The referee(s) is (are) the only judge of the rules.

If the referee says ‘tackle’ you release the ball carrier, if the referee says ‘offside’ you bail out of the charge, if the referee says ‘no’ you stop trying to get the turnover. Just plain dumb from Christie.

I fear it’s going to take a new generation of players to see real change with this. They’ve been coaching the front on ‘cheek to cheek’ tackle for thirty odd years, especially in the backs, to stop the offload.
While players conscious brains might think differently, their bodies will (all too often) revert to muscle memory.
Tackles where players go in upright need to be highlighted in replay sessions as a ‘black mark’, risking a red card. Coaches need to drill into players to ‘bend at the hips’.

They showed the replay of R Ioane’s head hitting the ground in the Blues game. He was immediately removed under fear of concussion.
I don’t like seeing it either. But I think it’s important for people to see that someone’s head hitting the ground is a completely legitimate reason to fear concussion. Though such replays are sickening, they provide an example of what people should look out for; far more so that telling someone or seeing it written in text.
Agree glad he seems ok. We need to keep the players safe.

The 2.6 million they wasted on a RWC they were never going to win, and the millions promised to Suaalii would sure come in handy right now.

I’d give Aumua a shot at 12 with McLeod at 13. Power and finesse combo, with youth on their side. A solid ‘bail out’ option for Kemara would no doubt make him more comfortable, and might draw in some of the defense.
Havili utility cover.

Apart from that players have left or are injured, a big part of the reason for the decline is that the coaches have gone.

But as the coaches have gone to coach the All Blacks, and the wealth of players across the New Zealand Super Rugby teams, I think the All Blacks will be alright.

I hope Australian rugby regains its former strength and grows. Happy to disagree about how that will happen.

They could put the money from two of the Super Rugby teams towards a third tier competition. That provides teams for spectators to support; it wouldn’t pay for the whole thing, but it’s a start.
The better Australian teams are good. Strengthening those teams will make them genuine title contenders. Get some titles and the virtuous cycle will start.

After seeing the constant disfunction at the top of Australian rugby over the years makes a lot of sense.

The answer isn’t turning Australian second tier teams into third tier teams though.
I know very little about Australian domestic rugby lower than Super Rugby teams. I’ve heard the attempt to set up the third tier NRC didn’t work as Rugby Australia couldn’t afford to keep it going long enough to develop a following. People are currently suggesting using club rugby as the third tier, I don’t know enough to know if that’s a good idea.
The Wallabies were the solidly in the top three international sides when Australia had three Super Rugby teams backed up by a club based third tier; and sometimes clearly the best. They won a RWC and held the Bledisloe. Why not try that out again?
A key thing about rugby’s growth in Australia, which no one mentions, is that Australians hate losing to New Zealanders. Would the NRL and ARL be as popular if: about half the teams were from New Zealand and the last time an Australian team won was in 2014? If the NRL and ARL teams (and national sides) were getting regularly smashed by New Zealand teams there’s no way those competitions would be as popular. When the Wallabies held the Bledisloe the tickets sold out in minutes. Deans got the Wallabies to world number two in 2011 and 2012 and a RWC semi-final in 2011 – not good enough because they weren’t better than the All Blacks. McKenzie got the Wallabies to RWC final and within one or two good plays from a win – not good enough because they weren’t better than the All Blacks.
Australian rugby won’t grow until they are competitive with New Zealand teams, because the casual Australian sports fan won’t watch it otherwise. To do that they need to concentrate their Super Rugby talent in three, or maybe four teams.
If the Wallabies the Australian Super Rugby teams win the fans will come. Then the game will grow in Australia, not the other way around.

The Blues could be outstanding, if the right players are picked (or not picked). They are paying $5.00 to win. Could be worth putting $20 on them?

I would start Suafoa at six any day over A Ioane. Suafoa may be needed to cover at lock though.

I’d like to see Sullivan get a shot at 10. If it works out he could be part of a fearsome inside back combination for the All Blacks: Roigard, Sullivan, R Ioane, J Barrett, L Aumua. I dare a defense to drift against that backline.

Great call regarding Suafoa.

I’m suprised that almost no one else is talking about him (especially in New Zealand). Could be the answer at lock/blindside, for both the Blues and the All Blacks. He’s: tough, all hard work, and skilled.

That’s a good point. Many Australian fans instinctively dislike a ‘Kiwi’ as the Wallabies coach. Including a decent amount of the administrators; especially as they will have their own favorites they want in the role.
The other thing that could hamper Schmidt is, though Australia produces some rudely talented players, Australian rugby players don’t always mesh with New Zealand rugby systems. Both in terms of how they play the game and skills. But also in attitude. In New Zealand bad attitudes are seldomly tolerated. From what some of the Irish players have said, Schmidt isn’t there to make friends and it’s Joe’s way or the highway; heaven help Wallabies who arrive at training camp and are unfit, or think the team revolves around them.
I wish Schmidt and Wallabies well. As always I hope they beat everyone, except the All Blacks.
If Robertson does as expected and improves the All Blacks, and continues to beat the Wallabies, the Rugby Championship could be tough on the Wallabies; especially as the Springboks are top tier. Discontent could rise pretty quickly.

