CJ Stander to retire at the end of the season

[TRF_Olyy]

Beast played age grade for Zimbabwe

 

[munstermuffin]

Let's talk facts, i'm in.
Let's see the evidence you have of Beast representing a nation other than South Africa. Any sport, any age group. If he represented Zimbabwe (or any other country) at origami in 3rd grade, I'll concede. That's the difference between you and me. My position is simple: it is based on a principle, which i presented clearly, and then look at the evidence. If the actions (evidence) fit that principle, I'm in, otherwise, I'm against. It doesn't matter who does it. If a Uruguayan born and raised player ends up playing for the pumas i would and will say the same. I don't like it.
My argument is based on principle. Yours appears to be based on convenience.

But i am open to being proved wrong. Let's see those facts you speak of.
When, where and regarding what, exactly, did Beast wore a jersey representing another country.

Cant wait. I will stand corrected when i see those facts you speak of.



I don't envy that moral relativism of yours.

I think @TRF_Olyy has answered for me but also Beast has openly spoke of 7s experience in Zimbabwe too.

As I said if that way you are fair enough. Just hope you're better out in real world. And again have nice Easter weekend

 

[RedruthRFC]

Let's talk facts, i'm in.
Let's see the evidence you have of Beast representing a nation other than South Africa. Any sport, any age group. If he represented Zimbabwe (or any other country) at origami in 3rd grade, I'll concede. That's the difference between you and me. My position is simple: it is based on a principle, which i presented clearly, and then look at the evidence.

Where on earth did you find evidence of him growing up dreaming about playing for South Africa?

https://www.therugbyblog.com/tendai-mtawarira-how-a-young-zimbabwean-became-the-beast/

 

[TRF_Olyy]

When I was a kid everyone wanted to be Jonah Lomu whenever anyone brought a rugby ball out - which means I am now fully eligible to play for the All Blacks

 

[munstermuffin]

When I was a kid everyone wanted to be Jonah Lomu whenever anyone brought a rugby ball out - which means I am now fully eligible to play for the All Blacks

I always thought you were bigger and better than him.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Where on earth did you find evidence of him growing up dreaming about playing for South Africa?

https://www.therugbyblog.com/tendai-mtawarira-how-a-young-zimbabwean-became-the-beast/

Fair point!
My bad, apologies. It was a poor use of a euphemism for someone who
- Born and raised in Zimbabwe
- Learned to play in Zimbabwe
- Could have played for Zimbabwe and did not*

Again, my bad. Apologies.
In fact, this portion from your link is quite relevant to this thread.

"I went to a really good rugby high school, and I just fell in love with the game more and more. There was a tournament in South Africa and I was playing for the Zimbabwe Under 18s, and the Sharks' scouts were there. They invited me to come to the academy and offered me a bursary to study, and play rugby.""

Given this, and being congruent with what i wrote before i am against him playing for South Africa. Again, not buts, no ifs, no excuses.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Fair point!
My bad, apologies. It was a poor use of a euphemism for someone who
- Born and raised in Zimbabwe
- Learned to play in Zimbabwe
- Could have played for Zimbabwe and did not*

Again, my bad. Apologies.
In fact, this portion from your link is quite relevant to this thread.

"I went to a really good rugby high school, and I just fell in love with the game more and more. There was a tournament in South Africa and I was playing for the Zimbabwe Under 18s, and the Sharks' scouts were there. They invited me to come to the academy and offered me a bursary to study, and play rugby.""

Given this, and being congruent with what i wrote before i am against him playing for South Africa. Again, not buts, no ifs, no excuses.

I do agree with you here, I said in post #122 in this thread that ideally u20 caps should have tied CJ. Still somewhat conflicted on the financial aspect of it though because the risk to your future health compared to the monetary reward in rugby is extremely low compared to most sports and I value the individual more than the "sanctity" of international sport.

We disagree on age for sure because I know of plenty of cases of 1st and 2nd generation Irish in England/Scotland rebelling against their roots because of the bullying that came with it only to consider themselves more Irish than anything else in their late teenage years but it's something that you should know by the time you're 18.

Ultimately I'd like it that any cap from u18 onwards ties you but I think rugby's player welfare needs to catch up a lot before it becomes something I really care about.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Ultimately I'd like it that any cap from u18 onwards ties you but I think rugby's player welfare needs to catch up a lot before it becomes something I really care about.

I could see the argument for U20 plus. I don't think it's fair to commit kids at 18 given that the country that they are living in could easily be a function of their parents' employment.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

I don't think it's fair to commit kids at 18 given that the country that they are living in could easily be a function of their parents' employment.

But if that happens in the overwhelming majority of cases they get nationality through jus sanguinis. You are basically creating a rule to protect 1% of the population while allowing the other 99% to exploit such rule. That is precisely the problem here.

