Six Nations table has cheerful symmetry

So the championship decider turned out to be the opener rather than the grand finale, writes Gerry Thornley

The final table rarely lies and the 2004 RBS Six Nations is no exception. There is the customary neat symmetry to this year's table, with everybody having beaten the team below them, and thus everybody having finished where they deserved to finish.

No one can quibble with France being the reigning kings of European rugby after a fourth Grand Slam in eight years but, despite their dominance over England in the first 50-60 minutes on Saturday night and the opportunist tries and Gallic flair of the wonderfully athletic, Anglo-baiting Imanol Harinordoquy and Dimitri Yachvili (quel surpise) overall, purely as French rugby triumphs go, did it leave you a little cold too?

Founded on resolute defence up until the last quarter, strong ball-winning and ball-retention, a territorial game based on superb long-range tactical kicking, plenty of hard, straight running and a general capacity to strangle the very life out of opponents, it was almost English-like in execution.

The scheduling remains a key factor, for France's last three Grand Slams have come when they've had Ireland and England at home. As an aside, England's last two grand slams of 1995 and 2003 (like their championship of 2001) came in years when they had France at home.

Even if Ireland were in the hunt for the championship on Saturday night, Irish supporters would probably have struggled to break the habit of a lifetime and root for England. Besides, finishing clear second (for the third time in four years) and equalling Ireland's championship record of 17 tries (set in 2000) after treks to Paris and London somehow gives Ireland's first Triple Crown in 19 years more credibility.

The Irish coach won't countenance any blights on the 2004 campaign (not for him what Clive Woodward terms, half-mockingly it is true, "constructive feedback") and on Saturday O'Sullivan staunchly repeated his assertion that Ireland put up a creditable effort in losing to France. Nonetheless you wonder if O'Sullivan himself doesn't wonder whether Ireland could have been somewhat more ambitious in that Paris opener.

But in virtually all respects it was a masterfully orchestrated campaign by O'Sullivan and his management team.

Tactically, Ireland had some coups along the way, most notably at Twickenham.

O'Sullivan's faith in Girvan Dempsey was rewarded, and in following Leinster's lead with Gordon D'Arcy, and then dove-tailing him with Brian O'Driscoll, O'Sullivan was utterly vindicated; never more so than in Saturday's win over Scotland when the midfield dynamos gave real width to Ireland's game, as well as telling penetration and opportunistic poaching.

Niall O'Donovan and Mike Ford can take a big bow as well, and though it was always a contrived marriage, the impending divorce between O'Sullivan and Declan Kidney seems a bigger shame now.

Inevitably, this tournament was a carry-over in many respects from the World Cup. It is said that one learns more from defeat than victory, and while England have been nursing a palpable hangover, France and Ireland would have felt they let themselves down in the semi-finals and quarter-finals of the World Cup, and harboured a desire to have a cut off the newly-crowned world champions.

Well though Lawrence Dallaglio played throughout, throw in the loss (more than anything) of Martin Johnson's presence and Jonny Wilkinson's opportunism, and England have lost their aura of invincibility.

Hard to come by, easy to go, and hence it has quite simply been England's worst championship performance since 1993 - as much a reflection of their consistency over the intervening decade. But although England have their problems, and these things are decidedly relative, they have the unrivalled playing and financial resources with which to orchestrate a rebound.

Admittedly, by Irish standards, the IRFU has made a massive and unprecedented investment in the Test team - taking into account training camps, management staff and competing with French and English clubs for the frontline players. And one worries at what cost to the rest of the game.

But the rewards are days like Saturday, and for Ireland to have maintained their new-found place in a two-tier championship alongside the Big Two since the turn of the Millennium is a hell of an achievement, as the accompanying, composite 2000-2004 table shows.

No less than the playmaking skills of Iestyn Harris and the cutting edge of the Williams Twisters with Wales, who were as entertaining as anyone when their lightweight pack could win some ball, Ireland are blessed to have a vintage crop of game-breaking backs as well as a first-rate pack. By comparison the paucity of play-makers and game-breakers must be depressing for Italian and Scottish rugby.

Overall, it was a pretty good and vibrant championship, albeit with too many predictable mismatches. The refereeing was decidedly mixed, and it's assuredly no coincidence that the influx of Southern Hemisphere referees resulted in a blind eye being turned to forward passes more than ever à lá the Super 12.

As with the failure to impose the offside line, there is a compelling case for more involvement from the touch judges. Perhaps there should be more specified training for touch judges, who rarely run the line as they more often in the middle, and why not have the video referees check on all aspects of debatable tries, including questionable passes in the build-up to a touchdown?