<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dundeesmiffy @ Apr 9 2009, 02:18 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
It'd still be nice to have a little integrity in the Lions set up, my main issue with Flutey is that he played professional international representative rugby previously (The NZ Maori, against the Lions as well) and that in itself - as far as I'm concerned - should make him ineligible for the Lions (and England for that matter). I wasn't pleased when he started playing for England and I'll be less pleased when/if he plays for the Lions.
I know Scotland have a wealth of players that weren't born here, but to me Flutey is in a different boat for the aforementioned reasons. At least admit you can see where I'm coming from.[/b]
i can see where you're coming from, but if your wishes and desires were to be fulfilled then I'll have thom evans back. not that he's good enough to get in the england team, just that i don't want him available for scotland.
I think the rules on residency are too lax, and it should be 5 years. But even if that was the case, the likes of Vainikolo and (maybe in the future) Shontayne Hape would be eligible. Which is fine by me, because England is a country that welcomes immigrants, and I don't see why they should have to wait for their chilren in the next generation before their genes are considered 'english' enough to play for their adopted country.
Fact is, every major rugby team has in recent years had someone with a controversial nationality. No exceptions, because even the Island nations who have players 'poached' by others go on to selct sides where many are born and bred in NZ anyway.
You can't call Flutey on this one, because that's putting everyone's discrepancies onto his shoulders. It's a consistency of international sport, and will always remain, because nationality itself is very difficult to define since the idea of a 'nation' is a human concept anyway.