I cannot think of a single example of a player in the situation you describe. Not saying there aren't, i am just not aware of them. Could you mention some so I can have a look? Someone who has parents from X, never played for other countries and wants to play for X and is not allowed to, as per your comment.

I have no problem, none whatsoever, with say, Jordi Murphy playing for Ireland or George North playing for Wales (at least with the info I have on them).
I do have a problem with (i'll name someone else since CJ has had enough) Beast (HA!).

And tier 1 gets its fair share of scrutiny. Do not even get me started on tier 2/3. Some of the national teams are basically +50% rejects from tier 1 countries. There are cases that go against everything i want the national teams to stand for. True story (i'll replace names and countries): 'Juan', over 18 yo, born and raised in Arg has Euro grandmother, therefore EU passport. He goes to work at a hostel for a summer in Spain. Decides to stay longer. Gets a part-time job in Belgium. While there he starts playing rugby at local club. 4 years later he is wearing the country's national team. He's not doing it for the money. He just likes the idea of playing for a national team and this is a way for him to achieve that goal. Everything is by the book. The rules allow him and the RU to do that.
This is what is going on today.
You probably think it is right. I do not. I think it is sad as ****.


As things stand today there quite a few cases that are mind-boggling even in tier 1. CJ's is not even the worst. To be honest, I was holding my tongue a bit when some (not all) south african posters were arguing here. Brian Mujati had over 10 tests for the springboks while he was not a South African citizen. I love the guy (and it's clearly not his fault) but that is just silly.

 

[RedruthRFC]

But if that happens in the overwhelming majority of cases they get nationality through jus sanguinis. You are basically creating a rule to protect 1% of the population while allowing the other 99% to exploit such rule. That is precisely the problem here.

I cannot think of a single example of a player in the situation you describe. Not saying there aren't, i am just not aware of them. Could you mention some so I can have a look? Someone who has parents from X, never played for other countries and wants to play for X and is not allowed to, as per your comment.

I disagree, to me you absolutely have to be mindful of unintended consequences when making any changes and can't descriminate against a group of people just because there aren't very many of them. Ross Moriarty is the obvious example that you're looking for. Hanno Dirksen would have been another if he'd kicked on and won South African honours.

And tier 1 gets its fair share of scrutiny. Do not even get me started on tier 2/3. Some of the national teams are basically +50% rejects from tier 1 countries.

This is why we don't see stricter sanctions IMO. It wouldn't be a good look for an organisation who are tasked with developing the sport to reduce the size and quality of developing nations' player pools.

You probably think it is right. I do not. I think it is sad as ****.

There's plenty I don't like and changes that I would make. As far as I can see, the difference between us is that I see this as a massively complicated problem that needs to consider the wants and needs of players and unions against needing to be fair. You seem to see players as the property of unions and World Rugby who should keep their heads down and play the hand dealt to them by a strict set of rules that may restrict their ability to earn a living or follow their heart.

As things stand today there quite a few cases that are mind-boggling even in tier 1. CJ's is not even the worst. To be honest, I was holding my tongue a bit when some (not all) south african posters were arguing here. Brian Mujati had over 10 tests for the springboks while he was not a South African citizen. I love the guy (and it's clearly not his fault) but that is just silly.

I'm loath to talk about individual cases because when needs to happen is to come up with a set of rules that fit everyone, which can be tested by running existing cases through it. However, FWIW, I see Stander as an example of why the rules should be permissive to an extent. The SARU weren't giving him the opportunities he wanted, Munster and in turn the IRFU did. I'm glad that Ireland got to benefit from their faith and investment rather than the SARU doing so having got it wrong.

 

[munstermuffin]

@Cruz_del_Sur now that we agree on you being wrong regard Beast and my reason for the hypocrisy comment. Where do you stand on Diego Domiguez?

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Ross Moriarty is the obvious example that you're looking for.

Pfff. Born in England to a Welsh parent. Educated and learned to play in Wales. He took a shot with England but when he saw the competition he realized he had a better shot with Wales so he switched sides. He played for West Wales schools, then for England u18, then Wales. He is a textbook example of what i am against. Pretty sure i am not alone on this. The main reason why this continues is because the people who run the show actually benefit from this.

can't descriminate against a group of people just because there aren't very many of them.

Ok, that's quite the definition of discrimination you've got there.
Let's see.

Discriminate (verb): make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people...
The unjust part is a judgement call from you which i disagree with, and it is absolutely not prejudicial as i am looking at the fact before i pass judgement.

As far as I can see, the difference between us is that I see this as a massively complicated problem that needs to consider the wants and needs of players and unions against needing to be fair.

