rugbyunion
Latest News:

Quinssa WebsiteQuins News from News NowQuins Official Site


World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
DOK (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 08:23

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
talkshowhost86 (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 08:42
About time indeed.

Will this stop some of the shenanigans around the New Zealanders and their poaching of Pacific Islanders, or do they get in early enough?

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
Fearless Fred (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 09:12
Also of note is the chance as of next year that U20s teams can't the the "second" representative team that locks in your chosen "nationality". That at least means that players won't have to choose early who they want to play for. Imagine you've got an English mother & a Welsh father, and you're playing rugby for, say Bath or Newport in their academy. You've been noticed by the Welsh & English national coaching team. Up until a couple of years ago, if you decided to play for Wales U20 team, that would have locked you in to only ever being able to play for Wales. It only changed when Wales re-activated their A-team after more than a decade of it being "retired". That's a big decision for someone at such a young age to make.

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
The Dead Baron (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 09:20
Quote:
Fearless Fred
Also of note is the chance as of next year that U20s teams can't the the "second" representative team that locks in your chosen "nationality". That at least means that players won't have to choose early who they want to play for. Imagine you've got an English mother & a Welsh father, and you're playing rugby for, say Bath or Newport in their academy. You've been noticed by the Welsh & English national coaching team. Up until a couple of years ago, if you decided to play for Wales U20 team, that would have locked you in to only ever being able to play for Wales. It only changed when Wales re-activated their A-team after more than a decade of it being "retired". That's a big decision for someone at such a young age to make.

Y'see I disagree. I think this is absolutely necessary. I'd even go so far as to say if you represent ANY country in ANY sport at U19 or over (i.e. you're 18) then you're done and done. You've chosen your nationality and that's you.

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
The Dead Baron (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 09:21
Quote:
talkshowhost86
About time indeed.
Will this stop some of the shenanigans around the New Zealanders and their poaching of Pacific Islanders, or do they get in early enough?

Totally agree, about time...... But I'd take issue with this - I suspect some nations (*cough*England*cough*) are WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY worse than New Zealand when it comes to this.

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
talkshowhost86 (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 09:40
Quote:
The Dead Baron
Quote:
talkshowhost86
About time indeed.
Will this stop some of the shenanigans around the New Zealanders and their poaching of Pacific Islanders, or do they get in early enough?

Totally agree, about time...... But I'd take issue with this - I suspect some nations (*cough*England*cough*) are WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY worse than New Zealand when it comes to this.

Wasn't the difference with New Zealand was that for a while they were cherry picking good players from the islands when they were in the early part of their career, rather than when they were kids? Someone like the Vunipola brothers are a bit different as they have lived most of their life here, but if you're picking off people when they are 18-24 that feels a bit more cynical.

Not sure if that's still the case with the ABs now though, and I suspect many of the Pacific Islanders move to NZ quite early in their lives anyway.

What World Rugby need to do now is make sure that the individual unions are doing what they can to make it meaningful to play for their nation. Nathan Hughes, for example, didn't want to play for England because he hated Fiji but because he'd get more money and it's all much better organised than in Fiji.

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
London_Falcon (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 09:51
Triv question...

Which country had the most overseas born players at the last World Cup?

[www.americasrugbynews.com]

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
ChipsteadQuin (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 10:09
Quote:
London_Falcon
Triv question...
Which country had the most overseas born players at the last World Cup?

[www.americasrugbynews.com]

Interesting and shatters a few myths ...

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
Adi Nako (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 10:23
Shame it doesn't come into force until 2021, but it's a good step regardless.

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
Quinten Poulsen (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 10:32
Quote:
Will this stop some of the shenanigans around the New Zealanders and their poaching of Pacific Islanders

It's happened on the odd occasion but it's mostly a myth peddled by the Welsh troll Stephen Jones.

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
T-Bone (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 11:09
Good news.

All Blacks are far from the worst at capping non-NZ born players.

England have loads of imports, but of varying degrees of "Englishness" - compare Vunipolas to Hughes for example. If players come over young with their families then don't see a problem.

NZ got grief for capping Pacific Island players just so they had the option of using them later, and barring them for playing for their "home" island, then often never using them again. But that is completely different from the large number of players who move over on scholarships for arguably a better education, or the families move over for financial reasons.

Scotland advertised a role for someone specifically targeting players not good enough to play for their home country, such as SA, Aus, NZ, who they could bring over. Wales used to do it a lot too.

everyone does it to a greater or lesser extent. I am not sure how much England target players from other nations, but we certainly have plenty of foreign born players

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
talkshowhost86 (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 11:17
Quote:
T-Bone
Good news.
All Blacks are far from the worst at capping non-NZ born players.

England have loads of imports, but of varying degrees of "Englishness" - compare Vunipolas to Hughes for example. If players come over young with their families then don't see a problem.

NZ got grief for capping Pacific Island players just so they had the option of using them later, and barring them for playing for their "home" island, then often never using them again. But that is completely different from the large number of players who move over on scholarships for arguably a better education, or the families move over for financial reasons.

Scotland advertised a role for someone specifically targeting players not good enough to play for their home country, such as SA, Aus, NZ, who they could bring over. Wales used to do it a lot too.

everyone does it to a greater or lesser extent. I am not sure how much England target players from other nations, but we certainly have plenty of foreign born players

Ah. Yes this was the practice I meant. So no the new rules won't stop that if they already qualify on residency rules.

This rule is trying to prevent those situations like Hughes and Stander which I agree with, but as I said they do need to do this hand in hand with sorting out the 'lesser' unions to ensure they can make it worthwhile playing for them.

 
Re: World Rugby: residency rule now FIVE years
DOK (IP Logged)
10 May, 2017 11:49
If you look at Samoa, it's obvious there's a huge pool of talent in NZ that could play for Samoa or for the All Blacks. I assume it's the same for Fiji, Tonga so the All Blacks don't need to poach anybody. They just pick first generation New Zealanders! smiling smiley


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?