Pasifika - how do we fix this?
-
What exactly was the reasoning behind changing the eligibility rules in the first place ? From memory Junior Tonu’u was the last AB selected who had played for Samoa previously ? Actually no, I also recall Dylan Mika getting picked but then dropped cos he wasn’t eligible ?
-
I'm sure from the perspective of Fiji, Samoa and Tonga, one of the advantages of the Fijian Drua and Moana Pasifika teams will be that the national unions will eventually have more control over player availability. At the moment the NH-based players either can't afford to, or are discouraged, from making themselves available. The quality of the players in those squads is for another discussion. I don't think there is any doubt there has been financial mismanagement from the PI unions which has meant they are still relying on the goodwill of other unions to subsidise the costs of tours. NZR and BOP have provided both to Tonga.
-
@raznomore hmm I'm keen to look at ways of amending eligibility to help the PI teams too. But I don't think it's right to enable a pathway that could see plenty of PI eligible players who've played limited AB minutes, then leave for the NH and a big pay day on the back of their AB status, before turning out for a PI side which has no issue with selecting NH based players.
Every situation will vary of course but if a guy knows his career can play out like this, he could take the piss. There may be no intention of making a go of a lengthy SR and AB career, with the goal to be getting that one NZ cap to enable the big NH pay day and then a couple of World Cups with Samoa (for example). And it's probably going to be someone NZR and the domestic systems have spent good money developing.
-
@shark yeah, i have been happy enough with fekitoa and the talk of Sopanga because it currently effects very few people, just a dusting of top talent to bring into these squads, dont want it to become the norm
It needs to be done alongside other things like clubs in the SH (not based in auckland) and as mentioned above more games so it becomes the norm to play for them fr these young guys
-
IIRC correctly, NZ was happy to maintain the status quo in terms of eligibility, but the NH nations were the ones gunning for one nation for life. That was no doubt due to the rabid bullshit in their media about poaching and all that crap.
I’d be more than happy to return to the previous system.
Thing is NZ is always damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Cop shit for not playing the Islands and then cop shit when the ABs beat them by a cricket score.
-
@victor-meldrew said in Pasifika - how do we fix this?:
Seems to me it all comes down to money
One big problem for the national unions of Tonga, Fiji, etc is fielding their best players on a regular basis. A lot of that is down the struggle between the national unions and the clubs (mainly in the Nth hemisphere) - and poss. the competence of the Pasifika Unions, or lack of.
Also some of the richer unions make a packet out of ticket sales and TV fees when the Islands play them but the Pasifika players and unions don't get much of that (IIRC, the NZRFU & Oz do this to some extent). I read one Pasifika team (Fiji?) were unable to get a ground to practice on and slept in sleeping bags during the Autumn Internationals, which is appalling.
The IRB/World Rugby could get their act together and make some rules on sharing gate receipts and TV money and put some rules in place that clubs must release their players for Test matches. Can only think it's vested interests or a lack of confidence in the Pasifika Unions to use the money wisely.
I don't think allowing players to switch eligibility will make much difference - the money angle needs fixing first.
This is not true. You are mis-remembering something else I would guess.
The host nation is responsible for and pays for the internal travel, hotels, training facilities etc.
There is no way in a million years that Fiji would be sleeping rough in France or England etc during the Autumn window.
What I suspect you are mixing this up with is the Zimbabwe team who left their hotel in protest in Tunisia during the the last RWC qualifying and twittered themselves sleeping in a bus station in protest at how bad their hotel was.
Tunisia hit back after Zimbabwe rugby team sleep on streets before qualifier
Tunisia rugby chiefs have accused Zimbabwe’s delegation of “unethical actions” after players slept on streets prior to a World Cup qualifier
-
I have found in my life that everything can be fixed by a dashboard.
My dashboard to fix PI rugby .....What is the problem, who could solve it, how.
Green if is not a problem or is solvable by themselves.
Red where they are deficient or if the solutions are things for which they are just flotsam in an ocean (or AB midget-passive tactics-counter attackers in a semifinal, for a rugby metaphor)
-
-
@rapido said in Pasifika - how do we fix this?:
I have found in my life that everything can be fixed by a dashboard.
My dashboard to fix PI rugby .....What is the problem, who could solve it, how.
