having our pacific players back would be awesome

[Leonormous Boozer]

Jaysus, Ireland are taking a bashing here when it'd never apply to us... We play our players so far past their peaks not even the PIs would want them.

I'm all for this. Sure, don't take the **** with international sport but I dont see why it should be held to a far higher standard than more important jobs in "the real world".

Any opinion against it from a T1 nation is coming from an Ivory Tower anyway. Some unions offer huge match fees, some offer full time employment with greater security and some offer both to any PI player who's good enough in exchange for their allegiance. Fix that before complaining about this.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

I highly doubt you watch the teams who would be taking advantage of this rule change as it is now, so you not watching would not lead to a change in viewership of these comps.

It's as if oyu are not aware of where you are posting. Everyone here watches a ridiculous amount of rugby.
Instead of making false assumptions about what i watch or dont watch, why dont you just ask me instead? You avoid the strawman and being wrong. Win-win.
I baby sit on saturdays, watching rugby is pretty much the only thing i do, from 6 am till 10 pm. I watch anything and everything i can get. I'll give you i haven't watched much of the PNC, but ARC? Seriously? Go read the Argentine Rugby thread.

The whole point is that players are choosing playing for the All Blacks or the Wallabies instead of playing for the PIs as it is. PI eligible players aren't willing to represent the PI because they will lose their Super Rugby contracts if they play for another country. If they are free to play for a PI and keep eligibility for NZ or Oz they will keep their Super Rugby Contracts. If they are good enough, they will be lost to the bigger country no matter what. At least give the PIs a chance to make a good impression on the player, maybe some will choose to play for the PI.

But that is the point. Today there is a cost, i like that cost to be as high as possible. If they can't play in SR, so be it. Go to Japan or France. Decisions come at a cost. I'm fine with that.
Half of the Argentines could double their salary by playing in Europe. And some chose to (Imhoff, etc) and they had to give up playing for the national team.

Argentina and Uruguay is an inapt comparison unless loads of Argentinians are eligible for Uruguay through heritage.

Or vice versa.
I dont have the numbers at hand, but i recall there are over 200k Uruguayans legally living in Argentina. That's from a country with less than 3,5M residing in it's own territoy. We used to be the same country, share the language, most of the culture and even the colours and symbols in our flag. Travelling from one to another has always been very easy.
Yet we dont poach each other.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

It's not about the amount, it's about the principle.

If every country can poach whatever talent they want from poorer/lower tier nations what's the difference between this and club rugby? This is supposed to be something else.
This reduces the consequences of poaching.

I understand the reality of the world has changed and that people are not born, raised, educated and live in the same place. Granted, that's ok.
But i don't think asking a player to pick a side, as his HOME and then sticking to it, is asking for much to be honest.

We are not talking about 12-year-olds. We are talking about people who are in 99,9% of the cases legal adults who can vote. Not sure how it is in the UK (most replies in this thread) but in a lot (i'd say most but i'm not sure) you can't be part of any military branch if you've served elsewhere. I'd apply a similar principle. The key concept here is allegiance.

Again, i'm not saying they can't choose. I'm saying the need to do so carefully. And yes, they can't go back. Decisions come with benefits and consequences.

its naive to think that doesn't happen now, if not actively by the tier 1 unions then just because they are a bigger deal and so attract PI players. I doubt we can name someone that would make the GOAT team that opted to play for their home PI team rather than the AB's for example

moves like this would make no difference, in my opinion, to the majority of international selections....just those that were overtaken in their first or adopted countries but still had enough to give something back the the PI team

if anything it might help with guys getting one or two caps and then being forgotten, just recently i saw Ruby Pass do a AB's 1 cap XV...some talent in that team that was hardly seen on the international stage

obviously rules around no more than five caps or no more than one season being selected, maybe stipulate can only go from a tier 1 team to a tier 2 team and not the other way around

In the end my though process

this is a game
games should be enjoyable above all
would allowing it (with the appropriate rules) make me enjoys games less? no
would it make me enjoys games more? maybe

 

[Leinster Fan]

Honestly I don't have much of an issue with it, so long as there's a reasonable time between the two teams, the player has less than 10 or so caps for their first country and there's a clewr step down, so no switching from Tier 1 to Tier 1. Don't have a problem with the idea within reason.

 

[mania]

alot of u are forgetting what its like to be a player and u got to look past all the admin bs and so called loyalty bs.
basically world class players would play for longer and be on show at rugbys greatest show case. the island teams would finally get their island players back

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

ts naive to think that doesn't happen now, if not actively by the tier 1 unions then just because they are a bigger deal and so attract PI players.

