Very interesting. The position we seem to always struggle with producing home grown players is 12. England dont to identify and move larger players there early enough maybe? Wales seem to produce a fair few.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
England vs Fiji 26th August 23
- Thread starter Don't Skip Leg Day
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Messages
- 11,797
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
A] These things are cyclical
B] I'm not convinced that we haven't produced any, they're just young, or decided to be Welsh or Scottish.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2008
- Messages
- 100,020,374
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Yeah, we lost two to Wales and one to Scotland during the must-be-Farrell-or-Manu saga, and came close to losing Kelly to Ireland (still could, with these new eligibility laws as well, eligible to switch next summer)
I think having a lot of import players is fine and helps the juniors and league be competitive. The balance however needs to be right and juniors needs to actually be given the benefits it can bring by letting them play. Where UK ice hockey went wrong is chasing success and the edge by allowing the import quota to go up and up.
Last edited:
Very long time between cycles atm.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2011
- Messages
- 8,399
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
4 years ago England were WC finalists. A couple of years before that they were grand slam winners and won a series in Australia 3-0. I take it at that point we had no foreign players in the premiership?
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2015
- Messages
- 7,047
EQP was introduced in 2016. England was good immediately after but 7 years on how do things look. The league looks to be falling behind top 14 and URC. The national team seems a little too similar to the team that toured Australia that year. Is it really helping new talent develop/break through?
TopTen2003
Academy Player
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2017
- Messages
- 352
Does anyone think I'm being harsh on Freddie Steward to say he looked cumbersome in his tracking/tackling for Fiji's first and second tries?
He cannot be an International Full back with such a low acceleration and change of direction.
Certainly not against an experiment at centre for his club next season but for now I don't think he should be starting 15 at a RWC.
He cannot be an International Full back with such a low acceleration and change of direction.
Certainly not against an experiment at centre for his club next season but for now I don't think he should be starting 15 at a RWC.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 2,900
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Well who else Malins, Daly if he's fit. I think you'll find he will be the starting 15 till we get knocked out.
Is it anything to do with how England's rugby season is scheduled? Are elite players, burning out and/or constantly being injured because of the long season? When I played over there, pre-season started July, pre-season games august, then the season ran sep-april. League games, cup games, friendlies, then 7s tournaments in May, So you kind of get 4 weeks off. And that's at amatuer level. If you're an England international, you finish the season and are off on tour to the Southern Hemisphere in June. Even if they weren't off on tour those guys must be feeling flogged.
Compare that to the Australian season for amateurs, pre-season starts Feb, pre-season games in march and the season runs from April to mid August. So you have 5/6 months off. Even for elite players, the season isn't long, Super rugby goes Feb-May, 6 games for the Rugby championship and then they have a few months off. They'll tour in November and not play again till late Feb. So 3 more months off.
I can imagine a lot of amateurs just end up quitting because of the length of the season, the commitment, the impact on your body.
I'm guessing similar in NZ and SA?
Compare that to the Australian season for amateurs, pre-season starts Feb, pre-season games in march and the season runs from April to mid August. So you have 5/6 months off. Even for elite players, the season isn't long, Super rugby goes Feb-May, 6 games for the Rugby championship and then they have a few months off. They'll tour in November and not play again till late Feb. So 3 more months off.
I can imagine a lot of amateurs just end up quitting because of the length of the season, the commitment, the impact on your body.
I'm guessing similar in NZ and SA?
Rugbyfan564
Academy Player
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2023
- Messages
- 493
It would damage the league but the national team could benefit if the ban on being capped while playing abroad was amended or lifted.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2011
- Messages
- 8,399
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Maybe we are just not good enough?
But it becomes expensive as if the get picked for England, they get more salary, hurting the cap space, while on top of that, ( as mentioned above), they only play for the club for 50% of the time.
1) sort out a calendar that means players are playing for clubs more and the casual fan can follow.
2) hard salary caps, no bonus players.
3) u20 development organised by RFU not clubs, including more funding to BUCS and an Elite 6th form programme.
Arundell
Slade from outside squad.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2008
- Messages
- 100,020,374
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
I'd trust Steward far more than either of those as an international fullback
Exactly.
The RFU should be breaking club rugby into 3 sections.
1) Pro
2) development
3) community
Each level has a different roke to play in developing the game.
For the pro level
1) sort out the calendar so there is 2 international windows, one of 7 weeks in Sept & Oct the other of 6 weeks in May/June.
2) NH pro rugby starts in Nov, with a 'trial' or 'pre-season' in Sept and Oct
3) maximum number of domestic dates to be limited to 22 weeks.
4) Europe played after domestic, as a RWC style 20 team event, 8 weeks.
This would mean an international player would play a maximum of
12 internationals
21 domestic
7 Europe
This is 40 weeks of games played over 43 weeks, still giving a 9-10 week block rest, with odd weeks rest in season.
And this is if that player managed to play every international and got to the final of every club tournament!!!
