Eligibility back on the agenda
-
@Pot-Hale I got it from an Irish fan , I thought that was what you guys called it?
Anyway have a great christmas, its been a good year to be an Irish rugby fan and for that matter an ab fan because your guys stepped up and gave us a new rivalry.
-
@jegga said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Pot-Hale I got it from an Irish fan , I thought that was what you guys called it?
Anyway have a great christmas, its been a good year to be an Irish rugby fan and for that matter an ab fan because your guys stepped up and gave us a new rivalry.
Nope - I haven't seen the phrase used. Clearly, every uncapped foreign player who comes to play in Ireland is aware that if they last beyond 3 years they would become eligible - same as any other country under current WR regulations. There's been enough players who didn't last or who are in their 4th/5th year, or regularly injured, without being looked at to undermine any notion of a tacit agreement or understanding they would be considered/ picked.
Erasmus' comment cited above was in the context of him saying that Munster were not pitching for Ben Smith as was being speculated in media. His brief from Nucifora along with the other provincial coaches is to find and develop Irish-qualified players, not pay out massive wages to a foreign player. The four provincial academies are now stocked with 20 players each, and the investment into the domestic pathway from age-grade upwards is a clear indicator of the domestic development policy from IRFU. Unfortunately, the IRFU haven't banned further use of residency players a la France but they don't seem to be too concerned if WR increase it to 5 or 7 years.
Anyway, as you say, overall a good year for Irish rugby with nearly a dozen new caps in the last 12 months, with some pearlers amongst them. And yep, matches against NZ in the future will have a new edge.
Enjoy your Christmas too. Cheers.
-
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@NTA said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
I think the grandparent rule probably needs retiring - with a bit of notice.
Would you prohibit a citizen of a country playing rugby for that country?
I don't think that is such a big deal and it happens now due to the one country for life. Quade Cooper is a citizen of NZ but can never play for the ABs (cheers around the country) and it's the same with lots of current Samoan internationals too.
-
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
Someone else brought up the point that we are proposing a higher standard to play rugby for a country than to fight for that country. It's not a point that I care for, hence my comments which you appear to have entirely misread but well done on some further Ireland bashing. In relation to your general point, it would reduce the number of serious rugby playing nations by a third.
There is no Ireland bashing here. They are just a unique case. So when you want other countries to replicate France's policy - it gets tripped up where Ireland have either have a fatal disadvantage (not a country, cannot issue passports) or a clear advantage (two passports possible, one passport makes it very easy to poach from three other countries).
The aim of Pichot is to try and get player squads to pass the smell test not create different loopholes for the Home Unions to drive a bus through, NZ implementing this doesn't help that in any way.
-
@rotated said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
Someone else brought up the point that we are proposing a higher standard to play rugby for a country than to fight for that country. It's not a point that I care for, hence my comments which you appear to have entirely misread but well done on some further Ireland bashing. In relation to your general point, it would reduce the number of serious rugby playing nations by a third.
There is no Ireland bashing here. They are just a unique case. So when you want other countries to replicate France's policy - it gets tripped up where Ireland have either have a fatal disadvantage (not a country, cannot issue passports) or a clear advantage (two passports possible, one passport makes it very easy to poach from three other countries).
The aim of Pichot is to try and get player squads to pass the smell test not create different loopholes for the Home Unions to drive a bus through, NZ implementing this doesn't help that in any way.
Actually, come to think of it, you could use Irish passports in Ireland's case because if you are born on the island of Ireland, you're automatically entitled/eligible to an Ireland passport. A UK passport would not be valid by itself, but rather that a player would qualify for an Ireland one by dint of whether you were born on the island. Parentage rules would apply as the norm.
-
Possible unilateral action from the RFU. I'll believe it only when it happens. However even if futile it sends a good message.
-
@Catogrande said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
Possible unilateral action from the RFU. I'll believe it only when it happens. However even if futile it sends a good message.
Unsurprising. It was known already that England supported a change and it suits them to announce it now. Politically, it may force other unions into having to give a public comment. Has the NZRU given an indication of its stance?
-
@Pot-Hale No idea about the NZRU but it is starting to become interesting to see which unions are giving support to Pichot's initiative. There's the French saying they will only select those with a French passport, but as discussed earlier, passport eligibility is different in many countries.
