On the face of it, Argentina, Australia and New Zealand have put in meritorious performances in their first games of the World Cup, but France’s performance was as horrible as England’s effort against the United States was forgettable and uninspiring.

It would be easy, on this basis of what we have seen so far, for the rugby supporter with wider than purely nation-state allegiances (i.e. the Europhile) to write-off both of the modern-day European superpowers at this point, and focus on Ireland, and once mighty Wales, to provide the European defence of the Cup in the face of the colonial Southern-Hemisphere offensive.

Furthermore, the opportunist gambler in me is very excited about the prospect of a Manu Samoan victory over the English in Nantes on September 23. At the very least, it looks to be worth a flutter with a fiver and should pay good odds if you can find somewhere to place the bet. If the Samoans push the Springboks close tonight in Paris, I’ll be fighting the urge to put much more than a fiver on it. If that should happen – England lose, that is – what I am about to suggest is very dark indeed for European rugby.

'Barring an unlikely English victory over the Boks on the 15th, it is more than likely that if Brian O'Driscoll's Ireland do not beat Argentina on October 1, that no European team will progress to the semi-finals'


Before I delve into the darkness of what the effect of the French defeat and England’s poor performance appears to be leading to, as a disclaimer (or get-out clause) cast your mind back to the 1999 World Cup. You may remember a fairly awful French team that was very luck to get past Fiji in the quarters, before hammering the All Blacks in the semi-final.

Similarly, despite the fact that the English team went into the 2003 tournament as co-favourites, they played very ordinary rugby in the pool stage, struggling in particular to put-away the Samoans - England trailed the Samoans at half-time - and though much improved, didn’t have it all their own way against the valiant Welsh in the quarters, before, as if out of nowhere, clinically disposing of the French in the semi-final. The French could be said to have looked the more likely to progress on the basis of their performances at that tournament up until then. It just goes to show that it is very hard to tell which team is going to show up on the day.

Nevertheless, the French loss casts potentially terrible and dark permutations on the World Cup for the Europhile, as barring an unlikely English victory over the Boks on the 15th, it is more than likely that if Brian O'Driscoll's Ireland do not beat Argentina on October 1, that no European team will progress to the semi-finals – i.e. the semifinals will be an all Southern Hemisphere affair.

The reason I say this is that if Argentina top Pool D, the runner-up, be it Ireland or France, will face the daunting prospect of quarter final against the All Blacks; Wales, the likely Pool B runners-up, will face the Boks in the quarters; and if England can get past the Samoans in Pool A, they will almost certainly face elimination against Australia. This leaves either Scotland or Italy (as the runner-up in Pool B) requiring an upset victory over Argentina to secure a semi-final berth for a European team.

So it would seem that Argentina’s defeat of France is likely to lead to an Australia versus New Zealand semi-final on October 14, and the Pumas taking on South Africa on the 15th.

Are Europe's chances of making an impact on the Rugby World Cup really as bleak as Wayne suggests? Post your comments below or let us have an article of your own.