If the national union has 1st right of call on the players, and if the players are centrally contracted to the RFU, then obviously the RFU has to foot the bill.

I hear exactly these same comments from Saffers over here every time I call for central contracts, but at the end of the day, if NZ can get it right, why can`t anyone else?

By the way, does Eng really play 18 international matches per year? 3 in May in the SH, 5 in the 6 nations, and 3-4 in November- that gives me 11 to 12 per year, leaving 16-17 for the GP season, Heineken Cup etc.

In SA, if we went with 12 tests, 8 Super games( 6 during the prelims and possibly semi and final), then a player would still be available to the CC competition for half the season. The big money for SARU comes in via our Newscorp deal, thus the tests and the Super 14- keeping those sponsors happy, and using the CCas the breeding ground for future stars, would give the top players sufficient rest, but also provide sufficient revenue to the home union to centrally contract their top players, while at the same time providing a conveyor belt of young talent for the future of the test side.

Don`t know if this can work in Eng with the HK and GP, but it should by all means be investigated. If it isn`t, you`ll continue to have overworked players not performing optimally on the test scene- Clive Woodward also shares this view, and I reckon he knows a thing or 2 about rugby player management.