Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
The Residency Rule Thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cruz_del_Sur" data-source="post: 957047" data-attributes="member: 55747"><p>Not true. Give me one example, just one, of Argentina taking advantage of the loophole. Just one. </p><p>I can think of two Pumas who werent born in Arg. Martin and Cancelliere. Both because their parents happened to be temporarily living abroad when they were born. Both Argentine by birth and raised in Arg. I dont consider that taking advantage of a loophole as, by law, people born to Argentine parents abroad are (or can be) Argentine. </p><p></p><p>Even brazil has NZ born players. Dont you think we could poach a couple? We don't. And this something that we do in every sport. Just look at our footie team. Every single one of them, again, born and raised in Arg. We take pride in this. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>See, that is precisely the point imo. It's not supposed to be a choice. The idea was for every country to play with what they had, end of. </p><p></p><p>You can sugar coat it the way you want, but once you add choice to the equation you end up benefiting a richer nation at the expense of a poorer nation, 99% of the times. </p><p></p><p>And yes, some might use the counter-example of NZ born players playing for Fiji, Tonga and Samoa. True. What they don't tell you, conveniently, is this</p><p></p><p>- A very good player from Fiji/Tonga/Samoa often gets poached by a rich nation</p><p>- The NZ born players who end up playing for Fiji/Samoa/Tonga are players who never made it to the ABs</p><p></p><p>The flow to talent is one way and one way only. From poor to rich. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Just to be absolutely clear, i am not suggesting that a team could only field born players. No, i am not saying that. What i am saying is that there needs to be a mechanism in place that prevents cherry-picking. </p><p>A 20-year-old playing for one country and later playing for another is unacceptable. </p><p>Brian Mujati's example is hard to comprehend. On week the Lions were trying to get him kicked out of south africa for being on an invalid visa (he's Zimbabwean) and the next week he's playing for the Springboks. </p><p></p><p>This idea that a country's rejects can pick another country and play for them is wrong. </p><p></p><p>I would do something along these lines (v broad strokes): </p><p>Once you are 18, you need to pick a team and in order to pick that team, you need to be a citizen of that country (or have the nationality). </p><p>If you started playing after that, when they write you down in your union, same as the above, pick a team. </p><p>If you have represented country A in any sport, you cannot pick another country. </p><p>Once you put on a country's jersey, that's the only jersey you can ever wear. No exceptions. No refugees, no "ive been living here for 10 years", no nothing. </p><p>Before ANY game WR has to check that the players are eligible (to avoid what happened with Belgium with Spain). All unions give WR a list of elligible players, WR keeps that database updated. End of. </p><p></p><p>This is not my preferred solution but something i think most countries could work with. </p><p>It is simple, clear, and relatively easy to implement. It still allows rich nations to poach players from poorer ones but way less than now.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cruz_del_Sur, post: 957047, member: 55747"] Not true. Give me one example, just one, of Argentina taking advantage of the loophole. Just one. I can think of two Pumas who werent born in Arg. Martin and Cancelliere. Both because their parents happened to be temporarily living abroad when they were born. Both Argentine by birth and raised in Arg. I dont consider that taking advantage of a loophole as, by law, people born to Argentine parents abroad are (or can be) Argentine. Even brazil has NZ born players. Dont you think we could poach a couple? We don't. And this something that we do in every sport. Just look at our footie team. Every single one of them, again, born and raised in Arg. We take pride in this. See, that is precisely the point imo. It's not supposed to be a choice. The idea was for every country to play with what they had, end of. You can sugar coat it the way you want, but once you add choice to the equation you end up benefiting a richer nation at the expense of a poorer nation, 99% of the times. And yes, some might use the counter-example of NZ born players playing for Fiji, Tonga and Samoa. True. What they don't tell you, conveniently, is this - A very good player from Fiji/Tonga/Samoa often gets poached by a rich nation - The NZ born players who end up playing for Fiji/Samoa/Tonga are players who never made it to the ABs The flow to talent is one way and one way only. From poor to rich. Just to be absolutely clear, i am not suggesting that a team could only field born players. No, i am not saying that. What i am saying is that there needs to be a mechanism in place that prevents cherry-picking. A 20-year-old playing for one country and later playing for another is unacceptable. Brian Mujati's example is hard to comprehend. On week the Lions were trying to get him kicked out of south africa for being on an invalid visa (he's Zimbabwean) and the next week he's playing for the Springboks. This idea that a country's rejects can pick another country and play for them is wrong. I would do something along these lines (v broad strokes): Once you are 18, you need to pick a team and in order to pick that team, you need to be a citizen of that country (or have the nationality). If you started playing after that, when they write you down in your union, same as the above, pick a team. If you have represented country A in any sport, you cannot pick another country. Once you put on a country's jersey, that's the only jersey you can ever wear. No exceptions. No refugees, no "ive been living here for 10 years", no nothing. Before ANY game WR has to check that the players are eligible (to avoid what happened with Belgium with Spain). All unions give WR a list of elligible players, WR keeps that database updated. End of. This is not my preferred solution but something i think most countries could work with. It is simple, clear, and relatively easy to implement. It still allows rich nations to poach players from poorer ones but way less than now. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
The Residency Rule Thread
Top