Where did I ever mention that it didn't happen? I just think this encourages it even more and it's a step in the wrong direction.

would allowing it (with the appropriate rules) make me enjoys games less?

Absolutely, 100% yes.

alot of u are forgetting what its like to be a player and u got to look past all the admin bs and so called loyalty bs.

Oh thee, enlightened one, please tell us mere mortals what is it like to be a player.

 

[mania]

Oh thee, enlightened one, please tell us mere mortals what is it like to be a player.

u want to play duh

 

[BPM]

OK, let's say his happened tomorrow with a 5 cap limit and a 3yr 'stand down'. How many players does that add for PI teams?

George Moala would walk in to the Tonga side but I can't think of too many like that?

A lot of those I can think of are probably past their best (and the stand down period means they're likely to be a bit older unless they were capped young). For example, would Semesa Rokoduguni or Taqele Naiyaravoro be picked by Fiji? Arguably wing is the most competitive position for Fiji and while they might make the squad, they wouldn't make the starting XV IMO.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Where did I ever mention that it didn't happen? I just think this encourages it even more and it's a step in the wrong direction.


Absolutely, 100% yes.


Oh thee, enlightened one, please tell us mere mortals what is it like to be a player.

...how many players can you name that currently play for a PI team that would walk into a tier 1 team but decided to stick with home?...if not...who are we worried about?

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

if not...who are we worried about?

It's not who, it's the what. It's not about what player goes where, but the principle.

For me there is a very simple acid test. If you get player X, lets call him John, who plays for national team A, and tell him listen, i guarantee you the same amount of money and privileges, would you play for national team A or would you rather play for another team that you could be eligible for? What colours do you want to represent, who are you?

If under any circumstances he decides to switch, imo and this is personal, granted, there is something wrong. Sometimes terribly so sometimes not so much.
Again, this is a principles thing for me. Playing for the national team is not a right, it's a privilege. I find the idea of a national team being someone's b-plan infuriating.
I'd rather lose with my own every game than go begging for the scraps of someone else's table.

 

[mania]

For me there is a very simple acid test. If you get player X, lets call him John, who plays for national team A, and tell him listen, i guarantee you the same amount of money and privileges, would you play for national team A or would you rather play for another team that you could be eligible for? What colours do you want to represent, who are you?

so you get player x lets call him manuSamoaTuilagi for arguments sake. Grows up in Samoa has nothing to do with England. gets in a bit of trouble so his brother take him to educate him in England. note that manuSamoaTuilagi is not a citizen he's a resident. because he's s\Samoan he's unable to play for Samoa cos he's in England. so he shows a bit of natural Samoan talent and makes the England side.
Once England dont want him whats wrong with him going and playing for the country he's eligible by blood to play for?

 

[Kiwiwomble]

I think it probably comes down to some people not wanting the PI teams to get better and potentially overtake some of the Tier 1 countries, keep the status quo

Principle? really? its a game, the only principle is for it to be fun and enjoyable and i get more enjoyment out of competitive games

 

[mania]

I think it probably comes down to some people not wanting the PI teams to get better and potentially overtake some of the Tier 1 countries, keep the status quo

yup i agree. its fear that the PI's will get their players back and start kicking a55 and taking names.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

so you get player x lets call him manuSamoaTuilagi for arguments sake. Grows up in Samoa has nothing to do with England. gets in a bit of trouble so his brother take him to educate him in England. note that manuSamoaTuilagi is not a citizen he's a resident. because he's s\Samoan he's unable to play for Samoa cos he's in England. so he shows a bit of natural Samoan talent and makes the England side.
Once England dont want him whats wrong with him going and playing for the country he's eligible by blood to play for?

This one is an interesting case and i thought i expressed my views earlier. Maybe it was another thread. Anyway.

I don't think Tuilagi playing for England is wrong. I think Tuilagi playing for England for the reasons he is playing is wrong. He has been quoted saying "heart and home is still Samoa". But again, i think he is one of those cases where it is understandable for him to chose and he did so. I just think it is a shame, not the choice he made, but the reasons he made it for. But as long as he sticks to it, i can accept it. I don't like it, but i can live with it.

What's wrong is that i don't like the idea of a player representing more than one national team. You want to treat all this as a free for all where the nations with deepest pockets poach at will and after they are done with the player and this one is past his peak he is "allowed" to represent another nation and wholeheartedly sing another anthem. I don't.

I think it probably comes down to some people not wanting the PI teams to get better and potentially overtake some of the Tier 1 countries, keep the status quo

Got a friend that sells tin foil hats on a discount. Want his number?