Green if is not a problem or is solvable by themselves.
Red where they are deficient or if the solutions are things for which they are just flotsam in an ocean (or AB midget-passive tactics-counter attackers in a semifinal, for a rugby metaphor)Good effort!
RE: removing central contracting, is this purely a suggestion based on the needs of PI rugby, without any consideration of consequences for other parties (e.g. NZ Rugby)?
As I feel central contracting is one of the major positives in our current setup.
-
@bobily2 said in Pasifika - how do we fix this?:
RE: removing central contracting, is this purely a suggestion based on the needs of PI rugby, without any consideration of consequences for other parties (e.g. NZ Rugby)?
As I feel central contracting is one of the major positives in our current setup.Yeah that might help the Tier 2 PI's but not this Tier 1 PI!
-
@rapido said in Pasifika - how do we fix this?:
@victor-meldrew said in Pasifika - how do we fix this?:
Seems to me it all comes down to money
One big problem for the national unions of Tonga, Fiji, etc is fielding their best players on a regular basis. A lot of that is down the struggle between the national unions and the clubs (mainly in the Nth hemisphere) - and poss. the competence of the Pasifika Unions, or lack of.
Also some of the richer unions make a packet out of ticket sales and TV fees when the Islands play them but the Pasifika players and unions don't get much of that (IIRC, the NZRFU & Oz do this to some extent). I read one Pasifika team (Fiji?) were unable to get a ground to practice on and slept in sleeping bags during the Autumn Internationals, which is appalling.
The IRB/World Rugby could get their act together and make some rules on sharing gate receipts and TV money and put some rules in place that clubs must release their players for Test matches. Can only think it's vested interests or a lack of confidence in the Pasifika Unions to use the money wisely.
I don't think allowing players to switch eligibility will make much difference - the money angle needs fixing first.
This is not true. You are mis-remembering something else I would guess.
The host nation is responsible for and pays for the internal travel, hotels, training facilities etc.
There is no way in a million years that Fiji would be sleeping rough in France or England etc during the Autumn window.
What I suspect you are mixing this up with is the Zimbabwe team who left their hotel in protest in Tunisia during the the last RWC qualifying and twittered themselves sleeping in a bus station in protest at how bad their hotel was.
Tunisia hit back after Zimbabwe rugby team sleep on streets before qualifier
Tunisia rugby chiefs have accused Zimbabwe’s delegation of “unethical actions” after players slept on streets prior to a World Cup qualifier
Thanks. I def. mis-remembered the sleeping bags bit. They stayed in less that £50 a night hotel rooms, flew economy class and used a free training ground. They got £400 each for playing against England whose players got £22k each. link
Not blaming England for that situation and credit to them for giving the Fiji Union £75k, but it highlights the problem with revenue sharing and the Pasifika countries being unable to host big games profitably.
-
Good try. I could suggest an IKUCU* chart would be a better option, but I retired years ago and this is a Rugby thread.....
It does seem to boil down to revenue-sharing in the absence of profitable venues in the Islands and player availability due to the financial clout of clubs. Poss. one may fix the other?
(*don't even ask)
-
Stand down periods for players who have been capped for other nations if they only get under ?? caps for that nation.
e.g. young guy might play Tonga U20s and then goes off shore to make the ABs at 22. Only gets 2 caps before an injury and never gets selected again.
At 25, he becomes eligible for Tonga again.
-
-
@ploughboy you mean the kid coming for a high school scholarship?
What happens if thier family move them here when they are 10, or 12, or even 15?
At the end of the day, they can choose whatever path they want, I mean look at the KIwis that have spent the required time playing club footy up north to become eligible for the country where they are, are you saying we deny them, because in a way, some are worse than a kid a school took a gamble on, the NH team entice an established player up there with the shot at INternational rugby.
-
A lot of the PI players are supporting the wider family back in the islands so they will always choose the option providing the greatest income. That's why so many play in Europe, even in the lower divisions, rather than play only NPC in NZ. Playing for a NZ or Aust SR team will also offer a salary far in excess of what they can earn at home. So it's no surprise if the choice is between being eligible for your country of birth or declaring eligibility to NZ or Aust, they will choose the latter if they want to stay in the SH.
