[June Tests 2018: 2nd Test] South Africa vs. England (16/06/2018)

[TommiG88]

What a splendid idea old bean, although change the soundtrack to Land of Hope and Glory.

All provided they can pronounce 'scone' correctly.

Sc-on
Or
Sc-own

 

[TRF_heineken]

We have the largest Union in the world and we have to rely on kiwi rejects? How will we ever beat NZ if all we do is hoover up their also ran players? Give Wales Callam Clarke and maybe they might beat us at HQ one year...

Do you have an issue with his selection because he's not playing in England, or because he's not selected for NZ?

Because this is not new to the UK nations.

Off the top of my head, I can think of the following guys that could be named in the same breath:

Brad Barritt
Mouritz Botha
CJ Stander
WP Nel
Josh Strauss
Richardt Strauss
Gareth Anscombe
Sean Maitland

Us guys here in the Southern Hemisphere are used to it by now that guys playing here, and then out of the blue are then selected for one of the "home" nations. I don't understand why you as an englishmen would not come to grips with it? It's old news. And it's not just in Rugby either...

 

[McTallshort]

Do you have an issue with his selection because he's not playing in England, or because he's not selected for NZ?

Because this is not new to the UK nations.

Off the top of my head, I can think of the following guys that could be named in the same breath:

Brad Barritt
Mouritz Botha
CJ Stander
WP Nel
Josh Strauss
Richardt Strauss
Gareth Anscombe
Sean Maitland

Us guys here in the Southern Hemisphere are used to it by now that guys playing here, and then out of the blue are then selected for one of the "home" nations. I don't understand why you as an englishmen would not come to grips with it? It's old news. And it's not just in Rugby either...

Yes its old news but its still wrong. The residency rule was set up to help developing nations not to allow England, France and Ireland to boost their playing numbers. OK if someone has lived in England for a number of years and played his rugby there, made a home etc then I dont really have problem but that isnt the case with Brad Shields. He has to my knowledge never lived in England or played for any time in an English club. He is a Kiwi who frankly isnt good enough for the All Blacks. It reminds me of Brendan Laney who having lived in New Zealand all his life was flown into Scotland a week before a 6 Nations game and suddenly became a Scotsman.

Brad Shields: England's answer to Brendan Laney.

 

[mdaclarke]

I don't have a problem with players with english/scottish/welsh/irish parents/(grandparents(at a push) playing for the country.

What I do have a problem with is players who do not qualify being actively poached and qualifying through the residency rule. This demeans international rugby and turns the teams into glorified club sides.

Also with a few exceptions (CJ Stander?) most of these players are not good enough to play for their native teams and you will never win anything playing with another countries B/C team players.

 

[All Black]

He is a Kiwi who frankly isnt good enough for the All Blacks.

Some years back when Sheilds was on top of his game, he was talked about as certainty for an All Blacks jersey by NZ rugby commentators. He picked up a major injury and thats why he never made it. He's a good player though.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Yes its old news but its still wrong. The residency rule was set up to help developing nations not to allow England, France and Ireland to boost their playing numbers. OK if someone has lived in England for a number of years and played his rugby there, made a home etc then I dont really have problem but that isnt the case with Brad Shields. He has to my knowledge never lived in England or played for any time in an English club. He is a Kiwi who frankly isnt good enough for the All Blacks. It reminds me of Brendan Laney who having lived in New Zealand all his life was flown into Scotland a week before a 6 Nations game and suddenly became a Scotsman.

Brad Shields: England's answer to Brendan Laney.

But it's a bit Hypocritical as England has been the country that has been exploiting this the most. And they started this whole cycle of project players and getting guys who would be eligible because of the residency rule. If we take a position such as inside centre as an example. Before Faz was your first choice, England went through a bunch a of foreigners as they didn't have international quality players for that position that were born in England. Brad Barrit, Manu Tuilagi, Stuart Abbott, Riki Flutey & Ben Te'o comes to mind.

I don't want to get too technical on this matter with regards to where they were born, went to school or where they grew up or played age grade rugby, but as soon as the "stigma-seed" has been planted of a player that has been "poached" it's nearly impossible to change someone's mind about his loyalties and that he's just a mercenary for hire and that the good old traditions of pride for king and country still applies.

