Samoa 14 - 101 New Zealand. Consistency...

Normally, I realise, I like close games. But blow-outs can be fun, as long as one of my teams isn't on the receiving end.

This was one that, probably even if I was from Samoa, I could have enjoyed. Why? Well it's good to see a team running through their paces and moves and working efficiently - which the ABs definitely did. But Samoa, despite the score line, showed up and played with pride and passion if not always a great deal of skill, the hits were real (occasionally massive) so it's better, you would have to think than a training run-out.

The other thing that was nice to see was the crowd, who towards the end rose en masse to applaud the Samoan's second try. It was, it has to be said, a really well worked try and deserving of applause, but if Australia had scored it, there would have been silence. To watch Samoa, they were there to applaud good rugby, and both sides produced it.

Watching the show also made me think a bit about what you look for in an international player. I mean, obviously, ideally, you want the best in the world at each position - McCaw, Carter, Hayman etc. have done that for the ABs over the last few years. But, although a team can be the best in the world, they probably don't have the best players in the world at each position. And, it has to be said, even the best sometimes have bad days. If I was grading players, from A+++ for the world beaters, you'd have to say that the bar for consideration for a test team (at least for a "big" nation (high on the IRB ladder rather than in population count) ought to be A as minimum (although you will take the best in the country of course, regardless of that if you don't have A-grade players).

But would you rather someone who is, on a typical day an A+ player, but on a bad day only a B player? Carter and McCaw on a bad day - probably still A+ players. But Sione Lauaki and Maa Nonu are today's targets - in part because they both had good and bad moments in the game. Obviously if they have too many B days they get dropped. But how many bad days or times do you give them to gain experience and see if they can improve? Some players just step in and look right at home of course but Nonu, for example isn't one of those. Even after an extended run at 12 for the ABs he still has shockers. He had moments of that today. Should he be dropped and a new number 12 tried in the slot? There probably are candidates - Toeava springs to mind although he's a different type of player than Nonu and perhaps the ABs need the banger that Nonu is in their midfield - Umaga used to be that player, although he did have the ball catching, retention and passing skills too, which is where Nonu struggles on his bad days. Of course I don't have to have an answer to the question, they don't pay me the big bucks, but there's just enough there I'm starting to wonder why they're sticking with him, and how close to being dropped he is (or, in Lauaki's case how many "just one more" chances he'll get to prove he can raise it).