'Horrible feeling': Sam Cane says 'time will tell' whether Springboks loss was beneficial

Yeah, the new govn body purposefully skewed the draw just to get a better hype to the season. I thought that was common knowledge/understanding?

Would say POC will get the line out.

Cant see who is going on defence or attack but maybe 1 Scot between the two. Think Wales troubles might mean no coaches.

Wiggy has been called already and I’d say he's for the kicking.

The head to head stats where we thrashed the Reds are more specific. Quite even actually, but 2 clear differences are Canham lost 3 turnovers to Barretts 1 turnover, & the Saders won 90% lineouts to Reds 76% lineout win rate. Blah blah blah . . .

I would hope that the definition of foul play is clear enough that they can say “that wasn’t foul play - even though it resulted in a serious injury - because although player A did not wrap with the right arm, he entered the ruck through the gate and from a legal angle at a legal height, and was supporting his own weight until player B entered the ruck behind him and pushed him onto player C’s leg” or “that wasn’t foul play although players D and E picked player F out of a ruck, tipped him upside down and dropped him on his shoulder because reasons.”

Referees sometimes offer a clear explanation, especially when in discussion with the TMO, but they don’t always, especially for incidents that aren’t reviewed on field. It’s also a recognised flaw in the bunker system that there isn’t an explanation of the card decisions - I’d personally prefer the bunker to prepare a short package of the best angles and play back to the ref their reasoning, with the ref having the final say, like an enhanced TMO. It would cost a few more seconds, but would help the crowd to understand.

Greater clarity carries with it risks - not least that if the subsequent feedback is at odds with the ref’s decision they run the risk of harassment on social media - but rugby is really struggling to show that it can manage these decisions consistently, and offering a clear explanation after the fact would help to ensure better consistency in officiating in future.

For some reason it’s ‘poaching’ when any other nations do it, but not when the ‘poor islands’ do it, and statistically, they’re right up there with Scotland and Japan in terms of poached players. Not one of these Kiwis and Aussies would go live in the Islands to satisfy any criteria, and I’d say most of them have hardly ever set foot in the islands, outside of a holiday.

They should make the rule that you either have to be born in a nation, or that you’ve spent two-thirds of your life there. That rule would be good for NZ. But then watch the usual sector complain how that unfairly penalizes their national side because they’d lose all their imports. Can’t win.