Northern Edition
Select Edition
Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

RWC Final: England vs South Africa - who has the advantage?

Franco Mostert tackled by Maro Itoje during South Africa v England at Elllis Park in June. (Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images)

The England and South Africa squads are currently preparing for what it is likely to be the biggest game of their professional careers, as the two nations are set to contest the Rugby World Cup final in Yokohama on Saturday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Aside from Ben Spencer replacing the injured Willi Heinz on the bench, Eddie Jones and England are unchanged for the game, which is a rematch of the 2007 RWC final, a game that they narrowly lost. As for the Springboks and Rassie Erasmus, they welcome back Cheslin Kolbe, with the livewire wing having missed their semi-final win over Wales due to an ankle injury.

England have won all five of their games at the tournament so far, including impressively dominant victories over Australia and New Zealand in the knockout rounds, whilst South Africa, if they can derail England’s growing momentum on Saturday, will become the first team to lift the Webb Ellis Cup after having lost a game earlier in the tournament.

We have run the rule over both teams and previewed where each will have their advantages as England bid for just their second title and the Springboks attempt to join New Zealand at the head of the pack with three titles.

Set-piece

Scrum – minor South Africa advantage

Coming into the tournament, you would have certainly argued that South Africa have the edge here, although England have since found parity and even advantages against two packs as solid as Australia and New Zealand. Both teams have packed their benches with adept scrummagers and there should be no relenting in the second half. The extra ballast from the South African second rows of Eben Etzebeth, Lood de Jager and RG Snyman could provide a slight edge.

Lineout – parity

The Springboks may have the most efficient lineout in the tournament coming into the game, though they have yet to play a defensive lineout group as potent at spoiling and stealing ball as England. Maro Itoje and Courtney Lawes swarmed all over New Zealand’s lineout in the semi-final and they will fancy their chances of doing similar against South Africa. That said, Bongi Mbonambi and his array of targets have barely put a foot wrong so far.

Kicking game – minor England advantage

ADVERTISEMENT

Both teams have leaned heavily on their kicking games, with England arguably having found more joy from that approach so far. There’s not much between Faf de Klerk, Ben Youngs, Handré Pollard, George Ford and Owen Farrell in terms of individual ability kicking from hand, but England’s extra option gives them versatility. They also boast potentially the best chasing unit in the international game, between Itoje, Tom Curry, Sam Underhill and starting wings Jonny May and Anthony Watson.

Continue reading below…

Watch: Rassie Erasmus and Francois Steyn pre-RWC final press conference

Video Spacer

Attack

Ball-carriers and handling (pack) – minor England advantage

It would have been almost unthinkable to go with England in this category 12 months ago, but Jones has found new options and/or elevated the carrying game of a number of his forwards. The entire starting front row offers more in that regard than South Africa, whilst Curry and Underhill have come to prominence alongside Billy Vunipola in this area. The Springboks don’t lack for options themselves, particularly Duane Vermeulen, Pieter-Steph du Toit and de Jager, but England have their number in quantity and, arguably, quality. Well, until Malcolm Marx arrives from the bench, at the least!

Ball-carriers and handling (backs) – minor South Africa advantage

ADVERTISEMENT

This might seem counter-intuitive given that England boast Manu Tuilagi in their ranks, not to mention the incisive threat of Watson, but the Springboks are fairly loaded, too. Damian de Allende is a nightmare to defend at inside centre and is capable of creating space when there is very little to work with, whilst Kolbe’s return will have England at action stations throughout. In addition to those two, there is also de Klerk’s running game to deal with. He has gone to the boot heavily so far this tournament, but it wouldn’t be surprising to see him burst through a gap or two around the fringes come the final.

Control, discipline and tempo – moderate England advantage

This has been an area of real strength for England in the tournament. Against every opponent they have faced, they have dictated the tempo through a smart kicking game and intelligent play from Youngs, all of which is thanks to the work that has been done at the breakdown in both attack and defence. Youngs has been delivered quick and clean ball, whilst England have done a very good job of slowing their opponents’ ball, even when they keep as many players as possible on their feet and in the defensive line. The Springboks haven’t been bad in this area at all, though they haven’t delivered something as comprehensively controlled as England did against the All Blacks.

Defence

Fringe defence – slight South Africa advantage

We are being perhaps overly critical of England here, as they are not poor in this area, though it is a real area of strength for South Africa. Neither pack would be described as behemoths by modern standards, but what South Africa lose out slightly in to England in terms of mobility, they back up with physical stoutness close to the ruck in defence. England will have to be at their best to make significant gains on the pick and go or with one-out runners on Saturday.

Line-speed and decision-making – parity

From a pack perspective, you’d probably lean towards England here, with both their second rows and the flank pairing very comfortable defending in space and not sacrificing their decision-making as a result of their line-speed. As a defence, they attempt to force play back inside and they do it very well. We’ve called it parity because of the work Lukhanyo Am does at outside centre for the Springboks. His line-speed, decision-making and recovery speed – if the opposition are able to get outside of the blitz – are second to none in international rugby.

