France better than the Springboks ‘by an absolute country mile’ as Mike Tindall talks up England’s chances

The hosts’ chances of claiming the Webb Ellis Cup were ended on Sunday as the defending champions went away with a narrow victory.

Jacques Nienaber’s men edged to a 29-28 triumph to set up a clash with England in the last-four of the World Cup.

The Red Rose overcame Fiji 30-24 to secure their passage into the next round, but they will be underdogs for this weekend’s encounter.

Tindall very much wanted them to take on Les Bleus in the semi-finals as the former centre insisted that the Boks produced a smash-and-grab display.

More emotional over France loss

“I was more emotional about that game than the English game. I just so wanted France to get where they deserve to be,” he said on The Good, The Bad and The Rugby podcast.

“They deserved to win that game; they were the better team by an absolute country mile.

“South Africa missed 43 tackles, they had to make 153, they lost on every stat across the board, but they had three snapshots from box-kicks not dealt with properly.

“They didn’t create anything, yet that is what South Africa do in World Cups. If you go back to 2019, I said: ‘It would be a disgrace if South Africa won the World Cup,’ and they won it.

“If you go through everything, France had more metres, defenders beaten – France beat 43 compared to 12 – and clean breaks.

“They should have won that game. That first 20 minutes was breathless, and it could have been 14-0, but suddenly it’s 7-7.”

Most people are writing off England heading into the semi-final with South Africa, but Tindall believes that anything can happen in one-off games.

“The biggest factor in this is that you’re now in semi-final rugby, and what that does for the pressure levels,” he said.

“It’s knockout rugby; it’s the only time you can believe because you have to. It’s not like playing an autumn series.

“There’s only one game, it’s 80 minutes, and it only takes a few decisions (to go your way).

“They (England) will go a bit siege mentality, but it comes down to their intent. South Africa had their one game (in 2019), why can’t we have our one game in this semi-final?”

James Haskell in agreement

Fellow English pundit James Haskell, who was also on the podcast, agreed with Tindall over the Springboks’ run to the title in 2019.

“That’s true, actually. That’s all they did. They didn’t play any decent rugby until they got to that last game,” Haskell said.

“I think it’s very disrespectful to this England side not to give them a chance. I think there are some unbelievable players, some fantastic coaches, some guys who work very hard and, actually, they’ve got on with their business.

“We’re in a semi-final; what has gone on before is irrelevant.”

Haskell, however, was far kinder about the Springboks’ qualities, praising their resilience and never-say-die attitude.

“I think you’ve just got to give South Africa credit,” he added. “They play a certain brand of rugby and are just ruthless at it.

“We’ve tried to write them off a little bit at times, but you cannot ever do that. I won’t be surprised if they go on and win the bloody thing.”

England went into the final in 2019 sure to win the WC final after they beat the AB's in the semi and SA struggled against Wales in the other semi.   - and England went on to loose by a country mile.     I am not sure it won't happen again.     This tome they struggled to beat Fiji in the quarterfinal.    Am not all that happy about elements in the SA team to be announced and about the absence of players like Marx - but I do not think that England has the team to beat the AB's

Why was Tindall unhappy about the fact that SA beat France -is another issue.  They should under the circumstances be happy that they are in a way true - but England would not have beaten France in the semi anyway.

Talk is cheap - but money buys the whiskey.  I think the English knows they are up against Erasmus and that is a major problem for them..   A while ago the story was that they wanted to buy Erasmus for any money they could get to be the England coach to replace Jones - 

If the Springboks defend their title and win the trophy again that price could be a neat 10 million pounds a year.   .      .          .    

France dominated, but they had no plan to break the Bok defence beyond the little kicks over the top which they stopped doing after the first quarter. Just kept throwing isolated runners at us, kept being turned over, kept finding themselves 20 yards back from where they were seconds ago after throwing yet another frantic wayward pass or offload. You can have all the stats you want in your favour - if you can't score enough points, you're not going to win. 43 defenders beaten and you don't get enough points to win? That's not the ref's fault, as most of France wants to pretend this loss is.

Matfield himself said yesterday that the French played all the rugby for 60 minutes and were better than the Boks.

I agree.

It was determination that won us that game. The French were prepared but were unlucky on the day.

Any other day I would expect us to lose that match. The stats kinda say it all.

Now before anyone says I'm anti-Bok...I'm not. I'm just saying what I saw and what the stats say.

I agree with that, they played all the rugby and they also beat themselves in the process. No tries in the last 50 minutes - 10 of those against 14 players. They wasted all that possession on a totally ineffective helter skelter style of rugby which they never snapped out of. Plenty of passes, plenty of missed tackles for the opposition, but no one got over the tryline. You're doing something wrong. You don't have structures to support your breakouts, you don't play to your support so you get turned over or make an error every time just as you get going.

Rassie smarts won the day for us. 

Time to deep fry the uppity poms! 

Let's just keep in mind that we won by 1 point. France fluffed some chances that they could easily have capitalised upon.

When margins are that fine one can't really fault them.

They were out on their feet in the last 10 minutes and because of that we're pretending that they had no game plan.

They had a gameplan, a very good one, and it sliced us open many times.

Of the two sides, the Boks sniped and managed to land all our shots. That one aspect of this game is an anomaly as it is. We never play that accurately or convert chances into points at that ratio...like ever.

My feeling is that a lot went right for us and a lot went wrong for France.

I've yet to see or hear evidence to the contrary.

The dink to the corner that Cheslin just managed to bundle into touch, Eben's slap down, the numerous breaks were only a last gasp tackle saved us.

It's very unfair to say France didn't really have a plan or execute it. They made a ridiculous amount of chances and scored very dominant tries against us too.

The Gods favoured the Boks in that game.

