As soon as you receive a red card for a dive, and for such incidents you can use a video ref, then people will stop diving. A couple of weeks of nine-a-side will soon make sure football players aren’t such pathetic pansies!

I don’t think Wales are going backwards. They are still ahead of England when they have a fully fit side. As long as Johnson persists in picking overrated, experienced players, England aren’t going to go forward. What does Simon Shaw have to do to convince someone he should be in there as a token ‘experienced’ gun?

Kennedy is better in the lineout than Borthwick (and didn’t even make the squad?!), and with someone like Kay in there, we have RWC winning experience too. Steffon Armitage has been brilliant in club rugby, and has begun where he left off last season (despite his side struggling on the whole). This year will be a potential make-or-break for a lot of England’s young pretenders. Wait….didn’t I start this post talking about Wales?

I think Aus have more promise than NZ at the moment. The pack is probably the cleverest in the scrum in the 3N. If only SA could find a front row…

At the back, Barnes is a gem waiting to shine – he could be as good as any 10/12 in the world, maybe even the best in my opinion. For flowing rugby, Giteau is better than any 10 in NH by a way.

In terms of attacking options, I still think the strength in NH lies mainly in the pack. Ireland have a robust front five, while Ferris/Heaslip/Wallace – if not now, could/should be the best back row in the world if they keep going in the same direction. “Brainfart” O’Gara is too hit and miss at 10, but D’arcy on form, and the resurgent BOD is great to see.

You SH lads were surely impressed by Tommy Bowe? and give Fitzgerald a couple of years, with Kearney at the back. This Ireland team is only one player (Fitzgerald) away from being a top three side. This Autumn (Spring) is their chance to show they can mix it. They’ve received top drawer billing once before (2007 RWC), so they will need to do something pretty special to build on 6N 2009 and become a real world force.

PS. Thanks Knives Out, you’ve helped me waste a whole day of work talking rugby! Much appreciated.

I’m not sure how Foden would nail a start for England. Agree with you Knives Out, he’s blistering in attack, but he has a penchant to keep it to himself. Luckily, he’s looked very good doing it. I don’t think he offers a high enough quality of service to be a scrum-half.

12 is going to be a dodgy one. Shane Geraghty is another Northampton player who has been doing well, but has been thrown back in to 10 (admittedly his preferred position) due to injury. Would be interesting to see how Anthony Allen gets on at Leicester- he’s always looked pretty good, and even got an England look in. Can he make an assured step up?

There are options at full-back. England could do much worse than Ben Foden/Nick Abendanon/Olly Morgan. Armitage is probably better than these three, and does offer a kicking option, but it might not just be the SH teams blooding new players.

Wales will need to look at how to replace Williams at some point – losing two thirds of their front row is going to hurt them. It will be interesting to see how their back fare when their scrum isn’t producing the same sort of ball that they might have become a bit used to. Saying that, the other NH teams have been strong in the scrum area.

The Wales/NZ game will probably be a chance to see the more free-flowing forwards. Isaac Ross has been brilliant in the 3N in the loose, and is someone I’m looking forward to seeing. I think we’ll see Carter featuring, given his lack of real game time in the pressure cooker.

I’m not denying that. This has strayed well away from the initial point, which was that players playing more international games means that, in fairness to their bodies, they shouldn’t be subjected to as many club games. If the standard of club rugby declines, then the crowds are sure to follow.

You said ” don’t think saying to an English EPS player that you can only take part in 15 or 17 GP games is going to bring the house down”

My response was to say, that they play that many games anyway (GP mentioned in your initial point), so using White and Croft as examples, they fall fairly well into that assessment.

I’m just worried that constant expansion of the international game will lead to the devaluation of the club game. If not that, then a constant, ongoing battle between club and the RFU.

Apologies about my research, but I hadn’t had a chance to poll the attendees at Wembley on Saturday. I’m glad to see 45,000 fans there, just as I was glad at Twickenham the week before. Diversity, maybe not, but added to the razzmatazz of a large stadium and continued PR, cheerleaders etc, yes. I’m sure that bolstered the attendence – and I’m sure not all were rugby people. Something I’m happy to see!

I think it is dangerous to use the Lions tour as a barometer of the North, but I would look at France winning in NZ as a better reflection of some stength in the NH. It’s been a long time since I’ve had the impression that the SH is well above the NH in terms of skill, but it seems that it could be now.

I’m itching to see how England get on. I’m still very unconvinced by the side (and selections) that were made in the Nov Internationals last year, as well as the Six Nations. Looking at their players, I would say they still have a way to go before they can be considered anywhere near the force they have been.

Wales seem to be a reflection of the All Blacks up here, and the match at the Millennium Stadium will be a fantastic game to see.

The problem is that the top players in the game are still all in SH. Watching pretenders like Ferris compete with the likes of McCaw or Broussow is going to be mouthwatering. Do we really have to wait until November?!

I eluded to the fact that sending second string sides in any case is a bad idea, it does nothing to promote the game. But on the other hand – Boks in particular – is it fair on their players to raise themselves to the same intensity after a Lions Tour and a Tri-Nations?

Could/would Japan be in a position to offer any sort of team? They have financial backing, and an initial side could see it bolstered with Tri-Nations (RIP) players, as a general aim to increase player turnout and level over there?

Spot on. There can’t be a rugby fan in the land who would disagree with that. Although that could spell the demise of English rugby haha

Take away penalty kicks at goal? The positional advantages would still stand….yeah, I know, I’m not even sure if I agree with this one either!

Three players from the GP final, whose team had extra games, reached the final of the HC? Good, non-biased shout. Tom Croft who played 16 GP games, which is between the 15-17 games aforementioned.

As for the crowd, Saints didn’t sell out Franklin’s Gardens v Worcester, and Saracens are desparate for a larger following at Vicarage Road. To say that the whole 45,000 crowd attending were week in-week out rugby followers is quite a statement.

I loved Wembley, but you are honestly saying that less international players in the club game will prove as much a draw? Which is the original point you have argued.

Another thing, I don’t think more tries is necessarily the answer to attracting crowds. When every possession become points it makes it less of the contest, and more of a lottery. Everyone likes to see the ball thrown around a bit, but it has to be with style and precision. The ELVs mistake was that players just began chucking the ball around with no structure, thank God they are (pretty much) assigned to history!

The bonus point system is the best idea to come out of recent years. Could that be improved? i.e. a point for 3 tries, maybe 2 points for four tries?

Would increasing the try’s worth on the other hand, lead to teams clogging up and become scared to concede? It could turn matches into a defensive game of chess. Much more kicking and positional play, and only attacking rugby would come in the final third.

I think a good idea is decreasing DG and Pens to 2 points. Nowadays, players can get over the posts from their own 10!

Part of the attraction of rugby is the skill and art of pushing and bending the rules. Every good flanker knows how, it’s all part of the tactics. I think to just totally expose any slightest discrepancy with the rules would be a bad idea, and we’d see most games played with 6 backrow players in the bin.

Does anyone like the mistakes that cause controversy and talking points for years? I for one do!

For every decision that goes right, there could be a decision that could go the other way. In sport, it tends to even itself out. Give more power to the referees to make their own decisions, before it becomes even more stop/start.

They play 15-17 games anyway, reducing that would be a bad idea, is the point I’m making.

General rugby fans know their Alex Goode from their Andy Goode, and will appreciate which players are going to be good to see, but outside of the initial rugby bubble, there isn’t a knowledge of players that is going to attract more fans to our sport.

Non-rugby fans went to the Wembley game to experience the stadium, and winners of a talent show too. Sarries did a great job of creating a spectacle, with good PR and great entertainment. This is a great way to attract fans, but who (non-rugby) is going to go to Worcester v Sale on a cold November night watching a bunch of players they’ve never heard of?

I’ve been struggling to think of a way that would mean less games but keep up the financial muscle. Admittedly, a few of the ideas up top were there to try and instigate some though, wouldn’t be able to make it through the chilly February without the 6N though!

I think having international players play less GP games is a bad idea. The reason families etc are being drawn to the games is that the children get to see their heroes from the international game up close. Less international players would mean less crowds. Wembley was a fantastic occasion on Saturday, despite the loss for Saints.

Regionalisation anyone? Being a Northampton man, I couldn’t see myself enjoying travelling to Leicester to see my ‘home’ games, if we created a Midlands region. Saying that, the recent Welsh regions are thriving!

What are your opinions on Super rugby as a whole? I like the idea that there is a level between club and international rugby that has been created, and I think it essentially makes for greater fluency in the international game with players who regularly play together. Do you Kiwis still hold an affinity to the clubs below the regions? Are new supporters growing up supporting Canterbury etc.?

A comment just made to me:

“South Africa are the Lleyton Hewitt of rugby”.

Couldn’t have said it better myself. Step up Roger Federer!

One look at this year’s Lions make it obvious how getting the ‘ethos’ right is the most important thing. Geech is the heart of what the Lions means. Anyone who watches the ’97 Living with Lions can see that they’re still touring as amateurs, which makes it such a good thing.

I’m not 100% sure, but I don’t think the players did half as much community work in ’01 or ’05 either? They were forever out and about in SA promoting the game, and the ethos of the game.

One pass intercepted in ’01 and the whole series changed – on what small actions large prices lie! Made for great viewing though. Should be pointed out how massively Richard Hill was missed, what a player he was.

Good shout! Is it too early to start debating the winners of that one….? haha

Not so sure about Spies. Anyone that big and fast is sure to get over the gain line, but give me Z Brooke’s skills and Dallaglio’s breakdown destruction any day. Brussouw is fast becoming a favourite, I think he is definitely the one that should be talked about ahead of Spies.

I’m surprised Steyn hasn’t been starting for months. Pienaar looks flaky to me, while Steyn has a calming influence on the game, giving an opportunity for the backs outside to get some movement going.

If you look at even five or six years ago, teams that were going head-to-head had fantastic players all over the park. Around 2000 you could look at most positions on the pitch and find truly fantastic players there. Remember Stadium Australia 2000 anyone?

Sheek: You mention the 2001 Lions were the third best B&I side to tour? Don’t think a losing side can really been seen as great, even if it was against a quality Aussie team.

Some people have said you can just go on results – but I honestly don’t think the results are the main thing in truly defining greatness. It is how the team carries itself and fronts up when under pressure. The Boks have had some iffy decision making on both fronts.

Great point about the winning away from home JamesB. When you go and win away against fantastic opposition, then you can go some way to acheiving some greatness (13 men England v ABs).

Being a Pom, I have to admit I wasn’t expecting much from B&I this summer, all the news was how these SA monsters would annihilate our pathetic, boring NH players. I still don’t think NH has much to offer in terms of pure quality at the moment, but they weren’t outclassed by the Boks.

The Boks are a on a bit of a hiding-to-nothing though, because they can only keep beating under-par teams, or they can slip up like last week. No win situation!