1. Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

The Residency / Poaching Thing.

Discussion in 'Rugby Discussion' started by Dismal Pillock, Oct 17, 2019.

?

Teste Rugbye Eligibilitye Periodii:

capped players can stand down for 1 year then play for nation of birth 6 vote(s) 21.4%
capped players can stand down for 3 years then play for nation of birth 11 vote(s) 39.3%
capped players can stand down for 5 years then play for nation of birth 4 vote(s) 14.3%
1 year residency rule is fine 2 vote(s) 7.1%
3 year residency rule is fine 9 vote(s) 32.1%
5 year residency rule is fine 8 vote(s) 28.6%
10 year residency rule is fine 4 vote(s) 14.3%
parents rule is fine 10 vote(s) 35.7%
grandparents rule is fine 6 vote(s) 21.4%
www.grannytranny.org is fine 6 vote(s) 21.4%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    I don't care if I change your mind.

    You should take league more seriously as a Wallaby fan. The Kangaroos could teach you guys something about winning.
  2. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    Nope. I'm just saying that I'm fine with how it is. Should the make-believe situation you've concocted ever arise, we can take a look at it then and see what we think then.
  3. Sully John Eales (66)

    Likes Received:
    8,501
    Then why are you posting?

    You have no idea how much or little I know about league.
  4. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    Well you certainly aren't changing my mind so why are you posting?

    You're the one who said you think International League is a joke so that was all I needed to know to make my comment.
  5. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    As long as World Rugby continues to deny nations like Samoa, Tonga and Fiji the ability to choose some of their best players, it benefits the nations who have the money. Neither the NZ jersey nor the Manu Samoa jersey would have been devalued if Nonu, Luatua and Sopoaga had played in this RWC. There is no good reason why they shouldn't have except that some white guys decided that this should be the case. I have no doubt that they know how competitive these countries would be if they ever got close to a level playing field.

    No-one has explained why these eligibility rules apply only to players. Why aren't coaches, administrators etc told that they cannot move to another country because they 'chose who they coached for with full knowledge there was no turning back'?
    Uh huh likes this.
  6. Show-n-go Ted Thorn (20)

    Likes Received:
    173
    But if you’re fine with how it is then by virtue you’re applying a cutoff which challenges people’s identity by saying they can’t represent the nation they identify with, which was what you were so very triggered by me doing?
  7. Dan54 Paul McLean (56)

    Likes Received:
    3,525
    Because Bullrush, they don't represent their countries, coaches etc are legally acting as advisers only, so they can't be told who they can advise. That really is a not very bright argument.
    As for Nonu etc not representing Tonga , these decisions made by world rugby, not some white guys who decided it was the case. World rugby is made up of representatives of a lot of countries, some with white skin, some with darker skin, and you know what some had brown eyes and some had blue eyes, because the colour of their eyes is no more important than the colour of their skins!!
    chibimatty and Getwithme like this.
  8. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    First off, you can fuck off with your condescending BS of me being 'triggered'.

    Second, I'm not really fussed with your imaginary situation. If that person really wants to represent Tonga because their great grandmother is Tongan, it's not a problem to me. But right now, that's all it is - an imaginary situation.

    I don't know why people feel like they can almost own these players. That because they played for you once, you now own them and can keep them from representing their heritage and culture even when you don't want them anymore.

    It is a colonial mindset which seeks to keep the island nations struggling.
    Uh huh likes this.
  9. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    View attachment 11145
    Coaches don't represent their countries?? That is not a bright argument. There are 2 guys at the press conferences before and after every game representing the country and the coach is one of them.

    Nonu is Samoan.

    As for World Rugby:

    So out of the unions which have more votes than the others - how many of those representatives would have the brown skin and the brown eyes of Samoan, Fijians and Tongans? Wales, Scotland, Australia, England, Ireland, Italy - all these largely white countries get 3 votes while Samoa and Fiji get one and Tonga is lumped in with Oceania.


    Using World Rugby representatives as some kind of claim to equality is again, not a bright argument.

    Let's take a look at the Executive Committee.


