'Every time he goes away with England he seems to come back a better player'

I genuinely am concerned about messing with the most unique part of Rugby Union.

I don’t really see what the issue is with teams scrumming for penalties - but I take the point about refs being under pressure and making the wrong call.

But winning a penalty/penalty advantage encourages the attacking team to have a crack at it with space when a free kick turns the whole thing into a ruck.and all 8 forwards standing in a line ready to receive you. Unless it’s a quick tap which it rarely is.

The penalty also gives teams a reason to kick for territory and set up an attacking lineout. Which means more tries.

I also don’t get why scrums should be a deterrent to gaining “new fans”. Perhaps the drama and mystique (including the time wasted) setting up and engaging in scrums should be emphasized over the shrill complaining about how slow the game is. Why put down as a negative something that is great albeit an acquired taste? Market the scrum. Don’t change it.

Has anyone watched American sports? Built in boredom which Rugby is far from if we’re close to 40mins in play time!

Stopping the clock during resets makes perfect sense. As for the rest. Leave the scrum alone please.

A pet hate of mine is how some English refs (not Luke Pearce or Matt Carley funnily enough) will say "use it or reset" if the scrum has gone down despite the ball successfully making its way to the feet of the #8. Under no circumstances should that ever lead to a reset.

I think the main thrust by far ought to be the need to devalue resets and remove the pressure on the ref to make decision when he probably doesn't want to. Stopping the clock during the reset process and only starting it again on the new 'Crouch' command achieves that aim.

I don't like the assistant ref participating in scrum reffing. They are a long way away and they may not be on the same page as the main official, leading to even more pens!

LaRoche were missing a few but so were Leinster with the backline also completely reshuffled during the week. When the game was only 6-3 to LaRoche and Leinster scored a neat try it looked like they would strike again. Nowell's block to stop a 3 on 1 and certain try was surely worth a yellow. If Leinster score before H/T they go in 16-6 and I felt a bonus point was available. LaRoche succeeded in making it a dogfight but this time they discovered Leinster had more dog in them. LaRoche have won all the big home games including Toulon, Bordeaux and Toulouse. (A weak Toulouse team but in the away match LaTocje got within one score in Toulouse.

If remaining matches go as expected then Bordeaux will be overall #1 seed and Leinster will be #2 with both having home matches until the final. Toulouse sent the big guns to get a bonus point with against Sharks but they failed. They will likely finish second in their group with a #5 seeding and have away matches after the round of 16.

Toulouse likely away to eg Northhampton in QF and would play Bordeaux away should they make a semi final. Leinster would likely play Toulon/LaRoche in a semi in Dublin.

The accepted version of 'not being able to see past Toulouse' might need revising particularly as Bordeaux scored 69 against Exeter.

if its a toss up between Isiekwe, Coles, and Kpoku for a world cup place, but Isiekwe and Coles both have 20 caps and have trained with the squad for multiple consecutive campaigns, and Kpoku hasn't, club form might not be deciding factor for Borthwick (nor should it be!)

Speaking of our man Schmidt, it was him and Farrell who showed the World how to beat the ABs. And it was Schmidt who taught the ABs how to beat Ireland.

Sure, playing what's in front of you is all very well in good. But if you're set piece is rubbish, you're breakdown work poor, and your defence is like a leaky sieve, you'll only be scoring consolation tries.

What's surprising, however, is the lack of innovation. I think we all thought that would be a big part of Razor's reportoire. So far we haven't seen much.

Razor seems partly held back by fear and the fact he's lacking an innovative figure in his coaching team. All the coaches know each other and have worked together for the same team; there's a real risk of groupthink.

When Razor bought O'Gara onboard at the Crusaders, he described his decision along the lines of: We wanted to bring someone onboard from a different environment, someone who would ask us different questions.

It's the mindset I've seen a lot of winners display—a willingness to be challenged and humility to have an open mind.

At the moment I see that attitude missing, and I'm not convinced Hansen has the tactical pedigree for his job.

But as we've seen from Razor, he has had the confidence to innovate in the past, and the ruthlessness to end a career for the sake of the team. Let's hope that self-belief to make the brave calls comes back soon.

I can't see much value in that being honored. Current Super would save more than it would take off from Sky's offer I'd imagine. I'd be happy to got with the NPC now and just lose a bunch of All Blacks as a result, but keeping the budget intact is paramount imo.

With Super up in the air they can cut like a 2 year deal and ditch Sky when something new comes out.

Highlights the need for a comparable URC type competition to be part of, or just run it for longer and hope the Aussies participate.

His last 3 appearances at 10 were very, very good though - 2 from the bench and an entire game against Ireland. While his cameos at 15 offered little impact. You're correct about BB, a better 15 than a 10. Although his running game that made him so great is slowly disappearing.

Either a massive 20+ team comp or two split Super Bowl style.

Through all the Super teams, and even in NPC, the players aren't allowed to play rugby themselves now. That which made them great is gone, and it is now heavily reliant on the coach to set the structure, ala Schmidts success with them.