Top 14 : Pierre-Louis Barassi de retour avec Toulouse

Japan have always been a good team to play, but there are doubts as to where they are going under Eddie Jones. As always he is talking himself up, but the latest results are poor. The 41 - 17 defeat in the PN Cup Final in Sept. for example. But in the longer term, under a better coaching team, would def. be wanting to play them each year.

Also hope this means EDG is OK, this is a fairly weak team with the likes of 'project' player Bell and still returning from injury Lord on the bench. Hope Ofa gets a few chances to highlight is skill, along with his grit.

This could be close to the top backline so if Eddie continues to pick no names it could be a very long night for the Brave Blossom's.

At NPC level with Taranaki, in the 2023 playoffs and Championship Final, Coach Neil Barnes preferred to start Josh Jacombs at 10 with Perofeta at fullback.

At Super Rugby Pacific level, in 2024 playoffs and Championships Final, Coach Vern Cotter preferred to start Plummer at 10 with Perofeta at fullback.

It’s not surprising that at All Black level, Razor sees Perofeta strictly as a fullback, when his NPC and SRP coaches do not trust him at 10.

One other idea that Mark Evans thought of while we were talking, and which I had to leave out of the article, was the possibility of Australia and Argentina joining the Pacific Nations Cup in those tour years..

And I have to say, this idea has some merit too, especially if RA and the UAR do receive some degree of compensation for the lost TRC games.

There's a 'right thing to do' elemebet about it, and Australia A played in the PNC only last year, so it has hed flexibility in the past, too.

Also sounds like they're suggesting the Springboks’ second XV would beat the Springboks’ first XV.

Fair.

NZ's domestic scene has the Ranfurly Shield within the Bunnings NPC. I think it works great. You might win the Freedom Cup but you might not win TRC!

Because you bring up SOO to me it sounds like a concept where you think say "who wins a proper 3 or 5 match series between All Blacks and Springboks is more relevant that who wins a one off RWC". While I agree a series might be a harder prospect than three sequential games against random opponents, it really goes against the game for me. RWC is the peak, enjoy your Freedom Cup if you want to (and maybe more would than a RWC Final), but the right thing to do is not segregate the game like that.

What I don't really see though is Fiji and Japan taking on that much for a single year. It just does not work out right. Five more tier 1 games a year would hurt their NC prospects (hard enough to step up to 6 guaranteed tier 1's, were often would be mixed with tier2), give them time to build up to that level of competitiveness.

I've probably caught most of it coming out in dribs and drabs but is there not more to the summary of what talk has come out of Australia (RA) about these years? Would they have the same take as SANZAARs response?

I agree with the flexibility of TRC though, Japan and Fiji could replace NZ and SA those years. The occasional appearance would be good but might suit Lions years? I still think my preference would still be to turn those years into tour based TRC formats.

Following a RWC a series based two year TRC, with full tours the first year, and just 3 match series the BIL (second) year, one during the 6N and the other following the Lions (maybe the other two countries have a full tour), then a full H&A double round TRC (or single with 6 teams) the third year, and then a single round RWC year?

Obviously whatever happens needs to be tied in with PNC as you can't continue to give Japan a spot simply because they have the best economy. This needs to be merit based.

As for compensation Herbert should first try and get his $700,000 Euros from the FFR for some non existent deal and then he should read the fine print and realize that the Rugby Championship is actually ending in 2025, so there will be no compensation in 2026. Any 13 year old will be able to explain to Herbert the nuances of a non existent agreement.