'I've already committed now': England players reveal how response to All Blacks haka didn't go to plan
It may have been the most iconic response to a haka the All Blacks have seen in a number of years, but it has been revealed by members of the England squad that the idea of advancing towards their opponents wasn't formulated until "the night before".
Ben Youngs, Tom Curry, Manu Tuilagi and Joe Marler appeared on The Jonathan Ross Show to talk about their recent World Cup campaign in Japan, where they finished runners-up after losing 32-12 to South Africa in the final.
A week beforehand, England crushed New Zealand 19-7 in their semi-final clash, but Youngs revealed that the infamous V-shape that they formed against the All Blacks prior to kick-off wasn't meant to unfold as it did.
Continue reading below...
"We met the night before and we said it's a challenge and we want to face the challenge and make sure they know we are up for it so let's get into a semi circle," Youngs said.
"A few lads were still confused."
It was here where Marler interjected to try and help his perplexed teammates.
"The issue was, Ben drew it up the night before… He got up and he did it on a flipchart and he marked it all out with Xs and Os," Marler said.
"The issue I had with it is I look at that board and thought, "It's not to scale"... I thought we were meant to be closer than what the picture said.
"[I went over the line] which I thought we were all going to do but then I looked back and they weren't doing it but I thought, I've already committed now."
England were fined a four-figure sum for crossing the halfway mark, but their response to the All Blacks' challenge evoked praise from a raft of rugby personalities, including players, coaches and commentators.
"I thought it was awesome, that's what the haka is about, it's a challenge," Kiwi hooker Dane Coles said in the wake of the loss.
"They walked forward. I know all the boys were pumped for it we were looking around like 'let's go'.
"From an All Blacks perspective we didn't think it was bad. We thought it was awesome."
"storyPage">
Even departing coach Steve Hansen praised the move.
"I thought their response was fantastic," Hansen said. "They didn't get fined for responding for doing what they did, they got fined because they went over halfway. Everyone knows you're not allowed to come over the halfway.
"You've got to get reality here. Joe didn't go back when he got told two or three times. I thought the response was brilliant.
"If you understand the haka, the haka requires a response. It's a challenge to you personally and it requires you to have a response. I thought it was brilliant, quite imaginative too."
In other news:
Latest Comments
Skelton may be brought back for the Wallabies so that would be the only reason that may hinder Wilson. Easily the form, most skilful and game IQ of any Oz 8. Valentini’s best and favourite position is 6, but lineouts may be an issue with Skelton, Valentini and Wilson. Will be interesting what Schmidt goes for but for me Wilson should be picked on form. Schmidt rewards work rate, skill and consistency. All that glitters every so often won’t be in contention. Greely is one of those players that has a knack of making the right decision. A coach is going to love him because he knows week in week out he’s going to get the job done. The second try Greely wasn’t the guy who made the initial break it was Flook, Greely was at the bottom of the ruck when Flook was off along the sideline. Greely got up and made the effort to catch up with play but also read the play nicely and hit the pass from Campbell at pace and then held the pass beautifully to Ryan.
Go to commentsSharks deserved to be far further back by the last quarter. Their tackling was awful, their set pieces were disappointing, their defensive organization was poor (especially on the Kok side of the D line), they kept making unnecessary errors, and they never looked like cracking the Clermont defense during those first 60m. Masuku kept them in touch, with some help from the Clermont generosity on penalty opportunities. Agree with the writer of this article. It was belligerence, and ability to raise their pressure game just enough, that turned the last quarter into a Bok-style shutout. Clermont have a reputation of not playing the full 80m, and there was a bit of that for sure. But, quite often when the intensity of a team drops off in the last quarter credit is due to the opponent for tiring them out. At 60m, with the Kok try, you thought that just maybe the game was on. At 70m, with the Mapimpi contribution, one felt that Clermont were fading, while facing a team that would maintain the pressure game through the final whistle. Good win in the end, but the Sharks are still playing way below their potential. And with their resources, and a coach that has had enough time to figure things out, they are running out of excuses.
Go to comments