IRB rule against Pacific Islander's switch

[dullonien]

Playing for a country doesnt change where you come from..it is a fair rule but I think some people would be offended if you told them they were not Samoan because they play for the All Blacks

That's increadibly odd, and tbh if they felt atall offended then they shouldn't be playing for the All Blacks, simple as. When you play international sport, you are representing that country, meaning you should consider yourself from that country. Why else have these players otherwise chosen to play for the All Blacks? If it's not because they deem themselves New Zealenders, then it must simply because NZ have a better international team and they are more likely to gain success and win trophy's. Am I missing something here?

If that's the case then they should be offended, and they should be ashamed of themselves to boot as they have turned their back on their country of birth. I would never, ever represent any other country at anything other than Wales, be that rugby football or tiddlywinks.

 

[nickdnz]

That's increadibly odd, and tbh if they felt atall offended then they shouldn't be playing for the All Blacks, simple as. When you play international sport, you are representing that country, meaning you should consider yourself from that country. Why else have these players otherwise chosen to play for the All Blacks? If it's not because they deem themselves New Zealenders, then it must simply because NZ have a better international team and they are more likely to gain success and win trophy's. Am I missing something here?

If that's the case then they should be offended, and they should be ashamed of themselves to boot as they have turned their back on their country of birth. I would never, ever represent any other country at anything other than Wales, be that rugby football or tiddlywinks.

I think in context, it makes a bit more sence. Being Samoan is a part of your heritage, so many New Zealanders are proud of their Samoan heritages, just as many African Americans are proud of their African heritage. They may consider themselves New Zealanders, but they are Samoan New Zealanders, if that makes any sence.

I don't understand at all how some people are being so shallow, as to say your blood line is from a country, and therefore that is all you can play for. You are not biologically attatched to any country, and you may have had family live in another country, but I don't see how you could tell a 6 year old child, who moved to New Zealand from India at 2 months old, that he's any less of a New Zealander that myself. My father was born in England, moved to New Zealand when he was 3 months old, with his entire English family of 5 siblings. My Grandmother and her five kids consider themselves New Zealanders. My dad is the most kiwi bloke around. If England decleared war on New Zealand tomorrow, all of my family would not hesitate to serve New Zealand. Does that mean they're allowed to give their lives to serve New Zealand, but not being given the right to represent them?

I think living in a country for five years, is fair enough to be able to play for that country, or playing through heritage. It would not effect a single All Black for the last 15 years.

 

[Nate Dizzle]

IRB are a bunch of wankers. Fancy turning this proposal down they just don't want to see pacific teams get stacked before world cups. Time to take the 2 votes off the home unions and give the pacific Islands a vote each so we can start to make some progress. Don't we want to see the absolute best teams at the world cup? or do we want to have turns at winning it between NZ, Aus, SA, ENG and France for the next 100 years, bboorrriiinnngggg. Another oppotunity to do something positive for the GAME and the IRB **** it up. Why am I not suprised.

 

[markshaw]

That's increadibly odd, and tbh if they felt atall offended then they shouldn't be playing for the All Blacks, simple as. When you play international sport, you are representing that country, meaning you should consider yourself from that country. Why else have these players otherwise chosen to play for the All Blacks? If it's not because they deem themselves New Zealenders, then it must simply because NZ have a better international team and they are more likely to gain success and win trophy's. Am I missing something here?

If that's the case then they should be offended, and they should be ashamed of themselves to boot as they have turned their back on their country of birth. I would never, ever represent any other country at anything other than Wales, be that rugby football or tiddlywinks.

I get the feeling this guy knows exactly what I'm talking about but is having a dig at the fact that The All Blacks have some Samoan/Tongan/Fijian players .

Nickdnz summed it up perfectly bro.... Dullonien, if you were brought up in Wales but you were born in Tonga to tongan parents. You have a Welsh and a Tongan passport, would you be offended if you were told you were not considerd Tongan because you played for Wales? When your parents/Grand parents etc were very proud Tongans? Thats not to say you wouldnt be proud as hell to play for Wales because thats your home. Have an open mind mate..

 

[dullonien]

Wasn't having a dig atall mate, as I have no problem with any of the islander born players who have decided to play for the All Blacks, as the majority moved to NZ at a very young age, therefore must consider themselves New Zealenders first, Samoan/Fijian/Tongan second. Something I have infact stated many times during this thread already... but don't let that stop you.

