Former Rugby Australia chief executive Raelene Castle secures new top job in New Zealand

But I agree, the ABs are definitely in the B range. For me, it's a B+, the + mainly reflecting the lifting of the teams baseline from wobbly to now comfortably being able to win ugly.

Bring on 2025.

E pai ana o korero TJ.

Bugger being the one to tell a guy he's off in his last game lol

Normally they rate them a bit lower if they have no impact don't they. Dmac came on and only really performed better as a 10, when he came into that role from fullback, where he just commits defenders and did a couple of nice flat passes. Otherwise as a fb replacement, very ineffectual (not really saying much in a game like this).

I really hope that Razor is just conserving Dmac because he's going to have no off season (going to top14 supposedly) and will return him to 10 next year. Otherwise just please please oh lord just give him to Toshiba in a swap to get the Mo'ongu signing over the line for next year (too late now).

I don't think I can handle an more of these selections.

Clearly, we are rebuilding from the floor up. But the one place that the Boks are not "miles ahead" is on the paddock. A brand new, relatively untested coaching team, with a new team still in the making, came close in Sth Africa.

Change takes time. Whatever this magic instant innovation potion is you allude to, it doesn't exist. Just ask Rassie. It's taken the Boks years to develop. I've no doubt Razor will get us there.

Ted & Shag were both about 85% I think, Foster at 78% & Razor at 71%. The implication was, of course, that Razor hadn't done as well as the others. A closer look though shows Foster's first 14 tests were v AUS (7) ARG (4) FIJ (2) & TON (1). There was no explanation about this, despite the obvious discrepancy rendering the "statistics" completely useless.

Not good enough Goldie, Kristie, whoever dreamt up this fiasco.