Rugby: Winning formula eludes coaches

Carlos Spencer hangs his head in disbelief after the loss to Australia in the Rugby World Cup 2003. Photo / Brett Phibbs

Super 15. World Cup year. What does it all mean?

It's one of the great beard-stroking quandaries and the answer differs the further you move from the international dateline.

Newsflash: New Zealand has never won the World Cup in the same year one of the five franchises has won a Super Rugby title.

To be fair, it has not won a World Cup since the first generation of mobile phones were on the market, but why let facts get in the way?

The current All Black coaches placed so little stock on the correlation between good Super Rugby campaigns from its constituent teams that they went out of their way to make life as difficult for the New Zealand teams as possible in 2007.

Put it this way: Removing 22 of the country's best players for half the competition is hardly setting out to assist your franchises.

In the two years before the infamous rest-and-reconditioning window, the Crusaders had ruled supreme.

In 2006, they won an all-New Zealand final against the Hurricanes.

With those two sides suffering from a lack of access to their All Blacks, it was two teams from South Africa who stepped into the breach when the World Cup year rolled around.

The Bulls beat the Sharks 20-19 in a last-minute thriller in Durban.

When South Africa lifted the Webb Ellis in Paris a few months later, their players and coaches talked openly about the confidence gained from the performance of their sides in the Super 14.

Clearly, the South Africans are big believers in the power of momentum, or, looking at it another way, they fear the rot that sets in with failure.

In 2003 their four franchises were next to useless with the Cats, Sharks and Stormers filling three of the bottom four slots and the Bulls finishing sixth.

They limped out of the quarterfinals of that year's World Cup, a fractured and despondent rabble.

New Zealand's failure at both Super Rugby level and the 2007 World Cup was sobering, but by no means a reality check.

The France-hosted finals was the first time there had been any relationship between the winners of the Sanzar trophy and the winners of the World Cup.

In 1999 and 2003, the only other times Super Rugby has been held in World Cup year, New Zealand sides were the only ones to feature.

In '03 the Carlos Spencer-inspired Blues beat the Crusaders 21-17 in the final.

That preceded a dominant All Black side charging through the Tri-Nations, putting 50 points on South Africa and Australia in Pretoria and Sydney respectively.

The next time they played Australia in Sydney, the result was not so pleasant.

In 1999, the Crusaders travelled to Dunedin and inched their way past the Highlanders 24-19.

The All Blacks also went on to win the Tri-Nations that year.

But the memories of those staunch South Island defensive lines tend to fade away in comparison to the sight of crazed Frenchmen running through the All Blacks for fun at Twickenham.

In short, every combination tried so far has failed.

So in the interests of giving everything a go at least once, there's no harm in cheering for an all-Australian final this year.

C'mon the 'Tahs.