« Le Tournoi est loin d'être fini », prévient Servat

Can the Super Rugby players, that get picked, just miss their Super Rugby game for that week, then no player welfare issues? If both the All Blacks and Wallabies only have one week to prepare then it’s the same for both sides.

Yes, some Super Rugby sides will be out some of their players for a week. But there could be monetary compensation per player missing from the test money. The Super Rugby sponsors could get some sponsorship in the test to make up for the reduced spectacle in Super Rugby for that week.

If the NZRU didn’t like the game being in Australia, couldn’t they just demand a bigger cut?

Making it work won’t be simple. But it seems like the issues are things that can be taken into account for. It’s a missed opportunity.

Two smallish locks at 1.97m and 1.98m and none of the loose forwards are above 1.88m. Good luck winning clean ball at line-outs.

The Hurricanes are done for the season unless the shift Ruben Love to 10 whether he wants to play their or not.

As for stats, they’re on this website, under “Fixtures & Results”. Choose SRP, click on Crusaders v Reds, knock yourself out.

Could even but a 2 week long international break into the SRP season leading up to the match.

Ireland were absolutely more respected after that game. Nobody cared when Ireland came to NZ, nobody acknowledged them either to be frank. But once they won, oh boy now everybody knew Ireland were a serious contender.

You think Australians and Kiwis and Saffas don’t respect each other? Because we do chat a bit of shite online to each other, but there is still a great deal of respect.

Everybody respected Ireland up until they choked another QF after hyping themselves up for about a year and a half.

I’m pretty sure the people have suggested they targeted the fixtures, but more seriously, you would actually put it down to just luck? You sure you’ve not felt that it was more than mere chance from what you’ve read otherwise?

And I would love to know what stats you looked up LOL

Depends on who you’re drafting whether moves like that are unreasonable, and I have my own reservations, but its purely an opt in idea so they aren’t being forced at all. It also often results that those sorts of drafts just get traded back to Dunedin (if wanted).

I think there are much better ways than doing it like that Ed, but yes - and understand it’s an debate style program so each is asked to share a particular view by the producer - Mils is getting better but still takes a while to get ideas verbalized. I’m sure it was in his head that one too.

I was also merely suggesting you were critizing the wrong person, I wasn’t critizing your view on the ideas/options btw. You want aussie strong, so less NZers playing in it (Taylahs take) would be far better off than allowing kiwis to take their key positions to ensure there sides are comparable. It actually looks to be work fine just the way it is. But OK I take your point that a better argument from Mils’ camp would also give/ensure sides are evenish.