This is precisely the problem. You make it sound as if both a player and a union want to work together, well, then that should be good enough. I do not. Sugarcoat it the way you want, but that is basically a carte blanche for richer unions to take talent from poorer unions and it destroys the ideal on which these competitions were built on. You are just legalizing a way to make good players want to play for teams other than their own. If Unions are allowed to purchase players, what's the difference between this and club rugby? If that's the case, let's call a spade a spade, remove flags, anthems, stop calling a national team and just call it "The best team Nation X could afford". At least that'd be honest. We can even use the sponsor's names. Tesco faces Carrefour! Ryanair vs Drambuie at the Aviva this weekend!
At least that'd have a shred of integrity.


The fundamental difference between clubs and national teams facing each other originated from that principle: clubs can cherry-pick it's members, the other cannot. That gave poorer nations a fair chance.
What the union or the player want should be (maybe not 100% in all cases but certainly to a high degree in most) irrelevant. That's the entire bloody point.

As things stand right now, you've got national european tier 2/3 teams where players not only cant even sing the anthem, they cant even speak any of the country's official languages. The reasons why this is non-existent at tier 1 is

a) More exposure so people in charge, knowing how bad this looks takes precautions.
b) English is rugby's lingua franca and it also happens to be the language most people speak as a second language.

The SARU weren't giving him the opportunities he wanted,

That's my entire bloody point. If your rugby union doesn't suit you your wants you shouldn't be able to turn around and play for another country. What Stander wanted should be irrelevant. This is not a charity called "let's-grant-a-wish-for-elite-players-who-couldn't-make-it-to-the-national-team-of-their-choosing-foundation".

I want to play for Argentina and score a last-minute try to win the world cup? That's what i want and what i need.
Rugby player's careers are short enough and i haven't seen a single cent from my national team's union. NOT A CENT.
Should everyone adjust the rules so that can happen if i want it hard enough?
Jesus christ no.

You think it is not only ok, but desirable if a player wanted to play flank for South Africa but didn't have what it takes, to go nation shopping. I do not. I think it destroys the game.

I am willing to tolerate some of the players' wishes in some very specific circumstances for practical purposes.


@munstemuffin

@Cruz_del_Sur now that we agree on you being wrong regard Beast and my reason for the hypocrisy comment. Where do you stand on Diego Domiguez?

A couple of things before i answer that. Let's make on thing crystal clear. My point is based on principle, a principle that I've outlaid already. A principle about what national rugby should be about. I then look at the evidence and if it fits the principle I'm ok with it, otherwise, i am not. In Beast's case i actually looked at the national teams box on wiki before i posted and since it didn't mention things other than South Africa, i made the call based on incomplete information. You want to call that wrong, fine, let's call it wrong. For me the key parts here are the principle and the logic applied. My principle stands and the logic is sound. If new evidence changes the outcome I'm actually happy about that. I've learned something and my position on a specific case is now a more informed one.


Now, back to your post. A straight question deserves a straight answer: against DD playing for Italy.
I have no problem whatsoever with Parisse playing for Italy though. As far as i understand, he ended up in Italy because his father's job landed him there, spoke Italian at home, and never wore an Argentine Jersey. If this last is false I'll change my opinion, not a problem. Again, the important here is the principle and the logic applied to see if the evidence stands for such principle or not. The result is circumstantial.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Moriaty is a good example. I wonder if he'd have been picked for England if he'd be happy representing us? In which case how can he be happy representing Wales (our mortal enemy). Players shouldn't be able to pick their nationality. It's funny and sickening seeing the South Africans line up unable to sing the french national anthem or the Italians who are still dreaming of an all blacks jersey in reality.

That's not international rugby, that's a glorified club game.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Ross Moriarty is Welsh. That is all.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Ross Moriarty is Welsh. That is all.

I think you're confusing the Merseyside town that he was born in with the Swansea cricket ground!

 

[munstermuffin]

Pfff. Born in England to a Welsh parent. Educated and learned to play in Wales. He took a shot with England but when he saw the competition he realized he had a better shot with Wales so he switched sides. He played for West Wales schools, then for England u18, then Wales. He is a textbook example of what i am against. Pretty sure i am not alone on this. The main reason why this continues is because the people who run the show actually benefit from this.


Ok, that's quite the definition of discrimination you've got there.
Let's see.

Discriminate (verb): make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people...
The unjust part is a judgement call from you which i disagree with, and it is absolutely not prejudicial as i am looking at the fact before i pass judgement.