ShropshireAllBlack
Academy Player
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2023
- Messages
- 152
So the countries that are successful in the current set up (Ireland and France to name but 2), are going to tear it apart and rejig everything because the RFU can't get their **** together?
I seem to recall the Heineken Cup being reconfigured once or twice, how's that working out?
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
- Messages
- 2,106
- Club or Nation
This is why the premiership is struggling.
#lessinternatonals
...
I had the above typed out as somewhat tongue in cheek response and decided not to post but following on from
this post I'll let my original comment fly. That's just the thing, clubs (pro and amateur) are doing their best to grow the game in every way yet are effectively hobbled by their own union. The RFU are the ones who have for generations targeted their own self interests and profitability over everything else (mostly with milking Twickenham and international cash cow at expense of everything else) and "at best" looked out for their select partners from the oldschool, say your Leicesters and Harlequins. Even then 40 full blown internationals wouldn't have been the biggest issue either if those matches were used wisely to vastly deepen the experienced player pool England could draw from, instead they were the exact opposite - thousand more minutes to Youngs being a peak example of many. Dan Cole was fortunate to make the 2019 world cup squad (IMO him being forced to play 70 mins Vs SA was a deciding factor in the final), generally anyone who regularly follows club rugby outside of Leicester can easily name far more effective props in 2023. I like Cole, but he's simply not the best prop in England any more and shouldn't be near a 2023 world cup. On and on it goes for almost every position.
Then you get to RFU academies, school systems and all that...
Lam on the 'flawed' system that is holding Bristol Bears and England back
Bristol Bears director of rugby Pat Lam says certain clubs are being hamstrung by the Premiership's salary cap rules around academy players which is then having a knock-on effect higher up the chain
"Premiership clubs can recruit and develop players into their first team from their academy without impacting their budget, under "homegrown credits" of up to £600,000, providing they have been signed from a predetermined area.
For Bristol that encompasses the city, South Gloucestershire and, from 2016, North and West Somerset, but as Lam points out includes just two of the 100 leading rugby schools in the country - Clifton College and Bristol Grammar School. By contrast, at the other end of the scale, Harlequins have a huge part of South London plus Surrey and Sussex, containing more than 20 of the best rugby schools.
....
he believes some of the country's best talent has become either trapped or completely lost to the system, therefore reducing options at international level.
"I can tell you now that I've been here nearly six years, the system is flawed for young players," Lam said. "When you look and you ask the question, and I used to always say this when I was back in New Zealand and coaching in Ireland, 'how is the country that has the most resources, financially and player-wise, not the No1 rugby nation in the world?' And the problem that you've got is that it's the only country that has a system that has boundaries on young players which is, to me, the biggest problem you've got.
"What that means, and I do this is my whole coaching philosophy is that I'm a big believer in bringing through young players, is, and I only recognise this now because the salary cap got dropped to £5m, when you have boundaries, the top 100 schools in the country - let alone the other schools - where are they all? In that top 100, Bristol has two schools in the top 100; Harlequins have 23 schools in the top 100. Ourselves, Bath and Exeter have the least schools.
"If I wanted to bring a young player through, and invest 2-3 years in him. To do that I might have to pay him 20k but I have to pay Harlequins, who have done nothing at that stage - okay, he might have come through their academy - I've got to give them 30k; that 50k that I've paid goes into the salary cap. So why would I bother doing that?
"I know, I'll go into the Championship and find someone who won't play for England but he can at least play at this level. I might get him for 30k, that goes into my salary cap but at least I've got someone here.
....
you're missing out on a lot of talent and what we have to do is make the most of the pool. Out of the top 100, two in Bristol, that is, say, 30 players that are available, maybe two in each position, you look at the Harlequins or the London Irish catchment, what are you talking, there? 200-300 they can choose from."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The whole interview is worth reading but as you can see the RFU situation just goes on and the article just scratches the surface. What other countries have their Union entering multi million pound business investment deals with select clubs, leaving the rest out in the cold? It wasn't for the betterment of the sport in general, that's for sure. What other union reduced the salary causing untold damage and issues to those in their stewardship because certain clubs who championed (and got) the previous cap, wanted it reduced as they refused to cut cloth and accept anything less than biggest fish at expense of others, wider competitions, and the game at large? What other union ruthlessly carved up the second tier of English club rugby under the pretense of "being fully professional" yet didn't even find a sponsor for their professional league for 3 years? What union changed the format/structure of their solely controlled professional league (The Championship) into something inappropriate for purpose and underfunded the clubs in it for a decade? What other union is even largely derided by many important grassroots and amateur clubs who almost exist in spite of, instead of due to, their "custodian"? What other union persists in pushing certain areas over saturated with competing sports for a low ROI instead of nurturing the talent left by the wayside in unpopular areas?
... I could go on but yeah, that's enough. Probably should have just said RFU and their cronies are a load of ****** as it's more succinct.
Last edited:
