If the old cliche about“Defence wins World Cups” applies, then the Wallabies and the All Blacks have cause for concern.

In a statistical analysis put together by The Times, neither the All Blacks nor the Wallabies even make the top-five meanest defences after the pool stages. To make matters worse, the Springboks are the most miserly.

According to The Times, the world champions have conceded just six points per game, letting in just two tries – despite being in what was accepted to be the group of death with Wales, Samoa, Fiji and Namibia. The loveable English are second in the table, giving up an average of 8.5 points and conceding just a single try in their four games.

Celtic tigers Ireland and Wales, in third and fourth respectively, and the stoic Argentines round out the top-five table.

For the record, the Wallabies have conceded 48 points so far at an average of 12 points per game, coughing up four tries in the process.

Predictably, there is better news in the analysis of the highest-scoring sides, where Australia lie third in the calculations with a total of 173 points at 43.25 points a game. The All Blacks lead the way in this category, amassing a combined 240 points at the breezy rate of 60 points a game.

The impressive Welsh are second in the attacking stakes, collecting 180 points, while the Springboks are fourth with 166 points, showing they are far from one-dimensional. Somewhat surprisingly, England complete the top five with 137 points. It does not make particularly good reading for the Wallabies but the the Telegraph’s Mick Cleary isn’t swayed. “If…Australia can get a toehold up front in Wellington, they will prevail,” he wrote.

Colleague Brian Moore agrees. “South Africa are the most experienced team and the result of their titanic showdown with Australia on Sunday depends on how well the Australian pack cope with the Springbok eight.” Moore reasoned. “…if anything like parity is gained Australia have the inventiveness to create space and tries. The result is as predictable as the toss of a coin.”

Elsewhere across the papers, gallons of ink were predictably spilt on trying to make sense of Dan Carter’s exit and what it meant to the other contenders. Eddie Butler, in The Guardian, encapsulates the curious mixture of the sympathy and schadenfreude that has followed his departure.

“Now, there is an obligation to view this objectively, as a great shame for the sport,” he wrote. “But it also must be reported that the thought of facing the All Blacks minus Carter is infinitely more attractive than the prospect of spending the next three weeks trying to work out a way to stop the best No.10 on the planet.”

Accompanying his piece is an interesting little odds table from bookies Victor Chandler. The All Blacks are still favourites, at 4/7, but the Wallabies are second on the line at 6/1, with South Africa and England at 15/2.

The reviews for Colin Slade are also in, and are largely unflattering. “No one expects Slade to be Carter,” Mark Reason wrote in the London Telegraph. “But New Zealanders hope he is good enough to direct a game and play up the talent around him. Slade will probably be that man in another two or three years, but at the moment he is still prone to damaging errors.”

At the Times, Owen Slot said Slade’s performance against Canada “made clear the difference between a world class act with 84 internationals on his CV and a relative new boy”.