Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Remembering the dirty tactics that undermined the flair of the France 1999 RWC side

(Photo by Shaun Botterill/Allsport)

While there is an adage that no one remembers who came in second, France made a decent stab of proving the saying wrong in the 1999 World Cup final. Les Bleus produced a performance for the ages in the semi-final against the All Blacks the week before.

ADVERTISEMENT

Their spellbinding display of irrepressible flair shocked the tournament favourites at Twickenham, but it was a game that was still marred by controversy with accusations emerging from the New Zealand camp of biting, gouging, head-butting and even testicle-grabbing. 

To this day, the build-up to any contest between the two – particularly at a World Cup – will see the words ‘filth’ and ‘violence’ resurface.

Video Spacer

Chart-topping book author Ben Mercer guests on The Lockdown, the RugbyPass pandemic interview series

Video Spacer

Chart-topping book author Ben Mercer guests on The Lockdown, the RugbyPass pandemic interview series

The benefit for Australia, who were waiting for France in the final 21 years ago, was that they were well prepared for such underhanded tactics that may have distracted the All Blacks, which saw them squander a 14-point lead. 

Following a tip-off from their traditionally bitter rivals, Australia coach Rod Macqueen and captain John Eales devised a plan to walk off the field if France resorted to such tactics again at the Millennium Stadium. 

It may have been a hollow threat, but it was one that put referee Andre Watson on alert. Unsurprisingly, the Wallabies were met by a barrage of devious tactics by their opponents. 

Hooker Mike Foley, prop Richard Harry and scrum-half George Gregan all claimed that they were gouged and despite Watson’s lectures to French captain Raphael Ibanez, the warning fell on deaf ears.  

ADVERTISEMENT

Looking back on the victory 20 years later in the build-up to the 2019 RWC, RUGBY.com.au detailed what was heard said on Watson’s microphone by Eales, who himself suffered a damaged cornea. 

“I fear for my team’s safety” was one complaint to the South African official, the captain warning “if this continues, we will leave the field – we will just leave the field”.

France’s unswerving commitment to play in such a way was ultimately their undoing though as they conceded 16 penalties in total. Matt Burke kicked 21 points simply though penalties. 

Australia were no saints either in this match, Watson brandished a yellow card to Eales for recklessly entering a ruck. But as is so often the case in rugby (albeit maybe not in the previous weekend’s semi-final), the most ill-disciplined side lost. 

ADVERTISEMENT

After the victory, the accusations of gouging were raised by the BBC. Eales responded: “The French are such a good side, they don’t need to play like that.” It was a typically classy response, particularly in light of how the runners-up chose to behave.

Eales’ crimson right eye as he lifted the Webb Ellis Cup aloft told the story, primarily that France could not get under the skin of the Wallabies in the same way they did against Australia’s rivals across the Tasman Sea. 

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 5 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian? Does the next Wallabies coach have to be an Australian?
Search