France player ratings vs Argentina | Autumn Nations Series

Isn't that the problem in a nutshell? Not looking forward enough and being prepared to peak a weaker team now, so that he can pick a stronger team come 2027?

And you're kind of an example of the problem. The players didn't always thrive, someone like Aumua only really became comfortable until he was thrust into the jersey full time. He needed to be trusted despite the clear drop in standards when he came off the bench.

Your "entire season lost" hyperbole is also part of the problem. You need to be prepared for what you're asking for if you want Razor and coaches following him to change their mentality.

The structure a little more stuiable for him than Canes though I feel, where he basically invisible.

Thanks again for doing the ground work on some revealing data Nick.

This article misses some key points points that are essential to this debate though;

Razor is under far more pressure than Rassie to win

Rassie is a bolder selector than Razor, and far more likely to embrace risk under pressure than his counterpart from New Zealand.

It doesn't realise the difficulties of a country like South Africa, with no rugby season to speak of at the moment, to get full use out of overseas internationals

Neither world player of the year Pieter-Steph du Toit nor all-world second row Eben Etzebeth were automatic selections despite the undue influence they exert on games in which they play.

The last is that one coach is 7 years into his era, where the other is in his first, and is starting with a far worse blank slate than where upon South Africa's canvas could be layered onto after 2017.

The spread at the bottom end is nothing short of spectacular. Seventeen more South Africans than New Zealanders started between one and five games in 2024.

That said, I think the balance needs to be at least somewhere in the middle. I don't know how much that is going to be down to Razor's courage, and New Zealands appetite however.

Sadly I think it is going to continue and the problem is going to be masked by much better results next year, even forgotten with an undefeated season. Because even this article appears to misconstruing the..

known quantities

as being TJP and Sam Cane. In the context of what would need to change for the numbers above to be similar, it's players like Jordie Barrett, Beauden Barrett, Rieko Ioane, Sevu Reece, Ethan Blackadder, Codie Taylor, where the reality needs to be meet face on.

On Jordie Barrett at Lienster, I really hope he can be taught how to tackle with a hard shoulder like Henshaw and Ringrose have. You can see in these highlights he doesn't have the physical presence of those two, or even the ones behind him in NZ like ALB and AJ Lam. I can't really seem him making leaps in other facets if he's already making headlines now.

They keep defending themselves around the number of 'new' players, but they've hardly been given any meaningful game time. Those that got it required an injury to others to get more than a few minutes. They would usually thrive, only to get dropped for 'experience' again. An entire season has been a year of wasted opportunity to create actual competition for places within the squad, and happy injury enforced selections. It's progress via accident rather than by design.

1. Look at a player like Mo'unga who took time to become comfortable at his max level, thrust a player like that in well above his level, something Farrell is possibly doing now with Pendergrast, and you fail to maximise your player base as a whole. I don't think you realise the balance in NZ, without controlling who can leave there is indeed right now an immediate risk from any further pressure on the balance. We are not as flush as a country like South Africa I can't imagine (look at senior mens numbers).

2. Your idea excludes foreign fans, not the current status, their global 1.8mil base (find a recent article about it) will dwindle. Our clubs don't compete against each other, it's a central model were all players have a flat max 200k contribution. NZR decides who is worth keeping for the ABs in a very delicate balance of who to let go and who not. Might explain why our Wellington game wasn't a sellout.

3. Players aren't going to play for their country for nothing while other players are getting a million dollars. How much does SARU pay or reimburse their players?

4. I don't believe that at all. Everything so far has pointed to becoming an AB as the 'profile' winner. Comms love telling their fans some 'lucky' 1 cap guy is an "All Black" and the audience goes woooh!

The reality is much more likely to be more underwhelming

But the repercussions are end game, so why is it worth the risk?

Hardly be poaching uni or school boys.

This comment is so out of touch with rugby in NZ.

European comps aren't exactly known for poaching unproven talent ie SR or up not down to NPC.

So, so out of touch. Never heard of Jamison Gibson-Park, or Bundee Aki, or Chandler Cunningham-South, what about Uino Atonio? Numerous kiwi kids, like Warner Dearns, are playing in Japan having left after some stardom in school rugby here. Over a third of the NRL (so basically a third of the URC) are Kiwis who likely been scouted playing rugby at school. France have recently started in that path with Patrick Tuifua, and you hear loosely about good kids taking up offers to go overseas for basic things like school/uni (avg age 20+), similar to what attracts island kids to NZ.

But that's getting off track, it's too far in the future for you to conceptualize in this discussion. Where here because you think you know what it's like to need to select overseas based players, because of similarities like NZ and SA both having systems that funnel players into as few teams as possible in order to make them close to international quality, while also having a semi pro domestic league that produces an abundance of that talent, all the while facing similar financial predicaments. I'm not using extremes like some do, to scare monger away from making any changes. I am highlighting where the advantages don't cross over to the NZ game like the do for South Africa.

So while you are right in a lot of respects, some things that the can be taken for granted, is that if not more players leave, higher calibre players definitely will, and that is going to weaken the domestic competitions global reach, which will make it much hard to keep up or overtake the rest of the world. To put it simply, the domestic game is the future. International rugby is maxed out already, and the game here somehow needs to double it's revenue.

This is what you need to align your pitch with. Not being able to select players from overseas, because there are only ever one or two of those players. Sometimes even no one who'd be playing overseas and good enough for the ABs. You might be envisioning the effects of extremes, because it's hard to know just how things change slightly, but you know it's not going to be good.

What sort of incredibly bitter kiwi thinks it's more important to undermine Australian rugby than look after his struggling son ? Do we really want someone like that coaching the Wallabies ? I sure as hell don't.

A trimuverate coaching group similar to what NZ had would be ideal with Kiss + Larkham + Mick Byrne, with them all keeping their Super Rugby jobs. The Tahs would however try to start backstabbing from day one.