If you recall there was the outcry when Zola Budd was granted a UK passport just in time for the LA Olympics when SA were banned from international sport. Even back then it was considered something of a cynical move with the Daily Mail prodding her Father to get her to apply for British citizenship due to her having a British Garndfather. Whilst the Grandfather rule is still there it was the seemingly indecent haste and the involvement of the Daily Fucking Mail.
-
Yeah I agree. I'm curious that rugby journos have not been asking specific questions of respective unions about their stance on the issue. Or if they have reporting on what answers they were given.
There's this extract from an article on Stuff:
"Pumas great Agustín Pichot, the World Rugby vice-chairman, believes three years is too short a qualifying time and believes extending it will help the player drain from the Pacific Islands.Scotland, Ireland, France and Wales have been aggressive in targeting overseas players who can help their test cause while England aren't immune to it either with Fijian Nathan Hughes, a former Auckland loose forward, the latest recruit to join their lineup after seeing out his time."
Leaving aside that it makes no mention of Australia, I'm puzzled about the reference to PI players. Pichot has talked before about PI players pulling on a jersey for Ireland for example. To date, there's been Payne and White from NZ, and Strauss and Stander from SA who've been capped. Scotland have had Maitland (NZ) and Nel (SA). Where are all these players being drained from the PI playing for other countries? France? They're moving to a passport requirement.
-
@Pot-Hale With the general level of rugby journalism following soccer journalism down the toilet it is much easier to pen a few inflammatory words than to ask any real questions that require answering. It seems in relation to the various Unions, all the press do now is report the press releases that the Unions throw them.
-
@Pot-Hale The main difference there is that there is strong belief amongst many that the island nations should be on equal footing with the more established. The narrative that the world loves to walk all over the island boys, steal their players etc is a strongly held one, and what this is all about. Nobody cares much if a second or third string NZ player plays for somebody else, or if a young up and coming NZ player is lured away. NZ is already at the top table., thus no growth there.
This simply isn't the same for the island nations - how strong they would be if they genuinely were given a seat at the top table, I don't know. But I don't think the eligilbity is the root cause of the problem. I think it's more about clubs not releasing players (or "encouraging" international retirement, and then the big elephant in the room, corruption/mis-management at the top level of the unions.
-
@Pot-Hale I think if Pichot stopped and thought about it he'd probably realise that a lot of those PI players he's thinking about in his head are actually from the Pacific Islands of NZ.
I expect the NZRU would be in favour of a longer time for residency (maybe they'd want to keep the school arrivals at same period). We're not anti residency players but it's not like they make up a huge number of our teams (remove the school arrival guys and it's only really Rawlinson and Devine in kind of recent times).
Weird that England is moving on it when they've recently been capping players under that eligibility. They probably should have instructed Eddie not to (or they went the other way, "quick, lock them in now").
-
-
@Bones said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia probably include Masoe in that too?
Would be interesting to see how a no grandparent rule might adversely affect Samoa/Tonga.
I think he went to Wanganui Collegiate?
Yep, the no granparent rule would hammer the islands in a generation.
-
@Bones Is removal of the Grandparent rule really on the cards though? I agree it would be to the detriment of the PIs or any country that had a large economic migrancy situation.
-
@Catogrande said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Bones Is removal of the Grandparent rule really on the cards though? I agree it would be to the detriment of the PIs or any country that had a large economic migrancy situation.
Yep agree. I'd say IRFU would object to that.
-
@Nepia said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
(remove the school arrival guys and it's only really Rawlinson and Devine in kind of recent times).And Taumoepeau. So it's about 20 tests all up, a majority of which were off the bench and often injury call ups.
The biggest change that could benefit the ABs is eliminating the grandfather rule as it would stop depth from converting to Samoa/Tonga/Fiji and being ineligible for NZ. However for the good of the game no one from NZ would be pushing for this.
Residency also helps the islands, but to a larger extent just helps give the international game some integrity.
-
@Catogrande said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@any country that had a large economic migrancy situation.
Such as New Zealand -> Australia. Although the likelihood of them actually targeting guys in the NRL U20s system or Aussie schoolboys rugby based on their parents/grandparents being Kiwis is unlikely given the wealth of talent back home. More of a don't call us we will call you type thing.
