Heavyweight prop snubbed by Gatland who bench presses 210kg ready for Six Nations debut

I don't think they should have bought him, but they did.

I also follow League closely, and I’d say the main motivations were revenge and hubris.

It didn't hurt League in particular, despite him being one of the top 5 highest paid players.

It probably hurt Rugby Union more via the exit of Nawaqanitawase, Carter Gordon and Petaia,…but it has already happened!

I note the outlined deficiencies in both attack and defence. I also think that he's a very fast learner and very adaptable with very little notice.

I think the main motivation is our weakness in the centres,…Ikitau excepted.

My view is that we’d be absolutely steamrolled by the Lions in the centres with anyone else available. I mean Piasami, Stewart, or even Kerevi in defence.

I think it’s a gamble, but one we had to take. He’ll wrestle down big guys, miss some and so on. He'll also flip some delicious passes, take some unexpected passes, beat guys with pace and/or grunt and swerve. He can cover tackle too.

Sua'ali'i is used to changing positions between games and within games, and IMO reads the overall game well. He’s no average League player at all.

Expect to see him at 12 as much as 13, occasionally at first receiver and occasionally out wide.

It’s worth the gamble!

There will be plenty of cohesion with the Scotland midfield and Keenan’s ability to anticipate, plus two powerful, big work rate wingers. If the Lions win a lot of ball I don’t see how Aussie will defend them play in, play out.

I don’t know whether they were trying to hold something back v Fiji, but if they are as soft as that v the Lions, Russell will carve them up.

Remember Scotland beat Aussie by the biggest margin of anyone on the EOYT.

I looked at him a few timnes for the Blues and I could not find a second 5/8 in there! Wing or FB, for sure.

But those contact skills, and that ability to read the attack can only be learned through experience, and lots of it!

2) The Top 14 is paying players too much, leading to wage inflation around the world which is bad for the sport.

Firstly, young athletes have a range of sports to choose from, so rugby holding out the prospect of a lucrative, glamorous career helps attract talent.

Above all, market forces mean the French clubs earn a lot of money, and spend a large part of that money on relatively high wages, within a framework set by the league to maintain the health of the league. This framework includes the salary cap and Jiff rules which in effect limit the number of foreign stars the clubs employ and encourage the development of young talent, so there is a limit on Top14 demand. The Toulon of the 2010s is a thing of the past.

So yes, the French clubs cream off some top players - they are competitive sports teams, what do expect them to do with their money? - but there’s still a there’s a plentiful supply of great rugby players and coaches without French contracts. The troubles in England and Wales were down to mismanagement of those national bodies, and clubs themselves, not the French

So if you don’t want to let market forces determine wage levels, and you do want to prevent the French clubs from spending so much of their large incomes on players, how on earth do you want to set player wages?

Is the problem that NZ can’t pay so much as the Top 14 and you fear the best players will be lured away and/or you want NZ franchises to compete for leading international talent? Are you asking for NZ wage scales to be adopted as the maximum allowed, to achieve this? But in that case why not take Uruguay, or Spain, or Tonga or Samoa as the standard, so Samoa, a highly talented rugby nation, can keep Samoan players in Samoa, not see them leave for higher wages in NZ and elsewhere.

Rugby is played in lots of countries, with hugely varying levels of financial backing etc. Obviously, it’s more difficult for some than others, but aside for a limited amount of help from world rugby, it’s up to each one to make their sums add up, and make the most of the particular advantages their nation/club/franchise has. SA are not the richest, but are still highly successful, and I don’t hear them complaining about Top14 wages.

Many, particularly second tier, nations benefit from the Top14, and anyone genuinely concerned about the whole community of world rugby should welcome that. England and NZ have laid down rules so they can’t make the most of the French competition, which is up to them. But unlike some NZ fans and pundits, the English aren’t generally blaming their own woes on the French, rather they want reform of the English structure, and some are calling for lessons to learned from their neighbours across the channel. If NZ fans aren’t satisfied, I suggest they call for internal reform, not try to make the French scapegoats.

In my opinion, a breach of standards would be to include on your team players who beat up women, not to regularly send a B team on the summer tours for reasons of player welfare, which in all the years you’ve been doing this only some of the pundits and fans of a single country have made a stink about.

[my comments here are, of course, not aimed at all NZ fans and pundits]

A kicker with an exit kick on a tight angle? Throw in at the lineout and maul.

I mean why not?

It might seem bizarre that you’d give away possession on attack in the oppositions 22 but we kick away a lot of possession these days and if your pack and scrum is dominant…

It isn’t a penalty when a player is ahead of (offside) during a kickoff or restart. Thats the only time I know of that being offside isn’t a penalty.

Any other time a player is ahead of a kick (in play) it’s offside.

Which kind of begs the question, why not make it a penalty anytime a player is ahead of their kicker? Why’s is it only a scrum offence at kickoff?

The penalty in this case is for deliberately committing an offence. it doesn’t have anything to do with the kick and the chaser - or the player being offside - it’s about Libbok and Esterhuisen deliberately playing for the scrum.

*In the event that a player were to deliberately knock the ball on to get a scrum - that would be a penalty too (for example) if deemed to be deliberate.

Another penalty might be an Italian prop deliberately looking to get a headbutt by acting like a little p*** laaitie.

Nick White acting like his throat had been slashed when Faf de Klerk brushed his whiskers with his pinky.

Dan Carter acting like he’s been hit by a car after a legal tackle by Bismarck du Plessis.

Actually, it did look like he got hit by a car…

Anyway.

Interesting stuff.

That’s a rough 2nd 15 of dudes not playing not selected injured

Ofa Aumua Dyer

Ahkuoi Lord

Parker Lio-Willie Blackadder

Preston Rivez

Havili Lam

Carter Perofeta Fihaki

That’s a 3rd

Norris Bell Mafileo

Shalfoon Walker-Leawere

Grace Flanders Christie

Fakatava Godfrey

Higgins Rona

Naholo Nanai-Seturo Tangitau

A 4th

Numia Slater Ma’u

Gallagher McWhannel

Delaney Iose Segner

Roe Jacomb

McLeod Sullivan

Springer Hurley Fehi F

A 5th ,cheated abit by only doing a 15 snd there are heaps of dudes I left out for various reasons and picked some on a whim but I reckon the depth looks pretty good obviously getting a bit thin the further u go but there a heaps of experienced guys left out and some real young dudes who look the goods but ain’t played much Super yet