Australia to be kings

This is it then. No game comes bigger than this. On this one day in four years, from Wagga Wagga to Darwin, and from Cannes to Caen, two nations expect. Indeed, the rugby-playing world expects.

There are a chosen few, such as Tim Horan and John Eales, who obtain these chances more than once, but essentially it's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. And this time it as close to a dream pairing as makes no difference, full of colour and contrasts - Southern Hemisphere v Northern Hemisphere, the Wallabies' collective strength and individual excellence against the ultimate mercurial wonders.

These two countries seem to be hogging global sport at the moment. They're shortly to meet again in the Davis Cup decider, while the sporting wizards of Oz have already landed cricket's World Cup as they prepare to host the 2000 Olympics. Meantime, France stand on the threshold of a soccer-rugby World Cup double that might never be repeated.

It is to be hoped that the flawed Millennium Stadium pitch will hold up and not destroy this showpiece. RWC organisers have kept their options open regarding the dilemma of whether to close the roof, though the forecast is for beater weather after the recent downpours.

It is to be hoped, too, that France turn up in spirit as well as body. I think they will, but even so, Australia look the part. The vast bulk of the side have been together for two or three years, the nucleus of it even longer. No team in the world has been more systematically prepared with this sole objective in mind.

They seem a classically strong tournament side, with an all-purpose, flexible game fit for all days and every opposition. They also seem to have paced themselves and are coming to the boil nicely.

Admittedly, France haven't so much come to the boil as volcanically erupted. For Les Bleus, perhaps, read the Azzuri: i.e. Italy winning the soccer World Cup in 1982, when they struggled through the group stages, seemingly devoid of direction and ridiculed by the media, whereupon they conjured an astonishing performance to topple Brazil, and thereafter simply took off. For Paolo Rossi, perhaps, read Christophe Lamaison.

In truth, the French management stumbled a little upon this winning formula. If it wasn't for injuries to Thomas Castaignede and Pierre Mignoni, their defence would probably still be leaking like a sieve. Fabien Galthie and Lamaison have shored it up, as well as giving the team direction and a much improved kicking game.

But that's sport, and that's life. Suddenly, France have their best chance ever of lifting the trophy. They need only to peak once more. Nor are they as likely to suffer the anticlimax which followed their epic semi-final win over Australia in 1987, when they were beaten all ends up by the All Blacks a week later.

French teams have always been confidence teams, and in one swoop they've acquired more confidence than they've had in about a year and a half.

However, France will not have the element of surprise which they had against the All Blacks. No one studies the opposition better than these Wallabies and no team in this World Cup has proved more adept at strangling opposing teams at source. Hence the world's best defence has leaked only one try - whereas France have conceded nine.

And, sad to say, as the three previous tournaments have proven (more so each time), defences win World Cups. It's worth noting that only one try has been scored in the last two deciders and that the Tri-Nations teams have since honed defences to an even more parsimonious level.

The Wallabies will have prepared for Christophe Lamaison's chips over their midfield, they'll have worked on their blind-side defence, which the French are again liable to attack in numbers because their handling, pace and angles of running are peerless.

Here again, though, Australian scrum-half George Gregan is a superior tackler around the fringes and on the blind side than All Black counterpart Byron Kelleher. Nor does this experienced Wallaby back line (who average over 46 caps a man) have any obvious defensive weaknesses akin to the All Blacks - a dodgy-tackling out-half, or a right winger susceptible to the high ball, or a left winger with a negligible work ethic off the ball who takes an age to retrieve balls put in behind him.

These Wallabies are also too seasoned a side to panic, as the All Blacks did, and will assuredly play more of a percentage game territorially than New Zealand. Australia can be expected to play the ball in behind the French wingers, Philippe Bernat-Salles and Christophe Dominici, and chase in numbers on the premise that the French back three may be inclined to risk running the leather back.

It may well be quite tight, but one can also imagine that the Wallabies will control the ball and recycle it through many phases, and ultimately apply such concerted pressure that the French might crack amid a torrent of penalties.

Although France have a better record against Australia than any other European side - they both have won 13 times in 28 previous meetings - the Wallabies have won the last four clashes. What's more, the in-form Toutai Kefu was the ball-carrying tormentor in chief when Australia beat France 32-21 in their most recent meeting in Paris last year. Galthie masks some of this French back row's defensive deficiencies, but Kefu could well expose them.

All of which is not to say that the French can't win, that their line-out drives can't make big yardage or that their blind-side forays, chips over the top, collective pace and off-the-cuff flair can't unlock the world's stingiest defence. All the more so if they scale the heights of last week.

Let's face it, it would be lovely to see France deliver as only they can. But finals tend not to work out like that, and these Wallabies look a more complete and mentally strong side. Hence, the head says Australia.