Sale repel second-half surge from Exeter to make play-offs

So I can’t believe you are correct when you say it brings in the money. I can understand though playing better nations than those in the 6N but which don’t have a profile (like how Argentina is still a hard rate in NZ even after years of high performance), don’t generate the same interest as Wales etc. You’re also not going to have a SA or a NZ touring every November, and Wallabies are no longer the benchmark.

I mean I wouldn’t doubt that the most obvious revenue factor is a 6N component, not trying to say that it isn’t, just that fans show that it needn’t be. November test should still generate a high amount of revenue. As a topic it is all redundant now as the November tests (and July) are going to have a competitive factor.

Hopefully the quality of nations continue to rise and you can have three blockbuster teams touring every year in the not too distant future. 10 or 11 games might be right around the perfect number for a minimum tier 1 test nation too. I’m sure you’re going to make the rest of your season fit around that (those aren’t 100% things at all).

So although WR have already implemented change, I do still agree with your opinion that things are pretty good as they are. I only see a little improvement needed before France can really step up to All Blacks or Springbok level. You might think that a joke and that you will always look up to these teams but as a nation you really can do/go one better.

I think WCs are harder to win than that (requires many factors other than being able to play the best winning rugby), and 5 matches that aren’t must win and are broken up is not a good test (especially compared what the All Blacks offered).

I’m fully aware that French International players participation into Top 14, European Cups & 6 Nations will hinder their preparation for a WC.

So I wasn’t saying suggesting that. Your competitions are fine, they just aren’t going to provide everything.

Interesting insight on the last campaign, and again, those components they’re adding are also practical and sensible attempts to improve their chances at a WC. So they question remains, why go to those lengths and throw it all away by not picking a better team to travel to New Zealand?

I’ve suggested in other topics they are really close to making it work, but also the data that’s been presented in this articles shows that even now they could have also made the tour to NZ work.

That is both in the view as presented here by NB and what other players were available, and in the long term planning that you say Galthie has undertaken, in not taking the opportunity to make it work even better (factors like the dates of these tests could have seen finalists available from test 1) for a tour like this.

TBH, I can understand if Galthie made a calculated decision to undervalue the tour. Many have had a bad opinion about the All Blacks ability/level under Foster, and even in test 1 he might have shown such an attitude to be correct still under Razor.

Agree on O'Connell. Very straight forward guy.

Filthy, dirty player.

Care to tell us how millionaires/billionaires don't own the top 14?

What is more interesting is that they have repeatedly said that they are going to fix the breakdowns and one or two other things. Matfield called this at half tie in the first game, btw. The solution has included an approach to the administrators to get clarty on how the breakdown should be refereed.

So if there is an article to write then it is about how the Boks will get clean and quick ruck ball, and how this is necessar to launch the back line.

If they came up with a proper plan it could have it’s benefits too. Fans would understand which specific windows the 20 will be available for, so actually get to see their idols and heros in club footy, and FFR would have one (or perhaps two?) window every four years to make a marquee tour that is to help prepare for the next WC. For instance next time it might be American tour vs north and south america, and one off tests (in say a triangular series previously popular in cricket) against none Lions opponents teams.

I’m not sure though whether they would like to hold it during the Lions, or a year out from a WC, or whenever, just that say LNR would agree to limit a FFR 20 or more to a certain window of club weeks one year.

They'll never be consistently great until they sort out the slow starts.

I do fancy them to bounce back tomorrow.

Tier 1 brackets are required to partake in reciprocal tours.

Of course they haven’t, it hurts them probably more.

It was just a joke about “france being serious about player welfare”, when their own league has more games than a player should be involved in each year, never mind a short tour at the end of the season making a difference.

Or if it was the last paragraph you didn’t understand the context of, I think it was J Marc saying they have a sentimentality of us against the British and their expats. Typically those are the tier 1 nations (which again is just a label for the above) and theres no reason tier 2 rugby can’t be a more exciting product (I preferred watching those countries much more in the WC for instance). So a viable idea imo, of course I don’t think it will get to that.

Oh and of course the two U20 New Zealand hookers. Lol