Worthy of note, the Reds did play both the Blues and Crusaders twice, winning all four games, but none of them were in New Zealand. I'm not suggesting anything here, just stating a fact.
Part of the reason the Reds did get home advantage in the finals was due to their relatively easy conference.
Actually you are trying to suggest something or you wouldn't have posted this. It's not the Reds fault the Aus conference was the weakest but as I pointed out, the differences weren't as great as the table suggests. Based on their peformance, I dont think the result would have been any different had the Reds been in the NZ or SA conference. They were the best team and there was ample opportunity for other teams to show otherwise. I remember all the naysayers predicting the Crusaders would 'flog those pretender Reds' in the final and the true colours would be shown. AND there was a kiwi ref too
The whole idea of a Leinster vs Reds game is a bit of a non starter from a logistical point of view anyways. The isn't a time during the season when the teams could really go up against eachother and be in pretty much the same kind of condition. When the NH season ends, Super rugby is still in full flow so the Reds couldn't play then and by the time Super rugby ends NH teams will already be in preseason but having not played a game in months.
Its a shame..it would be a cracker of a game and have the flavour of one hemisphere vs the other.
Last edited by a moderator: