Five of the big questions that will be answered in 2013

Here are all the South African complete and finalized squads with profiles http://www.rugby-talk.com/super-rugby/ Just click on squads then choose the desired squad. Western Cape selection not crap. Bulls been stealing everything young like pedophiles and there is quotas to adhere to. Bekker has moved on and Liebenberg have a back injury so they are looking for a back up hooker. Although I suggested Seapoint Main road....

I got 5 questions as well 1) Who will end at the bottom of the Super Rugby table A)The Kings B)The Kings C) The Kings D) The Kings E)The Kings 2)Without McCaw the All Black will loose the following advantage A)Someone who slow the ball down, loiter and break about 10 breakdown laws while the referee get distracted by a chirpy Scrumhalf B)The opposition going to 14 men for punching, kicking or headbutting McCaw for his total disregard to the spirit of the game C) A experienced captain who is able to marshall the troops when panick sets in. D) Quick ball and someone to run obstruction lines for Carter and the two centres from setplay moves E) All of the above 3) How many times will Beal be in a bar brawl or punch a bouncer at some night club? A) 2 B) 3 C) 7 D) 4 E 4) What will be the average minutes for a Queensland Reds player before he is out injured? A) 8 B)22 C) 40 D) 44 4) How many games will the Tah's supporters be optimistic for before their dreams get crushed by another straight defeat? A)3 8)5 C) 8 D) First game after a McKibbon box kick

I think the atmosphere at the Reds might just be toxic without Link. QRU must be bonkers! Brumbies look good but if the Tahs get the inside backs working I'll be larfing!

Better get a shot of penicilin Justin2!!

Uncle, I met Calcraft a couple of times during our years at UNSW studying Commerce. I dropped out & he went onto greater things. I also played against him at colts in 1976, when he was at Manly & I was at Easts. From our brief interchanges I found him a very decent bloke.

I accept that the norovirus contributed to the ab's defeat,and also accept that it is a long season.But that's just an excuse - all teams find themselves in that position. All I'm saying, is there are some worrying signs.We will see where the ab's are at when they play the frogs next year, particularly without McCaw.IMHO, one of the weaknesses of the current ab setup, is it's too reliant on a few key players.The ab's have to be careful they don't find themselves in the same position they were in '98,with a crop of retirements of great players being replaced with players that aren't up to it.

hehe good one Kipper %) Yes, the Reds hiring Graham is the most perplexing move last year in Rugby. They have replaced a championship winning coach in link with the worst performed coach with a proven track record of poor recruiting, poor communication and player rapport, no game plan or strategy and more importantly no tactics. And with a fatal character flaw that had him negotiating with the Reds pre season (the start of only his second year) after he demanded to be in charge of recruiting and player retention - and saw no conflict of interest. He was a disaster at the Force, it was not the case of him being a good coach at a basket case club but a basket case coach at a struggling club making it worse in every aspect and throwing them to the wolves. Watch out Reds if link really does relinquish coaching and/or game day to Graham. Kiss the past three years of development and success goodbye.

Interesting. What's the news on Juan Smith? Is he planning on a serious return to rugby or is his physical condition still not clear.

KiwiDave not to defend Hansen too much, but the Norovirus was probably the key player on the field that day. Run of the mill teams on losing streaks don't suddenly beat the All Blacks by a record margin when they happen to be suffering from a deibilitating virus without the cause of the loss being quite clear.

One of the weaknesses of the current ab side,is that for all their expansive play,Hansen has done this at the cost of neglecting the pack,and you saw the results of that in the England test..... ------------------- The English test you saw a tired All Black side where most of the players had been up for 11 months with Super Rugby, Four Nations and the EOY tour with maybe a 3 week break thrown in. The game is very taxing now with 10-11 month seasons rather than the old 6-8 month seasons and you cant be up all the time.

McCaw, Carter and a few others were missing then and the backups where nowhere near as good as what we have now. That whole season was a write off to be honest. We have far more depth now across the park now compared to then and I dont think anyone panics when a Carter or McCaw is unavailable any more.

"The depth in New Zealand rugby we could probably start a B side and beat France 3-0. It may sound like an arrogant statement ...." Yes it does and yes it is.

Remember how we did last time we played France in NZ without McCaw? 1-1 series with France taking the trophy on points difference. And 1998 is a good example of what a few world class retirements can do to a winning team.

I don't think losing McCaw or even Carter as well will see the rapid decline of the All Blacks. While the two of them are arguably the greatest 2 players in the last decade, the All Black machine will keep rolling with Cruden and Cane, both players of brilliant talent who are improving all the time. All Blacks have never been about individuals and always about the team. The depth in New Zealand rugby we could probably start a B side and beat France 3-0. It may sound like an arrogant statement but look at the talent running around in the 5 super franchises in New Zealand and you will see why.