All I'm saying is that England is the biggest offender of this nature, and has been for the longest time of all the nations. After they dropped off the pedestal of being the best in the world after the 2003 World Cup, they went on a binge to get the guys to get them back on top and the attitude of winning by all means necessary has created this vicious cycle. Perhaps the administrators should have a change of mind and follow the idea of SARU when selecting players for national duty. Even if it's just for a short while until the residency rule increases. At least by then the heat will be a little bit less.

 

[ncurd]

A lot past migrants from India, born in England will see themselves as Indian.

This, Try talking to a third generation subcontinent defendant in England about cricket. I'll place a bet most support thier grandparents respective country rather than England.

Shields qualifies because both his parents are English and thats bern fine for qualification sunce time began on these fronts. Who cares why hes doing it really no one will actually really know.

Our current offcial captain (sitting out these tests) has less links to England growing up than Shields does.

 

[ncurd]

But it's a bit Hypocritical as England has been the country that has been exploiting this the most.

Evidence? I suspect Scotland and Wales have been far bigger offenders but no onevcare becausenthey aren't England.

The poaching argument is just bloody stupid....

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

And it's not just in Rugby either...

So true! In athletics, among many examples, we have the sprint hurdlers Tiffany Porter and her sister. They qualify for GB through a parent, but were born and raised in America, they look American, sound American, train in America, live in America. In Tiff's case she represented America as a junior and is married to an American who represents America, also in the sprint hurdles. They are only ever seen on these shores for the national championships/trials to qualify for the globals and the lucrative Diamond League events.

They're totally eligible, but the bottom line is that GB was their fall back option because the standard in the USA is brutally high and they simply weren't good enough. The Union Flag is a flag of convenience to them, they play by the letter of the rules and my support is instinctively lukewarm on the back of it. Farah wasn't born here, but came here as a youngster and came up through the club system and development pathway - he had my unequivocal backing.

Shields is now here, I hope he does well. But it also begs the wider question of why we need to take that route when our union is, allegedly, so rich and we have such a conveyor belt of talent coming through the junior ranks. Haskell may be a victim of Shields arrival at both club and country levels, would be interesting to know his inner thoughts.

 

[spartan32]

So here's the thing. If Shields goes out tomorrow, smashes the bells out of everything that stands, throws a couple of lovely offloads leading to epic try's and generally plays his socks off, I wonder how quickly all the talk of him being a merc and outsider who doesn't belong, will evaporate?

Jones said it best. He has been given a sheet of names of eligible players and it's his job to pick to the best, no matter their heritage or upbringing.

If the home grown talent feel aggrieved I suggest that they get out on the training pitch and double their efforts so that the need to look further afield is negated. Shields has been capped for England now, he has cast his die and for the rest of his days he will only be available for us. I'd imagine a competitive chap who wants to play at the highest level will give it everything, especially with a team like England where there is actually a chance of lifting a World Cup which has to be every players dream.

Good luck to him I say and hope he does us, and his folks, proud and shows NZ what a big mistake they made no whipping him up for themselves.

 

[McTallshort]

But it's a bit Hypocritical as England has been the country that has been exploiting this the most. And they started this whole cycle of project players and getting guys who would be eligible because of the residency rule. If we take a position such as inside centre as an example. Before Faz was your first choice, England went through a bunch a of foreigners as they didn't have international quality players for that position that were born in England. Brad Barrit, Manu Tuilagi, Stuart Abbott, Riki Flutey & Ben Te'o comes to mind.

I don't want to get too technical on this matter with regards to where they were born, went to school or where they grew up or played age grade rugby, but as soon as the "stigma-seed" has been planted of a player that has been "poached" it's nearly impossible to change someone's mind about his loyalties and that he's just a mercenary for hire and that the good old traditions of pride for king and country still applies.

All I'm saying is that England is the biggest offender of this nature, and has been for the longest time of all the nations. After they dropped off the pedestal of being the best in the world after the 2003 World Cup, they went on a binge to get the guys to get them back on top and the attitude of winning by all means necessary has created this vicious cycle. Perhaps the administrators should have a change of mind and follow the idea of SARU when selecting players for national duty. Even if it's just for a short while until the residency rule increases. At least by then the heat will be a little bit less.

I agree England are the biggest offender and I dont like it.

 

[McTallshort]

So here's the thing. If Shields goes out tomorrow, smashes the bells out of everything that stands, throws a couple of lovely offloads leading to epic try's and generally plays his socks off, I wonder how quickly all the talk of him being a merc and outsider who doesn't belong, will evaporate?

