Gloucester explain why Rees-Zammit at No15 was a one-off just for now

I have critized Razor for picking players he knows occasionally?

I said I'm not surprised because of his style, he's more a grinder player like Cane, not going to show up on peoples radar until you see how bad the other choices are. This year players like Clarke have been on fire and just show a bit more.

Are you one of those posters continually taking it easy on Razor because he doesn't have his Crusaders stars available? Do you think the rugby world is going to up to him suddenly once Mo'unga returns? lol

Cheika was an OK coach but his 'go our and destroy the opposition' tactic worked for a while and then didn't.

Please give me a list of great Aussie coaches that I have missed.

But also, as it is the governing body, it also has more responsibility. As long as WR looks at FFR as the running body for rugby in France, that 'power' will remain. If the LNR refuses to govern their clubs use of players to enable a request by FFR (from WR) to ensure it's players are able to compete in International rugby takes place they will simply remove their participation. If the players complain to the France's body, either of their health and safety concerns (through playing too many 'minutes' etc) or that they are not allowed to be part in matches of national interest, my understanding is action can be taken against the LNR like it could be any other body/business. I see where you're coming from now re EPCR and the shake up they gave it, yes, that wasn't meant to be a separate statement to say that FFR can threaten them with EPCR expulsion by itself, simply that it would be a strong repercussion for those teams to be removed (no one would want them after the above).

You keep bringing up these other things I cannot understand why. Again, do you think if the LNR were not acting responsibly they would be able to get away with whatever they want (the attitude of these posters saying "they pay the players")? You may deem what theyre doing currently as being irresponsible but most do not. Countries like New Zealand have not even complained about it because they've never had it different, never got things like windfall TV contracts from France, so they can't complain because theyre not missing out on anything. Sure, if the French kept doing things like withholding million dollar game payments, or causing millions of dollars of devaluation in rights, they these things I'm outlining would be taking place. That's not the case currently however, no one here really cares what the French do. It's upto them to sort themselves out if they're not happy. Now, that said, if they did make it obvious to World Rugby that they were never going to send the French side away (like they possibly did stating their intent to exclude 20 targeted players) in July, well then they would simply be given XV fixtures against tier 2 sides during that window and the FFR would need to do things like the 50/50 revenue split to get big teams visiting in Nov.

I just have an idea it needs a whole team focus to make work. I also have an idea what the opposite applies with players in general. I feel like French backs and halves can be very small and quick, were as here everyone is made to fit in a model physique. Louis was some 10 and 20 kg smaller that his opposition and we just do not have that time of player in our game anymore. I'm dying out for a fast wing to appear on the All Blacks radar.

But I, and my thoughts on body size in particular, could be part of the same indoctrination that goes on with player physiques by the establishment in my parts (country).

With France, it's not just about viewers, they are also paying much more. So no doubt there will be a hit (to the amount the French teams receive for only playing a fraction of it) but they may not care too much as long as the big clubs, the top 8 for example, enter the meaty end, and it wouldn't have the same value to them as the top14 contract/compensation does. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the 3 separate networks broadcast deals only went to the clubs in their regions as well (that's how SR ended up (unbalanced) I believe).

Sometimes it doesn't work out so you have to go looking for another national coach who supports his country and believes in what he is doing. Like NZ replacing Ian Foster. And South Africa bringing Erasmus back in to over see Neinbar.

This is the real world. Not the fantasy oh you don't need passion for your country for international rugby. Ask a kiwi, or a south african or a frenchman.

Here in NZ commentators have been blabbing that our bottom pathway competition the NPC (provincial teams only like Taranaki, Wellington etc)is not fit for purpose ie supplying players to Super rugby level then they started blabbing that our Super Rugby comp (combined provincial unions making up, Crusaders, Hurricanes, etc) wasn't good enough without the South African teams and for the style SA and the northern powers play at test level.

Here is what I reckon, Our comps are good enough for how WE want to play rugby not how Ireland, SA, England etc play. Our comps are high tempo, more rucks, mauls, running plays, kicks in play, returns, in a game than most YES alot of repetition but that builds attacking skillsets and mindsets. I don't want to see world teams all play the same they all have their own identity and style as do England (we were scared with all this kind of talk when they came here) World powerhouse for a reason, losses this year have been by the tiniest of margins and could have gone either way in alot of games. Built around forward power and blitz defence they have got a great attack Wingers are chosen for their Xfactor now not can they chase up and unders all day. Stick to your guns its not far off