Allan Massie: Staying close for an hour is best French hope to hold off the seemingly inevitable

They have been the best international team for the last two or three years, while the French form over the last 12 months has been patchy to put it mildly. I doubt, too, if the history between the two means much, even though the “notoriously inconsistent” French have beaten New Zealand more often than England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland put together, and are the only northern hemisphere side to have defeated the All Blacks in previous World Cups.

In this tournament, New Zealand have hardly been stretched. Even when Argentina led them for much of the quarter-final, one never felt they would be ahead at the final whistle. The All Blacks simply carried too much firepower, and anyone who supposed that the loss of Dan Carter would make them much more vulnerable was catching at straws. His replacement, Aaron Cruden, played excellently against Australia.

After the pool match between to-morrow’s finalists, that great French lock and former captain Fabien Pelous said that the draw had ensured that, if France were to reach the final, they would have to play the All Blacks twice, and, he added, “we’re certainly not going to beat them twice”. By this reasoning, it was a good thing to have lost the pool match. What he said would have been true of any of the northern hemisphere countries. Actually, France started that pool game very well. The first 15 minutes were all France. Then the All Blacks cut loose, and there it was. Perhaps some of the French players were thinking like Pelous?

The French should take some encouragement from Argentina’s performance in the quarter-final. Their front five are surely as good as the Argentine one and their back row is better, and they will have noted that, for most of the first hour, the Argentine pack was either on top or at least achieved parity. If France can keep the game close for an hour, they must have a chance, because pressure will mount on the Blacks. To do this, their defence has to be watertight as it wasn’t in the pool game.

Whatever the result, this match marks the end of Marc Lievremont’s merry and often chaotic reign as French coach. Journalists will have to look elsewhere for the quotable quote. No matter how ill-judged, even loopy, some of his remarks have been, at least he never fell into the dreary professional football-style speak of most coaches. Cliche-free speech is rare and welcome. Last week I heard Jonny Wilkinson being interviewed after he had come on as a substitute for Toulon, and was impressed to find that he can utter the same cliches in two languages.

Not everything Lievremont has done has been as crazy as his press conferences. Moving Morgan Parra to ten may have been an inspired stroke, and not only because it enabled him to get Parra and Dimitri Yachvili on the field at the same time. Parra’s tackling in the fly-half position contributed to the victory over Wales; he not only made 14 tackles in the match, but five or six times brought Jamie Roberts down with classic low tackles before he had got over the gain line, as he had regularly done to great effect against Ireland. Stopping Roberts was probably the difference for France between victory and defeat.

There is, of course, one other coach who often speaks unguardedly: Warren Gatland. The latest example was his admission this week that, after Sam Warburton’s red card, they had discussed having a prop feign injury so that, with Adam Jones already off the field, the referee would have to go to uncontested scrums.

It was extraordinary that Gatland should admit to this discussion, even more extraordinary that he should claim credit for having turned the idea down as being against the spirit of the game, especially in a World Cup semi-final. Most people would think it against the spirit of the game even to consider the idea for a moment.

In effect Gatland was saying, we decided not to cheat because cheating is against the spirit of the game, especially in a World Cup semi-final. Since they decided against cheating, there seems no reason for the IRB to do more than issue a strong statement deploring the discussion that seems to have taken place. On the other hand, the RFU and English Premier Rugby might just be tempted to look back at Wasps’ matches when Gatland and his assistant in the Welsh team, Shaun Edwards, were in charge of the club, and see if any of these matches ended with uncontested scrums because Wasps had run out of front-row players.

Still, let’s hope tomorrow’s final is free of controversy and that it is a cracking game of rugby. It might be too optimistic to hope for anything more than a hard close match. Cup finals rarely offer scintillating rugby. But you never know.

Meanwhile, Australia’s defeat of Wales – close though the final score was – merely emphasises that the form book, like almost everything else, points to a New Zealand victory and the end of 20 years of pain