1 Workmanlike England are there for the taking.
England are wonderfully supported in France, and they have a group of players who look tight and well acquainted with the game plan. But, in terms of test rugby, they are clearly a side that has its limitations.
Fiji or the Wallabies will meet them in the quarterfinals, and as anticipated before the tournament started, this is an unbelievable opportunity to progress to a Rugby World Cup semifinal.
Samoa were an ankle tap away from beating England at the weekend.
And should Fiji confirm the Wallabies’ exit with a victory against Portugal, Rugby Australia will have to live with the reality that they have been the architects of a massive blown chance for Australian rugby.
2 The big difference between Australia and Ireland.
Fullback Hugo Keenan’s first try in their big win against Scotland highlighted a strength that is unique to Irish rugby at present.
The final pass was supplied by No 13 Garry Ringrose, who was actually playing on the right wing at the time with Mack Hansen undergoing an HIA.
Ringrose ran a perfect winger’s line from blindside wing, even though that’s not his fulltime job.
The level of understanding between the Irish players is off the charts, in part because 10 of the starting XV against Scotland play for Leinster.
Centralisation in Ireland is based around the powerhouse province – and the wealthy schools that feed their academy. Is this achievable in Australia, or even desirable?
3 Brumbies are right to be wary.
The above point is probably one reason the Brumbies are nervous about centralisation if they come under the same umbrella as the Waratahs and Rebels.
In that situation, it would clearly be in Rugby Australia’s commercial interest to see the teams in the bigger markets – Sydney and Melbourne – prosper.
Of course, there would be no shortage of supporters in NSW who would like nothing more than the Waratahs to be transformed into the Leinster of Australia. However, it would be something of a perverse incentive, because it could come at the cost of the club in Australia that has shown consistent innovation and excellence.
The suspicious types in Canberra will, justifiably, need some strong assurances about where this is going.
4 The fundamentals don’t change.
One of the reasons the game is in such a state is the current TV deal (and the readmission of a fifth Super team). Informed sources, who requested anonymity to speak freely, told this column Rugby Australia effectively ‘sold’ the British and Irish Lions series for about $2 million, because the uplift when Nine/Stan – publishers of this masthead – extended the deal to 2024 and 2025 was about $1 million a year.
In other words, there is no big broadcasting windfall coming from the Lions series, which may explain the apparent contradiction between Rugby Australia starting its golden decade in 2025 and still needing to take on more debt.
So, centralisation or not, the next broadcast deal is going to be critical. It’s hard to see the five Super Rugby teams surviving unless Rugby Australia can get an increase of about $15m a year.
5 Samoa are the losers from the Nations Cup.
As expressed last week, the proposed new competition is needed, even if that initially means two separate divisions without relegation/promotion.
The finances of the developed nations are hardly robust, and there are likely to be some hefty deficits reported across the board, in both hemispheres, for the 2023 financial year.
It is not long since Covid had the sport on its knees. That said, it would be disingenuous to say there won’t be losers from the competition – and Samoa are at the top of the queue.
They had a largely underwhelming Rugby World Cup, but the potential is clearly there for Samoa to improve.
In Theo McFarland, they have one of the best young No 6/second-rowers in the world, but until they get more high-quality fixtures they’ll find it hard to persuade players to give up their All Blacks or Wallabies aspirations to for the blue of Samoa.