Principle? really? its a game, the only principle is for it to be fun and enjoyable and i get more enjoyment out of competitive games

Geez, is that flag next to your profile the one of the nation that has benefited the most from poaching PIs players. No wonder you don't give a **** about principles. No surprises there.
And please don't confuse your cynicism with my naivety.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

This one is an interesting case and i thought i expressed my views earlier. Maybe it was another thread. Anyway.

I don't think Tuilagi playing for England is wrong. I think Tuilagi playing for England for the reasons he is playing is wrong. He has been quoted saying "heart and home is still Samoa". But again, i think he is one of those cases where it is understandable for him to chose and he did so. I just think it is a shame, not the choice he made, but the reasons he made it for. But as long as he sticks to it, i can accept it. I don't like it, but i can live with it.

What's wrong is that i don't like the idea of a player representing more than one national team. You want to treat all this as a free for all where the nations with deepest pockets poach at will and after they are done with the player and this one is past his peak he is "allowed" to represent another nation and wholeheartedly sing another anthem. I don't.


Got a friend that sells tin foil hats on a discount. Want his number?


Geez, is that flag next to your profile the one of the nation that has benefited the most from poaching PIs players. No wonder you don't give a **** about principles. No surprises there.
And please don't confuse your cynicism with my naivety.

how am I a cynic? How am I part of the tin foil hat brigade? I'm the one saying try something new, your the one paranoid about the world ending if they try something new...weird

you obviously think the All Blacks would poach a while swathe of new PI players...who are they, who currently playing for a PI team would walk into the ABs?

yeah, the abs have had loads of players with PI backgrounds, the reality is the vast majority have are born in nz , I'm saying give the PI countries something back...your just worried the argies will start getting bashed about and beaten by the PI teams

your "principles" straw man won't work, it's self interest plain and simple like anyone else

 

[bertiec]

100% against this.

The entire point, the whole bloody point of having nations against each other was not to be able to purchase talent from others. It levelled the playing field between rich and poor. I don't have a problem with Manu Tuilagi playing for England. I do have a problem with him wanting to play for Samoa (he's pretty much said this a couple of times) and choosing to play for England for money.
But I don't have a realistic solution as things stand now.

I understand someone born in country A, moved as a kid to country B and playing for country B. You can also have country's A nationality while being born in country B. Fine, that's perfect.
But once you wear country A's national jersey, you shouldn't be able to wear any other national side. Junior's included.

totaly agree, the thing to stop would be the capping of players with options (like Manu) being played once for a country then dropped with the purpose of preventing the other option.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

totaly agree, the thing to stop would be the capping of players with options (like Manu) being played once for a country then dropped with the purpose of preventing the other option.

i don't think anyone would argue, but how?

 

[higgik]

i don't think anyone would argue, but how?

Maybe have a 5 cap limit over more than one season. Those players are the ones the rich unions are taking a gamble on. If they work great, but no one else is having that option.
I would also stop 'project player' by making the age they become resident as under 16 and the move should be based on parents work. I know it won't stop all but will reduce a lot of poaching.
World Rugby should be doing more to cover insurance costs of players playing for T2 countries while employed by a top club.
Finally, stop the marquee player rule in AP to reduce the number of players being brought over to Europe

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Arbitrary time periods and rules are thrown into these debates all of the time. I find it mad that some people think that international sport should be more difficult to qualify for than citizenship usually is. If someone is over here, paying tax and contributing more to society than your average Irish person for five years he deserves to play for the country.

The argument of "CJ Stander didn't grow up dreaming of playing for Ireland" is dumb af too. Kids who grow up wanting to be cops or soldiers and realise there's more money and a better life in investment banking and pursue that aren't criticised or blocked from doing so which is essentially what stricter rules would achieve. Pro rugby is about a 10-12 year career for your average T1 level international, let the 15% make there money and drive the standard up while doing so.

 

[higgik]

Arbitrary time periods and rules are thrown into these debates all of the time. I find it mad that some people think that international sport should be more difficult to qualify for than citizenship usually is. If someone is over here, paying tax and contributing more to society than your average Irish person for five years he deserves to play for the country.

The argument of "CJ Stander didn't grow up dreaming of playing for Ireland" is dumb af too. Kids who grow up wanting to be cops or soldiers and realise there's more money and a better life in investment banking and pursue that aren't criticised or blocked from doing so which is essentially what stricter rules would achieve. Pro rugby is about a 10-12 year career for your average T1 level international, let the 15% make there money and drive the standard up while doing so.

My example would include Denny Solomona, he has 1 cap for England, so would be eligible to play for Samoa, as he dud in Rugby League. Another loophole that needs closing. Represent a nation at any sport and you are tied.