Rugby News: ‘Only way to recover is to get injured’ - French star’s dire workload warning, Cooper, Rennie fail to fire

We are seeing more players being able to cover more positions. Healy with Ireland was registered as covering all the frontrow. VdF was the one throwing into the lineout not the hooker, and we are seeing more forwards and backs changing places for lineouts as coaches move players were he wants them rather than the traditional roles.

not saying players can't play 80 minutes. But they will tire; high tempo games can be decided in a second or on a turn of play. Putting on 7 forwards likely will mean hooker is one of them and I'm not sure a player would be allowed to play out of position in a pack even in a depowered scrum.

Its debatable if they would get tired faster. SA were more likely to call for scrums and more likely for their hooker to play nearly full game. That would be the one position you would think that if there are more scrums the hooker would be changed sooner but he was able to keep going. Even Fourie who was not a hooker played nearly the whole game and was his usual self around the breakdown. Just because the forwards don’t play 80 doesn’t mean they cant. Not sure anyone did more work then PTSD in the final yet he played 80 minutes in the final and semi final.

So you have gone from Arg and SA want to play the RC in Feb to now saying NZ wont have anyone to play because SA arnt in the RC???? Fantastic imagination there BNF. There is no need or no inclination at this point to have SA tour NZ or vice versa as we already do two test tours for the RC.

That's where my smart-ass comment kicks in. Such a mass of changes, concurrently or consecutively, would give the ref the right to depower the scrum and breakdown. Turn the bomb squad concept against itself. Fresh forwards who will no longer be able to scrummage or scavenge will have to run more and therefore tire faster.

The bench is nolonger for injuries and hasn't been for a while. If you say just for injuries you get blood gate and the 100 min France v Wales game where rules were bent to bring on players. The problem is who determine who is injuried. If a player says part of his body hurts who determines if he is truthful.

And that's the problem, BNHF. The substitute bench in rugby is meant for injuries. Coaches shouldn't be able to pick and choose replacements. It should be done for them. If I was a ref and a team choose to send, say, 3 forwards (never mind a higher number) on at the same time, I'd declare a scrum emergency and move the game to uncontested scrums. That's sort these coaches out!! (or perhaps not ...!!)

Yes SANZAAR doesn’t run the unions. The unions run SANZAAR which is how it should be. I don’t rate the competitions by which one makes the most money. Couldn’t care less actually. I want to watch entertaining rugby and see the All Blacks win. And by that metric, SR trumps T14 anyday. Maybe if the French RU had more say in the T14, their national team might be able to finally win a WC.

So you don't think that Fiji choke in every WC game they lost at the WC. Its ok if you don't understand how WC gets big attendances for T2 v T2 games I can't help you. Namibia v Uruguay got 49,332 in Lille, where do you think all of those fans came from, the two countries involved by have sent 10k if you are really lucky, where did the other nearly 40k come from. Top 14 teams get about 15k per season average, La Rochelle are on an 80 game run of selling out their 16k stadium, those fans went and watched games in the WC. WR gets 90% of its income from the WC event. The Unions each put in a big and if successful they must pay that amount to WR regardless of what they get back. The Union then keeps the ticket money. France was able to put in the highest bid because they new on any given weekend about 160k of fans attend professional rugby matches in France. Those private backers were also able to help fund the money that is needed to put on the event. Lets see how it goes in Oz but the more Twiggs involved the less RA would be in financial difficulties trying to pay for the WC.

So no thoughts on SANZAAR having a bigger GDP???? SANZAAR doesn’t run the Unions of Arg, RA, NZR or SARU so not sure why you think they should be deemed as the reason for WC wins. They weren’t even around for 3 of the 9 competitions. But they do run an international competition that can’t make as much money as you would expect it to make and failed to make Super Rugby into a commercially viable competition. LNR doesn’t run the FFR so have no input into how the national team plays. What they have done is make the top 30 professional teams so happy that more teams wanted to be professional allowing the FFR to also run a professional league under the LNR. They have been able to take a league that had the same income as the Currie Cup or NPC and turn it into the second highest earning Union competition in the World. If SANZAAR was held to account rather than just assume WCs equal money RA might be in a much better situation. You would think with all the WC winners that SR would have stayed as the riches league in Rugby but with every WC win it seems to get poorer.

It is common sense in my opinion. The T14 might be doing great in your book, but that hasn't translated to France performing on the international scene. SANZAAR teams have won the WC 9 times, France 0.

That is not the definition of a choker. Someone who repeatedly makes it to the finals but can’t pull it off, that is a choker. And in Rugby WC's that is France and England. Weather you are for or against private teams really depends on where you see your national team’s priority. Private teams generally don’t have the national teams’ best interests in mind. And they are definitely not responsible for WR’s income, not sure how you can come to that conclusion. A WC in France will always make more than a WC in SA or NZ. It has nothing to do with the private clubs, rather the respective GDPs of each country.

Is it common sense for T14 to be richer than All of SANZAAR. France $2.783 trillion – 40 professional clubs, UK $3.071 trillion (110%) 20 professional clubs, OZ $1.675 trillion, SA $406 billion, NZ $247 billion, Arg $633 billion SANZAAR = $2.961 trillion (106%). So why would a bigger Economy in SANZAAR not be expected to be richer than a domestic league especially when international rugby generates alot more income than club rugby. The two French Regions that both earn about 150% of RA income just in the T14 only have 15% of the French economy. Any way you cut it either T14 is doing really well and SANZAAR average or SANZAAR is doing poorly and T14 is doing average, cant have SANZAAR doing really well and T14 with a worse product to sell and smaller economy doing as good a job.