Aerial defence and positioning – slight England advantage

When we say slight, we mean it. Both Elliot Daly and Willie le Roux have been critiqued in these areas, although Daly’s efforts against Argentina were very impressive. We all know that le Roux is capable of that, too, even if his recent form has been a little flat. Kolbe and Makazole Mapimpi are no slouches in the air and Kolbe in particular plays well above his size and weight, though they are up against two of the very best wings in this facet of the game. Watson and May have been ultra-reliable for England and assuming May’s hamstring injury is fully healed, it’s hard not to give England the edge here.

Watch: Cheslin Kolbe and Damian de Allende talk to the press ahead of the final

Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT
LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 22 minutes ago
Beauden Barrett weighs in on controversial yellow card

It’s an interesting question because a normal diberate knock on is just a penalty offense, an normal infringement like any other, so that’s deemed where the was not a reasonable chance to catch the ball.


But it’s a ruling that can also be upgraded to a foul, and by association, a yellow card, when it’s it was also deliberately trying to deny the ball to another player. For instance, that is why they are just given penalties up the field, because the player has just made a bad decision (one where he had no reasonable chance) and he doesn’t really care if the pass had gone to hand for his opponents or not (he was just thinking about being a hero etc).


So the way the refs have been asked to apply the law is to basically just determine whether there was an overlap (and not to try and guess what the player was actually thinking) or not, as to whether it’s a penalty or a YC.


This is the part Barrett doesn’t like, he’s essentially saying “but I had no idea whether they were likely to score or not (whether there was an unmarked man), so how can you tell me I was deliberately trying to prevent it going to someone, it could have been a blind pass to no one”.


It’s WR trying to make it clear cut for fans and refs, if at the players expense.

But yes, also you must think it entirely possible given both were foul plays that they could both go to the bench. Much the same as we see regularly when even though the play scores a try, they have started sending the player off still.


And while I agree Narawa didn’t knock it on, I think the ball did go forward, just off the shoulder. As his hands were up in the air, above the ball, basically like a basketball hope over his right shoulder, I guess you’re right in that if it did make contact with his hands it would have had to be deflected backwards onto his shoulder etc. Looking at the replay, Le Garrec clearly lost control of the ball forward too, but because Barrett was deemed to have committed a deliberate act, that overrides the knockon from 9.


I just don’t understand how they can consider it a deliberate attempt to block a pass when he actually lost the ball forward!

44 Go to comments
H
Hellhound 2 hours ago
Bok rule-benders are changing the game. They deserve respect

You want a lot of things that will never happen. You describe rugby League. You should go and watch that then. Rugby is supposed to be competitive. It's the opposition team that should figure out how to defend and turn it into an attack on the fly. The Boks play within the rules. Everyone says that kick off should have been a penalty. The law state that from a kick off it's a scrum. It's confusing as with mauls and rucks, the player has to be behind the kicker. The same does not hold true for kick offs. That law they can change, because the same rule should apply across the board for players to be behind the kicker. It's not the first time that the infield lineout has been used, only the first time in an international match. If I remember correctly, the Barbarians used it against England in 2021 or 2022 (under correction). It's also been used in SR during the 2000’s. There is just this big hoo haw because the Boks did it. If it was another team like the Irish or England or the French or someone, it would be innovative, genius and brilliant. The dummy the AB's did where a player broke to the right, acting like he had the ball, meanwhile the scrumhalfs ran down the sideline and scored. I don't hear you cry about that. That can be seen as cynical play and there is even a case for unsportsmanlike behaviour and at a minimum a yellow card. Yet there is silence from you about that. I on the other hand thought that was a great tactic. It's also not a new invention, but an old one. You only love rugby when it suits you. I don't care what new tactics teams use, or whoever the team is that is doing it. Every new invention or tactic or play that the coaches comes up with is great for rugby. It keeps it interesting. There is no law that prevents other coaches using the same tactics or create their own. It's up to coaches to come up with defense strategies to cut that down, and even retaliate against it. The game is never boring. It keeps evolving. People keep talking about rugby and all these things is what draw new fans. They don't want boring. They want innovative and fun. They want to hear the crash of bodies. They want to see the strength of the scrums. They want to see the speed, agility and flair of the players. The amazing passes and jukes or side steps. The only reason you are so up in arms is because the Boks did it and now you want it banned. The same rhyme over and over. Matt Williams wannabe. Nah, you don't love rugby or else you would enjoy the most exciting era yet in this lovely sport. Stars in so many national teams has never been more abundant nor was there so many teams that could beat each other on any given day. Not to even mention watching an era of the most controversial but most innovative and clever coach ever. A dynasty that's to last for a very long time even after he retires. Like him or hate him, his genius is undeniable and he is recognised world wide as the best coach in most countries by fans and pundits alike, even if they don't like him. Stop the hate and rather enjoy what's to come.

39 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ ‘He never backs down from a fight’ - Jack Conan times another Lions run to perfection ‘He never backs down from a fight’ - Jack Conan times another Lions run to perfection