I'm not saying that they can't be proud of their islander heritage, however they have chosen NZ over Samoa etc., advertising to the world that they are in fact New Zealenders first and firemost. Be proud, but don't winge because you can no longer represent your country of birth when your adopted country no longer require your services.

The original post I replied to stated that 'some Samoan's would be offended is I told them they were NOT Samoan because they play for the All Blacks', not that 'some Samoan's would be offended if I told them they couldn't be proud of their heritage because they play for the All Blacks'. If they consider themselves Samoan and not a New Zealender, then they should be playing for Samoa and not the All Blacks, simple.

Please don't acuse me of things I have not done.....

 

[nickdnz]

IRB are a bunch of wankers. Fancy turning this proposal down they just don't want to see pacific teams get stacked before world cups. Time to take the 2 votes off the home unions and give the pacific Islands a vote each so we can start to make some progress. Don't we want to see the absolute best teams at the world cup? or do we want to have turns at winning it between NZ, Aus, SA, ENG and France for the next 100 years, bboorrriiinnngggg. Another oppotunity to do something positive for the GAME and the IRB **** it up. Why am I not suprised.

I would turn it down. I guess that makes me a ******. It's not about trying to keep the PI nations down, it just goes against everything that international rugby stands for. If you've said, New Zealand is my home, and I want to represent them, then that is it. You may hold affinities to your countries of heritage, and that's fine, but if you represent your country, it should be because you hold it foremost it your heart, not as a consolation prize. I personally don't think it will fix many problems at all, and it does devalue an international jersey, to that of a club jersey.

I don't know where the attacking of dullonien if from. He hasn't had a dig at New Zealand having any players from the Picific Nations, he is meerly saying that when you represent a country in a sport, it should be out of loyalty and dedication to that nation, and by allowing players who won't represent a country again to change allegiances, cheapens both jerseys. Which I totally agree with. I'm not totally convinced giving Fiji, Samoa or Tonga second hand players will sort the roof of any problem, as they have the athletes to be competitive against the best teams, just not the right amount of money or time to get those great players into great teams. If New Zealand really wanted to help out the PI nations they'd take several actions -
1. Open up more spots for PI players in the Super 15, and allow them to have starting positions with good development.
2. Campain to give the PI Nations more quality games, with allowing PI players paid leave times during the June Series, Pacific Six Nations and EoyT. Right now they can rarely get a full team together, if they had the same intervals as other players, they would be competitive.
3. Big cash injection.

 

[Frank Dux]

If they play for NZ, it doesn't mean they feel more Kiwi than Samoan/Tongan/Fijian. People tend to want to play for winning teams. NZ have the hype and the winning legacy, and it's easy to get drawn in by that.

I can imagine Samoans in NZ playing for Samoa first, if Samoa were in NZ's position, and NZ were in Samoa's current position(ranked 11th; play only 5 tests a year; get paid less than a paper boy). Can you seriously say that someone like Laulala and Ieremia felt more Kiwi than Samoan, just in their short time in NZ, before donning the AB jersey?

I don't think the rules need to be changed though. The Island teams only need more quality matches and time, and a good coach always helps. The IRB want the Island teams to improve, but they're not giving them the best opportunity for them to do so.

 

[dullonien]

If they play for NZ, it doesn't mean they feel more Kiwi than Samoan/Tongan/Fijian. People tend to want to play for winning teams. NZ have the hype and the winning legacy, and it's easy to get drawn in by that.

I can imagine Samoans in NZ playing for Samoa first, if Samoa were in NZ's position, and NZ were in Samoa's current position(ranked 11th; play only 5 tests a year; get paid less than a paper boy). Can you seriously say that someone like Laulala and Ieremia felt more Kiwi than Samoan, just in their short time in NZ, before donning the AB jersey?

I don't think the rules need to be changed though. The Island teams only need more quality matches and time, and a good coach always helps. The IRB want the Island teams to improve, but they're not giving them the best opportunity for them to do so.

That's exactly what I and many others, including nickdnz above disagrees with though. The success of a team really shouldn't come into things when deciding on which country to play for. Rugby, more than most sports is about passion and pride in the jersey and the country it represents, and I hate it when a player plays for Wales that doesn't show that passion and pride (coughjasonjoneshughesshanehowarthcough). Giving an example of another sport. As most probably know, Wales are quite rubbish at football, this does not mean all our players instead decide to play for England because they then get a chance to play in the World Cup and Euro tournaments. Giggs is a fine example of this, considered by some to be up there with the best ever (Alix Ferguson hails him as the best Man U player ever), yet he has never had a chance on the world stage in a majour tournament. He could have played for England, infact he did play for them at age grade. Most Welsh players live and play in England as that's where the Premiership clubs are, but Pride in your nation should always come above fame and success.

How much do you think players get payed to play international rugby, in comparision to the amount they make at their clubs, it's not much whoever you play for.

 

[nickdnz]

If they play for NZ, it doesn't mean they feel more Kiwi than Samoan/Tongan/Fijian. People tend to want to play for winning teams. NZ have the hype and the winning legacy, and it's easy to get drawn in by that.

I can imagine Samoans in NZ playing for Samoa first, if Samoa were in NZ's position, and NZ were in Samoa's current position(ranked 11th; play only 5 tests a year; get paid less than a paper boy). Can you seriously say that someone like Laulala and Ieremia felt more Kiwi than Samoan, just in their short time in NZ, before donning the AB jersey?

I don't think the rules need to be changed though. The Island teams only need more quality matches and time, and a good coach always helps. The IRB want the Island teams to improve, but they're not giving them the best opportunity for them to do so.

Bull ****. If I've lived in a country most of my life (and barring a very rare few, most PI All Blacks have, then you are obviously going to play for them). Wealth may have been an incentive for their families to have moved to NZ in the first place, but it's not why they feel NZ is their home, and it's offensive so say otherwise.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

If they play for NZ, it doesn't mean they feel more Kiwi than Samoan/Tongan/Fijian. People tend to want to play for winning teams. NZ have the hype and the winning legacy, and it's easy to get drawn in by that.

Which is a bad reason to pick a country. You should not pick a country because you want to have more chances of winning prizes. You should pick a country to play for because you love the country and because you have ties to that specific country. I love to see NZ play but I would never ever play for them myself.

Also South Africa is a country I would not play for because it is not my country of heritage. The only ties I have to South Africa is that my son was born there and I live there. For me that is not enough. Playing for Uruguay would be a valid choice since my mom was born there. You see my point? Just living somewhere doesn't make you eligible to play for that country.

It's not club rugby where you can pick whoever you want to play for and where transfers are made, this is international rugby, country vs. country. English vs. New Zealanders. Not a team with 7 English, 3 Australians, 2 South Africans, 2 Americans and a Canadian vs. 8 New Zealanders, 4 Fijians, 2 Samoans, 1 Tongan. That way you can just play an international club competition in stead of a World Cup.

People should not be able to pick a country they have no hereditary ties with to prevent situations like these where a Samoan wants to play for Samoa after already playing for New Zealand

 

[nickdnz]

Which is a bad reason to pick a country. You should not pick a country because you want to have more chances of winning prizes. You should pick a country to play for because you love the country and because you have ties to that specific country. I love to see NZ play but I would never ever play for them myself.

Also South Africa is a country I would not play for because it is not my country of heritage. The only ties I have to South Africa is that my son was born there and I live there. For me that is not enough. Playing for Uruguay would be a valid choice since my mom was born there. You see my point? Just living somewhere doesn't make you eligible to play for that country.

It's not club rugby where you can pick whoever you want to play for and where transfers are made, this is international rugby, country vs. country. English vs. New Zealanders. Not a team with 7 English, 3 Australians, 2 South Africans, 2 Americans and a Canadian vs. 8 New Zealanders, 4 Fijians, 2 Samoans, 1 Tongan. That way you can just play an international club competition in stead of a World Cup.

People should not be able to pick a country they have no hereditary ties with to prevent situations like these where a Samoan wants to play for Samoa after already playing for New Zealand

So in other words you are saying Mils Muliania, Jerome Kaino, Isia Toeava, Ben Franks, Joe Rokocoko, Sitivini Sivivatu all shouldn't feel like they are New Zealanders, because not all of them were born here? Should your son feel South African? Would it make a difference if he was born somewhere else two weeks before he moved to South Africa?

I guess it's a difference of opinion coming from a very multi cultral sociaty, rather than one in which your not a true *select citizenship* untill you can trace your great great grandfather back to the home land.

 

[smartcooky]

Well I am in favour of the the idea, but not in the way it has been proposed. I would expect a LOT more stringent criteria to be set.

I would also expect it NOT to be a special "Pacific Islands" exception, but rather, one that applies across all countries (with restriction I will outline later). I see no reason why such a set of exceptions should not allow, for example, Matt Dunning to return to be eligible for Canada, David Pocock for Zimbabwe, or Leslie Vainikolo for Tonga.