It's very unfair to say France didn't really have a plan or execute it

100% They dominated the game and it's only the individual brilliance of the Boks and a touch of Houdini which wrestled a 1 point win.

We were denied a 7 pointer by O'Keefe. We dominated the last 35 minutes.

To talk about the 1 point win when we should have well well ahead is absurd. 

All the French apologists should move to France. Just march into the country as all the lslamists are doing. Learn the anthem and how to speak frog. Good luck to you a. Hahahahaha.

Not only do we have wee ab apologists here but now French apologists.  Thankfully the Welsh are kaput otherwise rootwit would be his usual Welsh  supporting sellout.

The only stat that counts is the scoreboard. We know it, you can beat your opponent in every part of the play, but you don't score more points, that is it. Take your chances. 

Remember when the boks had the All Blacks on their goal line for 10 min, and we couldn't break their defence. We were the better team, but we lost. 

So you can play for 79 min, but still lose

The French were better than us in QF just like we were better than them on the EOYT but lost just as we were better than Ireland on the EOYT and group game and lost

It happens

We don’t all think that way, Beeno ! I’m not uppity 

France were the better team. The Boks were just better at converting their limited oppertunities into points

How can you say the boks don’t know how to play. Those cross field kicks were specifically planned for that. So we had two tries from poor catching. Then, we also put a lot on our defence, yes, we miss tackles, but the guys also scramble and never give up which is part of the defensive system, to put pressure on the ball carrier. Du Pont pressured by Etzebeth, ball rolls, gets knocked on but the forward. Picked up by Steph, pins his man first, then beautifully finds Kriel who runs into space, drawing the outside backs. Puts a brilliant grubbed through where Kolbe runs onto it. How is that not brilliant play?!!!

Then, we get a scrum penalty in our own half, but instead of taking the penalty, we have a great break out from our 5 meter line, ball goes to dud. That perfectly grubbed the ball close to the goal line. Du pont is the only player and concedes a penalty. We then don’t scrum, but use smart play to creat pods and draw in the entire French pack to get Eben I space to run over 4 French players. 

Rassie knew that teams have figured us out. So they loaded their team with heavies to compete with us. Only, this time we pick a more mobile pack and we move their heavies around that can’t keep up with the pace. Rassie even said their forwards like to camp in the middle of the pitch. So kudos to Rassie on that one, 

Both NZ and SA backed their defence. Ireland had 30 phases and could not break the all blacks defence. Both teams know how to strike rather tossing the ball around. Just these dumb heads are former players that don’t get it and not coaches or tacticians 

That's more like it KC!...we played a smart and calculated match.

KC

A correction...

The Cheslin try was started by DDA picking up the ball and quickly giving it to Steph.

Seriously….we played a smart and calculated match to make 100 less metres, less than half the clean breaks and defenders beaten. That was the plan?

The truth is we were frantically hanging on by our fingernails all game. The French even outmauled us.

The game swung on 3 tactical kicks that led directly to tries. In every one of those tries there was a lucky bounce.

Let’s have a bit of honesty.

We took our limited opportunities and prevented the French from converting theirs

The same cannot be said about our game against Ireland

Agreed….we were tenacious and players made some massive individual contributions. Both games were basically  50/50 and the one we won was the one that was essential. 

The Boks tend to get up for the knockouts. For Ireland it wasn’t clear we were as committed, as we now see it didn’t really matter. I think our play reflected that.

If we meet NZ in the final both teams will be strongly motivated and that will be titanic. But with the Boks they could be half baked for England so watch the banana peal.

...worried about the piesangskil too, but I think we'll be up for it...this team knows how to close out a game...they're used to being under pressure...Rassie crafted scenarios where we had to grind things out for a win...

...worried about the piesangskil too, but I think we'll be up for it...this team knows how to close out a game...they're used to being under pressure...Rassie crafted scenarios where we had to grind things out for a win...good preparation...belief...

Yeah when you look at Eben he has been cruising up till that French game and then bang he hit them with a huge contribution

Am also worried that we might think England are just a formality but I’m counting on Rassie and the experienced boys to know better

Both semis are banana skin games for the Boks and ABs. 2019 is a stark reminder for the ABs on how it can all go to custard in the blink of an eye. Although they say how they’re fully aware of the danger, subconsciously both teams will struggle to attain the heights of the massive efforts required in the QFinal classics.

Yeah which in a way could merit some changes that would not weaken the side

Like Moodie on the wing for Arendse

Am at 13 for Kriel

Esterhuizen at 12 for DA

Pollard at 10 for Libbok

Williams at 9 for Reinach

Ox for Kitshoff

RG for Mostert

Wiese for Vermeulen

Kwagga for Siya

Both semis are banana skin games for the Boks and ABs. 2019 is a stark reminder for the ABs on how it can all go to custard in the blink of an eye. Although they say how they’re fully aware of the danger, subconsciously both teams will struggle to attain the heights of the massive efforts required in the QFinal classics.

True. It's not just about winning it's also about how much is in the tank for the final. Should England lift as we know they can I shudder to think how the Boks will find the energy to play a demanding 80 minutes against a very different AB side whom they beat in a friendly.

 BBC: Rugby World Cup 2023: Are South Africa even better than 2019 world champions?

The Boks have played less minutes per man than most other sides thanks to Rassie's clever rotation policy.

Nothing like a few hard physical tests to get our warriors ready. The Boks are now used to intensity. 

England will face a 80 minute effort. 

We ha e no injuries a wording to Nienaber. The guys trained on the Monday after test. 

I agree anything can happen in a semi final. However once again the Boks are the likely winners.

I see the faint hearted are busy talking down the Boks and contemplating defeat and finding reasons why the Boks will lose before the test is even played. Bwahahahahahaha.