Confidence in the Australian camp has since soared, despite the absence of playmaker Stephen Larkham and lock David Giffin. Elton Flatley, the fly half replacement, is a feisty character who will toughen the defence if limit the attacking options. Justin Harrison, in for Giffin, adds aggression and an even more competitive edge at the line-out.

The scrum is once again solid, after a first Test imitation of jelly, and, with the tight five to lay the platform, the back row runners in Toutai Kefu and Owen Finegan will improve even further on their efforts in Melbourne.

The Lions, come the finish, could be mauled. If they are, this time they could have few complaints.

MORE ABOUT

Ashes Series

Bad blood helps Wallabies come good

Read More