Jones said it best. He has been given a sheet of names of eligible players and it's his job to pick to the best, no matter their heritage or upbringing.

If the home grown talent feel aggrieved I suggest that they get out on the training pitch and double their efforts so that the need to look further afield is negated. Shields has been capped for England now, he has cast his die and for the rest of his days he will only be available for us. I'd imagine a competitive chap who wants to play at the highest level will give it everything, especially with a team like England where there is actually a chance of lifting a World Cup which has to be every players dream.

Good luck to him I say and hope he does us, and his folks, proud and shows NZ what a big mistake they made no whipping him up for themselves.

I wont have changed my mind as I haven't with Nathan Hughes but at least he was actually lived in the UK

 

[TRF_heineken]

Evidence? I suspect Scotland and Wales have been far bigger offenders but no onevcare becausenthey aren't England.

The poaching argument is just bloody stupid....

Like I said in my earlier post, it's not just in Rugby, as nearly half of the England cricket team for the last decade consisted of South Africans. Kevin Pietersen, Dawid Malan, Keaton Jennings to name but a few.

It might be a stupid argument to you, because your country is guilty of doing this, but from us outsiders feeling it hurting our national teams, this is not a stupid discussion or argument. You might not agree or even like this discussion, but it doesn't mean that it's going away, or that it will be swept under the rug. There will always be a discussion about this as long as it is happening. And yes, sometimes the "birth country" like SA is part of the problem due to other reasons such as politics and currency. But this pandemic won't stop unless the UK nations stop this policy of allowing foreigners to play for them because of residency.

Yes WR will be increasing the rule of residency. But each Union can add their own policy in stating that they won't select any guys that weren't born within their regional borders, or whatever rule they want to make.

But you guys wouldn't do that.

 

[McTallshort]

Like I said in my earlier post, it's not just in Rugby, as nearly half of the England cricket team for the last decade consisted of South Africans. Kevin Pietersen, Dawid Malan, Keaton Jennings to name but a few.

It might be a stupid argument to you, because your country is guilty of doing this, but from us outsiders feeling it hurting our national teams, this is not a stupid discussion or argument. You might not agree or even like this discussion, but it doesn't mean that it's going away, or that it will be swept under the rug. There will always be a discussion about this as long as it is happening. And yes, sometimes the "birth country" like SA is part of the problem due to other reasons such as politics and currency. But this pandemic won't stop unless the UK nations stop this policy of allowing foreigners to play for them because of residency.

Yes WR will be increasing the rule of residency. But each Union can add their own policy in stating that they won't select any guys that weren't born within their regional borders, or whatever rule they want to make.

But you guys wouldn't do that.

well said. We select foreign players to play for England in this case someone who is still contracted to another Union but dont select English players because they play their rugby on the other side of the channel. It ******* stinks. Are we really that short of backrow players? Have we not got enough player and coaching resource ourselves?

 

[SomeOke]

As people have said nationality is a very complex issue for a lot of people with not everyone identifying with just one nation, and the nation you were born in is pretty arbitrary if you think about it.

That said it feels bad to have your young guys poached, for me guys like CJ Stander and Quin Roux are far more aggravating than players who have given it a fair crack domestically and are found wanting, but such is the reality of international sport, it happens in football as well, you'll have to solve economic inequality before you solve this which might be a tad difficult.

No use complaining, just be happy it's still a fairly minor problem in rugby (for the most part foreigners are <10% for tier 1 nations).

Also almost everyone does it, Aussies and Kiwi's pinch the odd Fijian/Samoan/Tongan when they are good enough, we'd probably pinch more Zimbabweans if they were good enough etc etc.

 

[TRF_heineken]

well said. We select foreign players to play for England in this case someone who is still contracted to another Union but dont select English players because they play their rugby on the other side of the channel. It ******* stinks. Are we really that short of backrow players? Have we not got enough player and coaching resource ourselves?

The biggest issue is that we should stop this crap before it's too late. if this continues, then what would be the point of a RWC? As it will be nations playing against each other, but actually it would be more like the club champs as the players for each nation aren't of that nationality but rather they play in that region.

It will devalue the entire institution.

 

[ncurd]

And Pietersen is the only one there of note and he was less poached and more driven away by yourselves also British Mummy.

