Warren Gatland has created a storm, albeit not a serious one, in his native New Zealand by wondering aloud as to whether Ireland would be better served playing an under-strength side in their World Cup pool match against Australia, and even qualifying in second place. The Irish coach is now considering legal action in light of his comments being misinterpreted as a desire to throw the game.

Appearing on New Zealand's Radio Sport, (a 24-hour, 365-day a year station that broadcasts to the whole of the country via 20 frequencies) last Wednesday morning local time, the Irish coach exposed the flaws in the World Cup draw when commenting: "It's a question (of) which is the best route for us (Ireland) to take".

"A lot of people are saying," added Gatland, "that we should play our best side against the US (in Ireland's first game), rest everyone against Australia, then play a strong side against Romania and finish second in our pool to qualify for a play-off against the best third-placed side and if we win that game, get a quarter-final at Lansdowne Road. So that's probably the best way for us to go if we're to make the semi-finals.

"The winner of our group plays the winner of the Wales, Argentina, (Western) Samoa group and I saw a second-string Welsh side beat the USA in a magnificent stadium, and the roll Wales are on I wouldn't envy anyone playing in front of 72,000 screaming Welshmen with the expectations they have now."

In citing the possibility that the runners-up route might be the easier route for Ireland to take, something that Neil Francis first raised last January, Gatland said yesterday that "I was merely saying what everyone else has been saying here for months, and what everyone is saying to me."

Yet Gatland's comments (which were replayed every hour) provoked 50 calls to Radio Sport inside an hour, and the New Zealand Herald, under a heading "Macqueen can see wisdom in Irish logic", claimed that Australian coach Rod Macqueen understood Gatland's logic.

Macqueen was quoted as commenting: "I think I can probably understand what Ireland are saying. We looked at it and realised that winning the pool was the tougher way to go but we were never even tempted to do something like that." Macqueen was also quoted as stating: "We would never contemplate going into a Test without anything other than winning on our minds."

In response to this, Gatland said yesterday: "Neither would I. I'm exactly of the same mind. They haven't obviously played the interview to Rod Macqueen but if it had been presented to me like that I would have responded in exactly the same way.

"Everyone else has looked at the possibilities and different scenarios, and we looked at them too. We wouldn't be doing our jobs right if we didn't. There's no way I'd ever go into a game at Lansdowne Road without trying to win.

"However, if we did rest two or three players," added Gatland in reference to the second Pool E game against Australia, "there would be no better motivation for players who feel they should be in the team. It's a great position for me to be in."

The problem for the Irish management, like all other managements, is the need to utilise their 30-man squads so as to keep as many players as fresh as possible. Ideally, the second pool game, in Ireland's case against Australia on October 10th, would be the best chance to rest some first-choice players.

"We've got to make sure what is right for our players. If we finish second in our pool we could possibly have to play seven games in four weeks. There's no way that you can play the same 15 players in all those games."

Gatland also acknowledged that "the whole situation changes if, for example, Wales don't qualify first from their group. Basically, everything has to be re-assessed after our first game against the United States. Then we will sit down and look at all our options, and the same again after the Australian and Romanian games."

Gatland might have been better off keeping quiet on the issue, although he's not averse to throwing the odd curve ball which, in this instance, seems to have been directed towards Australia. "From my point of view, if everybody is talking about us and trying to guess what we're going to do next, then I'll be delighted."

Gatland also exposed another flaw in the World Cup draw whereby the best third-placed side could be determined by their points scored, regardless of the points they concede, in the event of them each having one win from three. Speaking on New Zealand's Radio Sport, Gatland pointed out that Ireland's group is the only one affected by this, as the runners-up in this pool will play the best third-placed side.

"For example, if we were 50 or 60 points ahead of the USA or Romania, why not let them score 40 or 50 points in the second-half so you could up (the chances of) playing them as the third best qualifier?"

Gatland admitted yesterday: "All I was doing was making the point that perhaps the World Cup organisers hadn't thought this through, as in the cricket World Cup, but this is what happens when you have 24 countries instead of 20. You end up with a manufactured draw."

"But if you think about it, I don't see how you can do it (let the opposition run in a host of consolation points) on the field. Even if you had the inclination, it's not very feasible."