Alex Sanderson quells Six Nations fears after George Ford has scan

Kiwi coaches are vindictively trying to do the same to Australia.

Of course Australia's next coach or coaches must be an Australian but they must also not be from the Tahs, like Cheika or Eddie Jones. They just can't help themselves choosing hopeless Tah pets, like Foley, or Phipps, or Hooper, or Beale, or Mumm, or Porecki or Donaldson over much better Australian players, which cripples the team and it's morale.

But the Tahs don't care. They put themselves before Australian rugby and if they can't justify a Tah coach, a compliant kiwi who will do the same thing is just as good.

I'm amazed, sort of, that so many Kiwis, Argentinians, Welshmen and Scotsmen, want Joe Schmidt to ignore his son's welfare, just for the opportunity to undermine Australian rugby, again. It is very callous.

It is also callous in my opinion for Joe Schmidt to see undermining Australian rugby as more important than his son's welfare, despite having promised his son and his wife after his indulgent Ireland coaching gig, that he would spend more time with them and pulling his weight at home.

What sort of bitter and twisted individual sees a vindictive campaign against Australia as more crucial than looking after his family ? Are all kiwis this vindictive ? Some I know are not and are equally flabbergasted at Schmidt's chutzpah in ignoring his previous promises to his family, to coach the Wallabies to failure, from NZ, whenever he is there of course .....

It shows just how desperate and mean spirited the Tahs are as well, to want to insist he stays away from his family, just so more Tah players get a spot in the Wallabies. It is beyond callous.

Dear kiwis, please just bugger off out of Australian rugby. It's dragging you down as well by making sure you have no real competition. How dumb can you be ?

You ain't got it, boy. Now run along. The grown-ups are talking.

Would I'd be think is that in the future that's not going to be the case. Having such a large number of WCs certainly adds flexibility of some nature in that regards, I'm just not sure it would be the best.

South Africa isn't part of european rugby at all

Well that's one starting point for an error in your reasoning. Do you think that in regards to who should have a say in how it's setup in the future as well? Ie you would care what they think or what might be more fair for their teams (not saying your model doesn't allow them a chance)?

Yes, I was thinking about an automatic qualifier for a tier 2 side, but I certainly wouldn't think it's a necessity when they are likely to get a decent chance if they're good enough with yours (but that is the thrust of typical tournement like this, eg when NZ/All Whites got a free entry into FIFA WC etc).

Ultimately what I think would be better for t2 leagues would be a third comp underneath the top two tournemnts where they play a fair chunk of games, like double those two. So half a dozen euro teams along with the 2 SA and bottom bunch of premiership and top14, some Championship and div 2 sides thrown in.

The purpose of the EPCR comps is, I think, the facilitate competition between the best of the 3 leagues.

And at this point has the chance to raise the pinnacle of domestic rugby standards/theatre, which can drive its growth around the world. So if the point is to get the best rugby on the park possible, I certainly think that intent has a lot of merit at this point. The competition still be changed in the future when needed, my thought was just to create a middle ground now which can sustain it until that time has come, were I thought yours is more likely to result in the constant change/manipulation it has been victim to.

Finally, were going full circle here, yes, that is the question I'm raising. I'm highlighting that those leagues/countries chose to implement a "bigger base" model (not saying those bases are therefor bigger than "clubs" who didn't adopt that model mind you), aside from maybe Ireland. Those countries could have kept their leagues and had what you suggest it already really is, a defacto european comp, with simply a couple of their best rotating through Pro/URC rugby. Instead they chose to funnell all their players into say 4 sides, to improve their quality and allow all to stay in the league (instead of say if a random team like Cardiff do well at the onset and then continue to lure others talent to them to keep them permenatly at the top, while others rotate in and out so often they can't get a foothold etc). Now, that doesn't mean too much in an of itself, but what I see is an approach that is going to improve these teams, especially in places like Ireland, Scotland, SA, (but possibly also detrimental to having at least one strong team in Wales case), and should therefor have a guarentee of representation. So in my case I think that repsented with 7 partipants, so that might look something like (the 7 found by URCs own chosen method) the four semi finalsts (or top four seed if they prefer that), then each regions top side if not in the four, then back to seed to fill it out etc.

There's no point interviewing him, you might as well have a mache camel infront of the camera and a tap recorder repeating, I felt this was the best team for this week..

The jump in how many Wallaby rucks last three seconds or less is telling. In the last four seasons, the Wallabies averaged under 60% in rucks under 3 seconds. In 2024, 64% of Wallaby rucks lasted three seconds or less, even whilst the team made the most carries per Test in five years (125 carries a game).

Schmidt abhors mental errors more than he loves feats of skill. In particular, he cannot abide handling errors, and the style of play which tends to cause errors. Offloads (attempted chicken wings) are seen as a major culprit for ball spills. When Schmidt was coaching at Ireland he famously forbade a dozen starters from trying a ‘Sonny Bill.’ The result was that Ireland made only 4.8 offloads per Six Nations matches under Schmidt; almost two lower than anyone else.

The Wallabies averaged 5.4 offloads per 2024 Test, down from 8 under Eddie Jones and 6.7 under Dave Rennie. This resulted in a rate of passing errors of one every 142 passes in 2024 (under Rennie it was one in 87; under Jones one in 67 passes).