This is precisely the problem. You make it sound as if both a player and a union want to work together, well, then that should be good enough. I do not. Sugarcoat it the way you want, but that is basically a carte blanche for richer unions to take talent from poorer unions and it destroys the ideal on which these competitions were built on. You are just legalizing a way to make good players want to play for teams other than their own. If Unions are allowed to purchase players, what's the difference between this and club rugby? If that's the case, let's call a spade a spade, remove flags, anthems, stop calling a national team and just call it "The best team Nation X could afford". At least that'd be honest. We can even use the sponsor's names. Tesco faces Carrefour! Ryanair vs Drambuie at the Aviva this weekend!
At least that'd have a shred of integrity.


The fundamental difference between clubs and national teams facing each other originated from that principle: clubs can cherry-pick it's members, the other cannot. That gave poorer nations a fair chance.
What the union or the player want should be (maybe not 100% in all cases but certainly to a high degree in most) irrelevant. That's the entire bloody point.

As things stand right now, you've got national european tier 2/3 teams where players not only cant even sing the anthem, they cant even speak any of the country's official languages. The reasons why this is non-existent at tier 1 is

a) More exposure so people in charge, knowing how bad this looks takes precautions.
b) English is rugby's lingua franca and it also happens to be the language most people speak as a second language.



That's my entire bloody point. If your rugby union doesn't suit you your wants you shouldn't be able to turn around and play for another country. What Stander wanted should be irrelevant. This is not a charity called "let's-grant-a-wish-for-elite-players-who-couldn't-make-it-to-the-national-team-of-their-choosing-foundation".

I want to play for Argentina and score a last-minute try to win the world cup? That's what i want and what i need.
Rugby player's careers are short enough and i haven't seen a single cent from my national team's union. NOT A CENT.
Should everyone adjust the rules so that can happen if i want it hard enough?
Jesus christ no.

You think it is not only ok, but desirable if a player wanted to play flank for South Africa but didn't have what it takes, to go nation shopping. I do not. I think it destroys the game.

I am willing to tolerate some of the players' wishes in some very specific circumstances for practical purposes.


@munstemuffin

A couple of things before i answer that. Let's make on thing crystal clear. My point is based on principle, a principle that I've outlaid already. A principle about what national rugby should be about. I then look at the evidence and if it fits the principle I'm ok with it, otherwise, i am not. In Beast's case i actually looked at the national teams box on wiki before i posted and since it didn't mention things other than South Africa, i made the call based on incomplete information. You want to call that wrong, fine, let's call it wrong. For me the key parts here are the principle and the logic applied. My principle stands and the logic is sound. If new evidence changes the outcome I'm actually happy about that. I've learned something and my position on a specific case is now a more informed one.


Now, back to your post. A straight question deserves a straight answer: against DD playing for Italy.
I have no problem whatsoever with Parisse playing for Italy though. As far as i understand, he ended up in Italy because his father's job landed him there, spoke Italian at home, and never wore an Argentine Jersey. If this last is false I'll change my opinion, not a problem. Again, the important here is the principle and the logic applied to see if the evidence stands for such principle or not. The result is circumstantial.

As I said no problem if that is your views. More as I was pointing out in Beast case. It seemed to be same points but youn were ok with 1 and not the other.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Ross Moriarty is Welsh. That is all.

Then why did he play for England under 18s? Surely if he was really welsh he wouldn't of been caught dead in an England shirt?

Or maybe he's just lazy and went for the easiest cap and doesn't actually care about being welsh or English. He's definitely not 100% welsh and he's another example of players choosing a country when they shouldn't.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Then why did he play for England under 18s? Surely if he was really welsh he wouldn't of been caught dead in an England shirt?

Or maybe he's just lazy and went for the easiest cap and doesn't actually care about being welsh or English. He's definitely not 100% welsh and he's another example of players choosing a country when they shouldn't.

For career reasons I'd imagine. I'm pretty confident that if the rule was that as soon as you payed 1 under 20 game you were capped for that country Moriarty wouldn't have gone down that route but no one will truly know that other than him and his family but knowing who his father and uncle were I don't reckon his life would've been worth living had he played for England.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Then why did he play for England under 18s? Surely if he was really welsh he wouldn't of been caught dead in an England shirt?

Or maybe he's just lazy and went for the easiest cap and doesn't actually care about being welsh or English. He's definitely not 100% welsh and he's another example of players choosing a country when they shouldn't.

Do Wales have a history of picking players based outside the country / academy system for U18 sides? I'd be surprised if they have the resources to do that. If the answer is no, this is exactly why I'm saying that players shouldn't be tied to a country by an U18 cap. I don't think it's reasonable for the game to force players to disrupt their education and / or move away from their family in order to play representative rugby for the team they wish to represent in the future.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Do Wales have a history of picking players based outside the country / academy system for U18 sides?

They definitely used to, cause there was uproar when Haskell told the story of how he used to go to training with Wales u18s, with no intention of playing for them, just cause he could get cash out of them for expenses, and free kit