Most players people whined about when it came to Cricket lived there all of two minuites and happened to be born there because there parents were in that country at the time. Before they were even in secondary school they were over here.

Lets be honest how of these 'mercenary' players go along to become all time greats? Very few.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

But it's a bit Hypocritical as England has been the country that has been exploiting this the most. And they started this whole cycle of project players and getting guys who would be eligible because of the residency rule. If we take a position such as inside centre as an example. Before Faz was your first choice, England went through a bunch a of foreigners as they didn't have international quality players for that position that were born in England. Brad Barrit, Manu Tuilagi, Stuart Abbott, Riki Flutey & Ben Te'o comes to mind.

I don't want to get too technical on this matter with regards to where they were born, went to school or where they grew up or played age grade rugby, but as soon as the "stigma-seed" has been planted of a player that has been "poached" it's nearly impossible to change someone's mind about his loyalties and that he's just a mercenary for hire and that the good old traditions of pride for king and country still applies.

All I'm saying is that England is the biggest offender of this nature, and has been for the longest time of all the nations. After they dropped off the pedestal of being the best in the world after the 2003 World Cup, they went on a binge to get the guys to get them back on top and the attitude of winning by all means necessary has created this vicious cycle. Perhaps the administrators should have a change of mind and follow the idea of SARU when selecting players for national duty. Even if it's just for a short while until the residency rule increases. At least by then the heat will be a little bit less.

That is just inaccurate if we are being honest. If we take the most recent six nations, Scotland had 23 foreign born players as opposed to England's 11. At the RWC, England only had 3, one of the lowest in the tournament. Italy, Scotland and Australia have all fielded more foreign born players since the game went pro.


This is my big sticking point though, I wasn't born in England and have never lived in one country for more than 2 years (England only for 1), yet because my Dad was brought up in England despite being foreign and because my mum is English, my heart lies truly with England. Birthplace actually has very little bearing on these things IMO and if they will stand and proudly sing the national anthem, then I am happy to accept them as English. At the end of the day, I am only half English and havent lived there for a significant part of my life, wasn't born there, but anyone who knows me would attest to the fact that my loyalties are in no way divided.

The biggest issue is that we should stop this crap before it's too late. if this continues, then what would be the point of a RWC? As it will be nations playing against each other, but actually it would be more like the club champs as the players for each nation aren't of that nationality but rather they play in that region.

It will devalue the entire institution.

This is the nature of globalization though, not a rugby issue. As trade and travel become easier world wide, this will happen in every area. People can emigrate so they will... Not a rugby issue, but preventing it will simply make rugby appear archaic in a globalised future

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

And Pietersen is the only one there of note and he was less poached and more driven away by yourselves also British Mummy.

Most players people whined about when it came to Cricket lived there all of two minuites and happened to be born there because there parents were in that country at the time. Before they were even in secondary school they were over here.

Lets be honest how of these 'mercenary' players go along to become all time greats? Very few.

On that last point, I found an article that analysed just that:

"Overall, foreigners score more tries than their native counterparts. The foreign-born All Blacks, for example, average 6.1 tries per player while New Zealand native All Blacks average 4.8. That trend holds up for seven of the 10 countries analysed. The most notable exception is England, whose foreign recruits average just 1.5 tries compared to the 3.1 tries of home-grown players. England's foreigners also don't tend to last, with the foreigners playing just 13.8 matches each on average compared to 21.4 matches for native players. That ratio is by far and away the lowest of the data set. In Wales, for example, foreigners actually play more matches (24.2) than Welsh-born players (23.3)."

 

[Durbanite]

Who's the South African 10 cover? Le Roux?

Correct according to Sport24, Willie le Roux at 10 with Faf de Klerk taking over the goal kicking duties in case of Pollard having issues.

So if Shields was made unavailable who would come in at 6? Would Robshaw still be in the squad? Seems like an improvement to me especially now that SA have the extra jumper in PSdT

@unrated @SomeOke
It's less a question of how DDA is playing compared to his best self and more a question if DDA is better than Andre Esterhuizen. I'd like to hear your thoughts as to why he wasn't selected, I had assumed he would miss the first test due to the LA test which is why I'm put out. Is it just a question of experience? Form? or does Esterhuizen simply not fit into Rassie's idea of "pace late in the game" like a Jesse Kriel does?