That’s a good point. Many Australian fans instinctively dislike a ‘Kiwi’ as the Wallabies coach. Including a decent amount of the administrators; especially as they will have their own favorites they want in the role.

The other thing that could hamper Schmidt is, though Australia produces some rudely talented players, Australian rugby players don’t always mesh with New Zealand rugby systems. Both in terms of how they play the game and skills. But also in attitude. In New Zealand the attitude of the coach is Fifo (Fit In or **** Off); bad attitudes are not tolerated. From what some of the Irish players have said, Schmidt isn’t there to make friends and it’s Joe’s way or the highway; heaven help Wallabies that arrive at training camp that are unfit, or think the team revolves around them.

I wish Schmidt and Wallabies well. As always I hope they beat everyone, except the All Blacks.

If Robertson does as expected and improves the All Blacks, then continues to beat the Wallabies. The Springboks are still top tier. The Rugby Championship could be tough on the Wallabies. If so discontent could rise pretty quickly.

I think they are giving special treatment players who play in Japan Rugby League One: 1) as they want to give an incentive for players to play there, rather than in Europe, as the standard of play is less damaging to the players – so they are in better shape for international duty. 2) They are trying to build a relationship with Japan.

The long term solution is to formalize the crossover games into a wider pacific championship like the European Rugby Champions Cup. The Major League Rugby teams would added once they got a bit better.

A big lure of being an All Black was the elite status that came with it. The erosion of the All Blacks reputation during the Foster era could be start of a long term decline.
If Robertson restores the reputation it could postpone the long term decline.
I was surprised when Piutau left for Europe. I assumed it was as Piutau thought he was in danger of not getting in the All Blacks, due to players like Milner-Skudder etc. I partially blame John Kirwan who was mismanaging the Auckland Blues and not giving Piutau the opportunity to shine. Also the NZRU should’ve made sure that Piutau was happy to stay and secured his contract. SBW got treated pretty well, they let him do what ever he wanted: Boxing career, go back to league, try his hand at sevens.

The lure of being an All Black will keep a decent amour of the better players in NZ. Not for the same length of time though. Being able to pay the players more might keep enough there for long enough.

Super Rugby will probably play all the crossover games in Japan for a share of the broadcast and any cut the gate profit.

Hopefully less similar. That will be a start.

It will take a long time, or radical (uncomfortable) change to make it really different.

South Africa never really took to regional teams like New Zealand did. With smaller, more compact geography, it made more sense to combine NPC teams into Super Rugby teams. That was the reason why New Zealand wanted regional teams as it concentrated the best players in five teams, with some mind to making the teams set up to produce combinations for internationals. The fans saw the difference between the NPC and Super Rugby; it also gave the third division, second division, and weaker first division teams a real stake in Super Rugby as their team was actually competitive.
Auckland were dominant in 1996 and 1997, and all but went three in a row in 1998 (having Graham Henry as coach helped). They Blues went backwards afterwards as the playing field was leveled (shamateurism in the late NPC era meant all the best players went to Auckland). Auckland never had to have their administration well organized. As you say the Crusaders really got their administration right (having Deans, Smith, Schimdt, Hansen as coaches and Carter and McCaw also helps 😂 ).
Agree the playing styles in Super Rugby Pacific are all very similar now. The loss of the South African teams really reduced the different styles in Super Rugby. The Australian teams backsliding did as well, as they used to have excellent backs and mobile forwards.

Currently Super Rugby Pacific teams play 14 round robin games. They play three teams twice. The teams that get into the semifinals have to play the quarters finals.
If Super Rugby Pacific eliminated the three additional round robin games and the quarter finals the top four would have four slots in their calendar to play crossover games and end up playing the same amount of games.
They could crossover Super Rugby Pacific top four vs Japan Rugby League One top four. Seven games, semifinal, then final. With the four games saved that’s only five additional games for the Super Rugby Pacific teams. Or they could only play the other nation’s sides in the cross over round robin; four games, semifinal, then final. To keep the player workload down.
The 2024 pre season crossover games will be a good gauge whether the Japan Rugby League One fans will watch games against Super Rugby Pacific teams. I hope they do as it will make a richer competition (double entendre intended 😂 )

Agree, it shouldn’t matter who are the teams in the finals, if the best four are from one country, who cares; the Aussies seem to care though.
I would make it a Cup/Plate /Bowl set up e.g. three series of semi/finals but the groups are split based on position on the table: 1-4, 5-8, 9-12. You still get lots of finals games, the games are more even. You avoid the, mostly meaningless, 1-8, 2-7 games.
The finals set up probably doesn’t have much to do with increasing the quality of the teams in the short term. Having the odd quarter final in Australia will bring in some additional money for that club and be good for fan engagement. But the issues with the long term weakness of the Australian Super Rugby teams are systemic. The Australians won’t reduce the number of their teams. New Zealand can’t afford to make more teams, to even up the average quality. A draft might work but has issues regarding player eligibility that need sorting, also having the better players distributed across lots of teams makes it less likely that international level combinations will develop; which was one of main reasons for Super Rugby in the first place.
I would also look at having the round robin schedule the home games before the crossover games e.g. the Australian teams and the Drua all play each other in the first half of the competition. Which will hopefully generate positive buzz in Australia and build confidence in the players.