Workload could be a factor but tbh, imo it is excuse making, fair enough the English players may have played more games but at the end of the day if say a player from Saints has played 37 games, you can knock 4/5 off that total already because 1/2 were probs a Challenge Cup game vs NL2 opposistion and the best players at Saints could probably be out on the lash the night before that game and still beat them by 40 points at least. Also 3/4 games a season probs more for the Saints/Leeds contingent in the England side are played with less intensity for example and its no disrespect to a team in the lower echelons of SL here but around 9/10 times Saints play Cas how many times are Saints's players giving it 100%, probably never, more like 60%/70%. In the NRL there really are no easy beats, fair enough SL has seen a reduction in 40+ point results but you still get far more than in Aus. The competition is more intense thus a player playing 28 intense games a year is probably on the same workload as a player who played 38 games a year with around 9/10 games not at 100%.
Another problem SL has is you look at all 14 teams in the SL, how many of them have 2/3 star players, eg : 2/3 of the best 60 players in the world. I would probs say 7. In the NRL every side has at the very least 2 star names. Even NQ Cowboys who finished bottom of the NRL last year have Thurston, Penrith have Wesser, Civoiniceva. The really top sides in the NRL have say 5/6 star players, eg Melbourne - Folau, Inglis, Slater, Johnson, C Smith.

The French team is on a hiding to nothing in this mid-season fixture - Super League based players are worked into the grounds by the cumulative effects of a gruelling Super League schedule, season after season, as rlsenior figures like Jamie Peacock identifiedrl

The logic is the same for the French trying to compete with England. French test players (as well as England and Wales test players) should only be playing 16 Super League fixtures (rather than 27), with a maximum of 30 games over the course of a season, 32 at the absolute most. Unfortunately, in recent seasons, leading senior players are overworked and the effect on them is being blunted, ineffective and eventually breaking down with injury, e.g. these are the game workloads for leading French players, not including pre-season games

The precise recommendation for workload is at rlNoakes - Rotation will be keyrl



Furthermore, the FFR based players are also asked to play this game at the end of a long season, and these players would also be tired and jaded.

Agreed, a proper debrief would have been helpful, as would a proper rest, and not having to back up that weekend.

Don't change the season, just require that no player should play more than 90% of the League fixtures, pre playoffs. This would mean that all coaches would know that they have to rest all their players at least three times through the season, which means rotation and greater use of academy players - which is good for burnout and good for developing talent.

The problem is that clubs will either not agree to rotate players, or they might initially agree but backtrack from the agreement. Why would clubs want to? Resting international players from SL games might mean the difference between winning and losing games, making the finals or not, securing a home final or not, and ultimately a coach, coaching staff, players or administrators keeping their job or losing it. IMO the only time a club will consider resting players (if they are uninjured) is if they lead the competition and have no risk of losing the lead. So, as long as SL clubs are scheduled to play so many times against other SL clubs, they will want their stars on deck. Their other options would be to sign more overseas players to fill the gaps, and ask them to not play test matches, and to refuse release for international teams that aren't England. Neither option is good for RL.

They may consider resting star players against semi professional opposition.

I wasn't limiting this rule to internationals, make it a rule for all players. If you make this the rule, same for all, from pre-season, then coaches know that they have to play their academy players a minimum of 60 times through the season (based on a 20 man squad), more if there are injuries. This means the coach has to focus on bringing through talent and developing the academy players. It means that (say) Leeds would play more academy players against (say) Salford meaning closer games, as well as less player burnout and more time for developing academy players. The only difficulty is getting the clubs to agree, which is easy - just make it a condition of the next license agreement.
Oh, and this would only count for SL matches. Yes, International players would play more matches than non-internationals, such is life. You can't field your academy side in a CC match against a C1 side, drat. Yes, if your club do well in the Cup you play more matches. I bet most SOO players complain about the extra matches and ask for time off?