I think you will find the USA and Japan are. Playing numbers are only behind SA, France, England and New Zealand yet Japan only has one quarter final and the USA has never even finished 3rd in the group. Both have domestic leagues just like England and France yet have failed to match unions with alot less players. Sri Lanka also are in the running as they have never even finished second in the Asia WC playoffs even though they have more players than Scotland. Fiji are also disappointing as they have more players than Ireland, Wales, Argentina and Scotland but have made less knockout games and have also finished 4th in the WC group something even Italy with less players has never done. If you took out the Private owned Clubs from England, France and Japan there would have been about 3000 less professional players in Rugby and England, France and Japan would only allow local players to play. without professional teams for the PIs to play or Argentina or any other T2 side WR would be broke having to fund all the players that private teams are funding. If WR had to fund the Jags they would have to pull funding from Drua, MP, SLAR and RESC plus the new MRL side. When the 11th riches rugby nation (Argentina) aren't able to fund a professional squad of 40 players when they earn $30m what hope do Unions like Canada and the USA on about half that. Not sure why you are so against Private teams (even SA's URC teams are private owned) as WR in alot richer today because the LNR worked to make sure lots of fans attended the WC allowing France to give WR about $30-40m more than SA was offering. All that money is going to fund T2 Rugby whose players are also funded by private club owners. Its not the Unions that are making WR money. When NZ held the WC is was not very good for WR finances which may be why teams like USA, Canada and the PIs who depend heavily on WR saw a big drop off in funding and performance after it while T2 teams who were less dependant on WR funding did better.

First of all — congratulations on mentioning Francis Kean, a convicted murderer who I grew up with. He subsequently was forced off the WR committee; a black eye for WR who will no doubt be wary from now on. FK was symbolic of everything that was wrong with Fiji Rugby AND their politics. It will take time to undo that damage. Just because Fiji voted for Beaumont doesn’t mean anything. Based on what I just said, you should believe me that, at that time, Fijian rugby was very rotten. FK’s membership on the WR committee was the price BB had to pay for Fiji’s vote. It backfired badly. Botia came up through the Sevens ranks; a common pathway for Fiji players. He played for Fiji against Portugal in 2013 and made a French club the following season. Not a coincidence. Same for Viliame “Bill” Mata (picked up by Edinburgh after sevens play). The Drua are sharing in broadcast revenue from the competition but they have also secured their own finance. Fiji is a big enough country to do that. NZ and Aust have helped the Drua, first through the Aussie NRC then into the SRP. The Drua are a gateway for Fiji players to be noticed by rich overseas cluubs. Such is the talent that at least two T14 clubs have set up academies in Fiji. They are taking players directly from Fiji. And that women’s Lions tour is being organised from the NH; if NZ is in their sights as their first tour, it is no doubt because the men are touring Australia (and the strength of the NZ women’s team). What a touring concept that would be! Trans-Tasman Lions tours

Bill Mata and Levani Botia to name just 2 were never professionals in the South, both were given their first professional 15s contracts in the North. Maybe look at the votes of Fiji and Samoa and how people from thise countries got gigs at WR. As an example Francis Kean has been nominated for the World Rugby executive committee. Kean, the chairman of the Fiji rugby union, was seconded by the French rugby federation.. or the Europe v rest of the World Rugby vote Thanks to additional support from Rugby Europe, Canada, Samoa, Fiji and the split North American vote, Beaumont has clinched victory. Doesn't sound to me like Fiji is in the SH corner, care to show where Fiji is lined up with SH. Having the Dura who gets none of the broadcast revenue that the competition generates and is not a shareholder even though in SRP from the start doesn't mean Fiji are now locked into the South, next WR vote they will vote who gives them the most which NZ and RA can't. Believing that SA will stay just because they wont abandon NZ is to ignore that NZ are only looking after themselves not the RC and when Australia is having the Lions NZR are planning to have a rival tour that they hope will take some of the Lions money and eyes. SA will get fed up with the contsant being told no by Oz and NZ at RC level.

You really need to get out of the NH for a visit down under, BNHF. All those top Fiji players in the NH began their test careers down under. The Drua exist mainly on local players who develop then become test players then get signed up by NH clubs. Fiji knows it's best interests are served down under than up north. The MoU is different to the RC. And SA is going its own way. I think they have no appetite to abandon NZ just yet.

Both are asking for it Jacko. If SA leave over it what then. How much is the RC worth to them. If NZR want to do a three match tours with SA would that be enough for SA to not need an RC. If SA are without a competition then that changes how them being added to the 6Ns is discussed

So you think that Fiji aren’t aligned with the NH. All their top players are not playing in OZ and NZ and most would be unlikely to get contracts in the NH if Fiji have to take all their best players to play in the RC. Neither NZ or OZ SRP teams are lining up to hire players from Fiji without first having them commit to only be available for that country and they must get approval to represent Fiji. The timing of the RC is going to become a bigger and bigger issue for SA just like the number of of teams did in SR. does the MOU with Japan say they want to join the RC and have it played in its current window. How did the vote for Samoa go the last time their was a North v South WR vote.

Thinking Fiji would side with SA and Arg means you are in line for a surprise, BNHF. Fiji also has players in NZ and Australia. Japan has MoUs with Australia and NZ so there is alignment there as well. SA and Argentina chose to align themselves with the NH club season; that's on them. Giving that Argentina is on the way back into SR while SA is not means that Argentina may come onboard with RA-NZ so that is 75% of the teams choosing the non-NH path.