Ben.S , I would take issue with you on the pack.The scrum has been only adequate, no doubt a lot of that to do with the absence of Thorn and Kaino, as well as their impact in the tight.Both Retallick and Romano,whilst doing their core job of winning lineout ball,have simply not done enough of the tight work.This has put considerable pressure on the loose forwards,particularly Read and McCaw.Messam, to me is not up to this level of footy.Someone like Brad Shields,or in that mould, would be a better bet going forward.The problem with the pack is it simply doesn't secure enough ball, and the ab's have to rely too much on scoring all their points off turnover ball.Many of the brit newspapers have commented on this,and by all accounts,Lancaster formulated his gameplan around exploiting this weakness. Your point about teams tightening up at WC time is valid,but I stand my opinion of those teams.It's not a criticism, it's a compliment.Those teams were successful because they adapted to what was required to win at the time.You saw evidence of this in the last WC where the ab's had to tighten up in the knockout stages, going v their normal style of play.

Firstly, the brand is highly relevant because the brand does not suit Quade Cooper. So suggesting he will suddenly spark the Wallabies simply because he is playing alongside Genia is a highly flawed notion, and the Wallabies are not a winning side. By their own standards they are playing badly and the results match. Secondly, the sides in 2003 and 2007 were actually capable of playing very good rugby, but tightened up. All rugby fans know that World Cup rugby is totally different beast to non-World Cup Test football. How has Hansen neglected the pack? He lost two of the better players in world and replaced them with players who prior to that England game had put in some good shifts. Look at the players he blooded in the pack and how the NZ lineout improved. Clearly the pack was high on his agenda. -- Atawhai Drive, I have no interest in entertainment. I think the players, as professionals, have an obligation to win first and foremost, which is kind of what Richard is saying. From my own experience fans support winning sides regardless of their style. Just look at Munster of previous years. I enjoy Super rugby and European rugby, but would never get into what is better debates as they are different beasts. I don't think the standard of Test rugby is massively high ATM, but professional rugby is still in it's infancy, and there will always be peaks and troughs with regard to quality. Also, we are in the first year of a WC cycle, so a lot of teams will be tinkering and brand new. Personally I think we will have some great games during the Lions tour. Prior to the 09 tour all we heard from the SA media was about a forward battle and the weakness of the Lions backs, and yet the Lions backs were emphatically better and played all the rugby. Lions tours make players better.

Ben S, everyone likes a winner, although I'm still scarred by the experience of watching the Wallabies beat Wales in the third Test in Sydney last year. It took my bank account a while to recover too. But as a debating point, what do you think of the argument that from the moment it became professional, rugby found itself required to entertain, to maintain its profile in a competitive marketplace? Before 1996, it was a game for the players. If spectators came along, well and good _ but the players had no obligation to keep them entertained. The best tickets for the Lions Tests this year will cost $295. Anyone who pays that much might feel entitled to something other than 80 minutes of collapsed scrums, shambolic breakdowns, poor passing and aimless kicking.

Ben.S - why do people care about the brand of rugby? If you look at WC winning teams in 2003 and '07, you would hardly call either teams entertaining or expansive.You cut your cloth to suit the style that works best for your team.Would people be critical of the wb's if they were playing a supposedly boring brand of rugby,but were winning their games. One of the weaknesses of the current ab side,is that for all their expansive play,Hansen has done this at the cost of neglecting the pack,and you saw the results of that in the England test. Pragmtism should always take priority over some ludicrous desire to entertain.You concern yourself with winning first and foremost,and if you can play an exciting brand at the same time, that's a bonus.

'the brilliance of Will Genia and lingering doubts about the quality of the Lions’ 9-10 options outweighing any question marks over the hosts.' In his last 20 Tests how many brilliant performances has Genia put in? Conversely, how well have Care and Youngs played for England in the same period? Likewise Cooper/Beale v Sexton/Flood. And as for Cooper having a trick up his sleeve, that's simplistic. It hasn't done a great deal to date, and what does it matter when Deans has the Wallabies playing such an ugly brand of rugby?

The Sharks and the Stormers are going to very very strong in 2013. The sharks have recruited well and have couple of players coming through in the positions they were weak in 2013. The Stormers have benefited from the demise of the Lions, snaring their three best players in Taute, Jantjes and Cilliers. Added to that is a young but fast maturing forward pack, they should start as one of the favourites to be overall winners. There seems to be something wrong at the Bulls and I expect them to struggle and finish somewhere around mid-table. Ludeke will have to start making some big decisions with regards to blooding some of the young talent they have been stockpiling over the last three or four years. As you said the Cheetahs lost five or so players from the starting pack of forwards. The loss is somewhat compensated for by the fact that none of their losses were really that impressive (with the possible exception of Ashley Johnson). A couple of injuries to their star players and things might get pretty ugly for them. It is not outside of the realms of possibility that they could be scrapping out with the Kings at the bottom of the South African conference and the overall table. The kings have been dealt a bum deal by SARU by only guaranteeing them Super rugby for one year. Its made it almost impossible for them to recruit quality players away from the settled unions and makes investment into youth players redundant. The best they can hope for is for the Cheetahs crash and burn and for couple home wins against the weakest of the Australian teams. Seems unlikely though.