What a joke to call this reserve clash a Test match

Bill Beaumont knows the definition of a Test match better than most, a contest reserved for the best of one country against the best of another, a ‘test’ of skill and strength. His vice-chairman on World Rugby’s executive council, Augustin Pichot, emerged from 71 of those Tests with a reputation as a scrum-half of the highest calibre. As a global administrator he has enhanced that reputation as an outspoken guardian of the game’s moral code.

Beaumont and Pichot head a partnership at the very pinnacle of the sport’s global governing authority. While determining what constitutes a Test match, World Rugby would appear to have turned a blind eye to what doesn’t.

In Washington DC late last night, one country that chose to leave 13 of their first-choice players at home bumped into another fielding a largely second XV. And they called it a Test match because it suited both Wales and South Africa to do so given that neither made the trip just to see round the White House. A non-Test match would not so much slash the fee for turning up as wipe it out.

To be fair to Wales, they had made no secret of their intention to put out an experimental XV. According to the new Springbok coach, Rassie Erasmus, he had been told as much by Warren Gatland a while back at a coaching conference.

The Boks entered into the spirit, leaving the vast majority of their big-hitters at home to prepare for the infinitely more important business of a three-Test series against England.

Established players, notably the Lions elite, deserve a break and Wales would have failed in their duty had they dragged them across the Atlantic and on to Argentina.

World Rugby approved the Washington arranged as an out-of-window match. Why, when they knew that both teams would be deliberately depleted, did they not take a perfect opportunity to strike a blow for the devalued state of Test rugby?

Why did they not say to Wales and South Africa: “You can go ahead with Washington a week before the window opens. You can call it what you like but you can’t call it a Test match.”

Instead of taking a stand, World Rugby continue to preside over the depreciation of international competition at the highest level. As former Wales captain Gwyn Jones pointed out in his perceptive way on Scrum V: “Test rugby against the Springboks should not be a preparation match.’’

Rightly he bemoaned the consequent devaluation of Test rugby. Gatland’s response was to describe those who dared make such criticism as ‘bitter and twisted’ while stressing the value of the match as experience for a largely novice team.

Nobody disputes that. The issue is not that the match is being played, not that it doesn’t offer something with the World Cup looming but that it has been granted Test status.

An American fan buying his ticket on the assumption that this really was ‘a clash of the Titans’ as the RFK Stadium blurb described it would have been tempted to refer it to the Trades Descriptions people for adjudication.

Gatland choice of English-based players like Luke Charteris and Tomas Francis in his original squad put those concerned in the invidious position of having to drop out because England’s Premiership clubs do not release players for out-of-window Tests.

Premier Rugby are perfectly entitled to ask questions over the fixture. “We’re not sure why World Rugby authorises these matches,’’ chief executive Mark McCafferty told the BBC. “You shouldn’t be authorizing matches outside the Test window and then expect players to be released.’’

World Rugby missed a trick. How much more of a battering does Test rugby have to take before Messrs Beaumont and Pichot make a stand?

“How much more of a battering does Test rugby have to take before Messrs Beaumont and Pichot make a stand?