My conditions would be as follows

One Switch Only
A player would only be allowed to change allegiances once in their lifetime. This would allow the player a one-off opportunity to either repair a mistake in judgement that may have made when they were younger, or to give something back to the country of their birth/ancestry.

Immediate ancestry only
The player can only switch to the country of their birth, or of their immediate natural parent's birth. No grannygate or great-grannygate.

Down a tier or two, but never up
The player can only switch from a higher Tier to a lower one. Switches within Tiers would not be allowed, and nor would going up a Tier be allowed. This would make it too easy for rich Top tier unions to buy established international players from Tier 2 & 3 unions.

Residency period
The player must live and play in the country they are switch to for 24 months before they can represent it. This would ensure that the player shows commitment to the country and isn't just continuing to play Club Rugby in Europe or Super Rugby in SANZAR.

Stand down period
The player must have stood down from International competition for five years before they become "re-eligible" to represent the country of their birth. This would ensure that a player could not, for example, retire from being an All Black immediately after one world cup, and represent Samoa at the next. They will have to skip a world cup.

Irreversibility
The player must declare their intention before they commit to the Residency requirement of becoming re-eligible for the country of their birth. Once this happens, they can never go back, even if they do not complete the process. For example, Player A, an ex Wallaby, declares the intent to play for his birth country, Tonga. If after living in Tonga for only 12 months he decides its not what he wants to do, he cannot simply go back to become eligible for Australia.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

So in other words you are saying Mils Muliania, Jerome Kaino, Isia Toeava, Ben Franks, Joe Rokocoko, Sitivini Sivivatu all shouldn't feel like they are New Zealanders, because not all of them were born here? Should your son feel South African? Would it make a difference if he was born somewhere else two weeks before he moved to South Africa?

I guess it's a difference of opinion coming from a very multi cultral sociaty, rather than one in which your not a true *select citizenship* untill you can trace your great great grandfather back to the home land.

It depends on when they moved there. What worries me is people like Quintin Geldenhuys (Italy), Hendre Fourie (England) and maybe soon Robbie Diack (Ireland) to name 3 examples. They are players who moved to a country at a later age and should not be eligible to play for the country they chose. It's different for a player who has lived somewhere almost his whole life. Maybe I described it the wrong way. My second point is that if a player decides to play for 1 country, he should not be able to switch.

 

[smartcooky]

Ezequiel

Its unwise to get too hung up on birthplace. George Gregan was born in Zambia, in the same Lusaka hospital as Corne Krige. Do you think either of these players "feel Zambian"?

Krige was educated at Paarl, but his parents still live in Zambia, so unlike most Samoan born NZ rugby players, he did not move to his new country with his parents at a young age... he boarded in SA, but lived in Zambia until he reached the Age of Majority.

Gregan on the other hand, moved to Australia with his parents before he was a year old.

So, if you had your way, Gregan would have been allowed to play for Australia, but Krige would not have been allowed to play for South Africa, even though their birth circumstances were virtually identical!

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Does Gregan have 2 Zambian parents? Heritage is based on 2 things: Place of birth and your parents' nationality.

 

[smartcooky]

Does Gregan have 2 Zambian parents? Heritage is based on 2 things: Place of birth and your parents' nationality.

Australian father, Zimbabwean mother.

IRB eligibility regulations recognise as far back as Grand-Parents.

Regulation 8.1 Subject to Regulation 8.2, a Player may only play for the senior fifteen-a-side National Representative Team, the next senior fifteen-a-side National Representative Team and the senior National Representative Sevens Team of the Union of the country in which:

a) he was born; or

b) one parent or grandparent was born; or

c) he has completed thirty six consecutive months of Residence immediately preceding the time of playing.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

So if he has an Australian father, he should be eligible to play for Australia, no worries.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Okay, this is creepy... Who changed my avatar??? I love it! Thanks to whoever did it

 

[smartcooky]

Okay, this is creepy... Who changed my avatar??? I love it! Thanks to whoever did it

That's not creepy, it disturbing. Regardless of whether or not you like the avatar, Mods and Admins (it would have to be one or other) should not be tinkering around with the stuff in your profile without consulting with you first.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

Well, to be honest I did ask in the feedback section why I couldn't set it as my avatar myself before. Because I didn't get an answer, I picked a photo of Willem Alberts as an avatar. Now, 2 weeks later, it is set as my avatar after all.