    Screen Shot 2019-10-20 at 10.50.43 pm.png
    Willin1 and eastman like this.
  10. Sully John Eales (66)

    Likes Received:
    8,501
    Nonu is a Kiwi. Of Samoan heritage.
    Teh Other Dave and Dan54 like this.
  11. Show-n-go Ted Thorn (20)

    Likes Received:
    173
    We get it, white person = bad, Islander people hard done by with Samoa, Tonga and Fiji being the best 3 countries in the world if we bent or redid all the rules to suit their specific needs
    chibimatty likes this.
  12. Dan54 Paul McLean (56)

    Likes Received:
    3,525
    I know nonu a Samoan, I was kind of making point I didn't care what his heritage was, could be any island, probably should of put in more words to explain it!
    Yes a coach is at press conference, but he does not get a test cap! I think you are really stretching argument to say people at press conference makes them a representative.
    your agrument that the colour of the skin of a countries reps on WR makes a difference to whether players should be able to swap between countries is quite strange to me, but I kind of get the impression you were trying to start racist argument, and as I kind of find racists not to my liking I will leave you to your own devices. knock yourself out!
    chibimatty likes this.
  13. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361

    The man who is most likely to take the fall in the face of defeat - particularly at a RWC - doesn't represent the country? You've got it around the wrong way - being at the press conference doesn't make him a representative. He's at the press conference BECAUSE he is a representative.

    And while he doesn't get a Test cap, he does get a winners medal if successful. And the knife if he isn't.

    Turning a blind eye to racism and racists doesn't make either disappear but whatever makes you comfortable.
  14. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    I get it. You are quite happy for the best pacific players to compete - so long as it's for the countries that pay them. Who just happen to largely be the white countries.

    No one has provided a valid reason for why players shouldn't be able to switch. The 'devalue' jersey argument has been debunked by players who have switched teams and codes (the Brad Thorn example someone threw in) with no lost value in any jersey. If anything, it has often enhanced it.

    Is there anything else? Or you just don't like it??
  15. wamberal Simon Poidevin (60)

    Likes Received:
    4,046
    I have not been following this bunfight too closely. But from my perspective the national jersey has been devalued a fair bit already, by the weight of money on offer in the richer nations. And of course I am old enough to remember Des Connor.


    At the end of the day, we are talking about sport, not armed conflict. Sport is about enjoyment, participation: even, dare I say it, entertainment.


    Rugby is rugby, forget about what other sports do, we can chart our own course. If that means allowing a Test player from a Tier one nation to play for his country of birth at, or towards, the end of his career how is that more ridiculous than Bundee Aki, for example, turning out for Ireland?
    Uh huh, Bullrush, Dan54 and 4 others like this.
  16. eastman Jimmy Flynn (14)

    Likes Received:
    147
    The eligibility rules should be designed to assist Tier 2 nations as much as possible without devaluing the 'integrity' too much - I think the rules at the moment are probably adequate.
    Getwithme likes this.
  17. wamberal Simon Poidevin (60)

    Likes Received:
    4,046
    As a final observation, why on earth would a young rugby player who is born in Tonga into the average village family want to play for his nation of birth? There is no money in it, and never will be other than as a reference for a retirement stint in Japan.
    Jimmy_Crouch likes this.
  18. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    Exactly.Pretending that the choice between playing for Samoa or NZ is equal is either ignorance or arrogance. As is trying to dictate to players that they must choose to only ever be identified with one nationality.

    As much as some people might like to box Pacific Islanders into their small mindsets, we are quite capable of being both Kiwi and Samoan - and we don't need a white man's permission to do so.
  19. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    2,361
    If Samoa, Tonga and Fiji had even half of the resource and infrastructure of Tier 1 nations, they would be in the Top 8. Again, every team in the Top 8 bar the Boks, have Pacific Island players.

    The rules were re-done and bent to suit the Tier 1 nations so I don't see why they can't be bent back.
  20. Show-n-go Ted Thorn (20)

    Likes Received:
    173
    **players of Pacific Islander Heritage
    Dan54 likes this.

Share This Page