Inga Tuigamala: Sabbatical? Give us a break

The so-called sabbaticals being given to our top rugby players are a farce.

I'm certainly not blaming the players. I believe there will be a growing number of them seeking these holidays to combat the effects of long, draining, high-impact seasons.

These sabbaticals are a sort of cry for help, a warning signal, and it is time to take heed. I think that Mils Muliaina, who has been given a three-week break at the beginning of next year's Super 14, would in fact have preferred an even longer rest but thought it best to go for the barely adequate minimum.

He will be spared an arduous trip involving games in Australia and South Africa, but nonetheless it is still just another partial fix to the problem.

Even the term "sabbatical" is helping cover up the important issue. Sabbatical is a cute name for a holiday, and the worrying issue is that if our players do not get the rest periods they need then their careers here are going to be severely curtailed.

We've already seen one sabbatical backfire, with Dan Carter ending up with a bad injury while playing for a French club. You would also have to say that the inappropriate resting of players in 2007 backfired on us big time at the World Cup, when some players were clearly not match-hardened even though they might have been fit in other respects.

The system is too random. It's like the money-making decisions to play Bledisloe Cup tests in places like Hong Kong and Japan - they aren't part of any overall plan that seeks to deal with the nub of the issue.

To my mind, there is one comprehensive solution and that is to have a global season, which would mean the Northern Hemisphere playing rugby in their summer.

The chances of this happening I suppose are slim, and the Northern Hemisphere wouldn't like any hint that they were being bullied around by the Southern Hemisphere. But the climate is too hot to contemplate turning rugby into a summer game in this part of the world.

The sabbatical system is becoming confusing because it involves one rule for one, and a different rule for another. It isn't helping the status of the Super 14, which is struggling for the sort of support it deserves. If the best players keep opting out, its credibility is affected.

In the case of Muliaina, a three-week break is neither here nor there. Being the professional that he is, I'd imagine he would be involved with the Chiefs' preparation and planning all the way through anyway. So missing three games will not give him the additional time off that constitutes the sort of break he needs.

I am absolutely certain that the long seasons, which involve an incredible amount of travel, are why Ali Williams is struggling in 2009.

The reason we are seeing so many injuries this year is because players are not getting sufficient rest - the seasons are far too long.

And if anyone has doubts over whether the travel factor is too severe, look at what could happen in this year's Super 14.

The Crusaders have just returned from South Africa and will play a game at home and in Auckland. If they sneak into the top four, they might then be required to travel back to South Africa for a semifinal, and then might have to return home to play the final.

This weekend's big battle is the table topper between the Chiefs and the Hurricanes. I have had to eat my words about the Chiefs' depth and with home advantage, I'm picking them to beat the Hurricanes.