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:
    There would be very few players, if any, who have Samoa as their first choice if they could also play for the All Blacks or Australia, England etc. The reality is that Samoa is already 2nd choice because the money gap is MASSIVE. Not just in terms of getting paid by the ABs or Samoa but how much more a player can expect/demand from clubs when they have played for the All Blacks or a T1 nation. And it is pretty common knowledge that these players are often the main bread winners for a larger extended family and community so the need to make the best money you can is even greater. Samoan players are not alienated because Nonu played for the Manu. If anything, it puts more weight and pride in the jersey.

    No integrity is lost whatsoever by the sport simply because any of the players I mentioned earlier represented different countries at different times. And to say the rules are being 'bastardized' when the law itself is less than 20yrs old is a bit rich. The guys at the top of the rugby hierarchy change the laws, some of those lower down the chain say that the law change is adversely affecting them and the reply is 'we shouldn't bastardize the rules!'.

    Telling high profile players to help by being anything else except players is like having a mechanic look at your broken down car and telling him to give it good clean inside, change the tyres and wipers but don't work on the engine.

    Let them do their work where they best know how to.
  2. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    Well Jack Lam didn't get a contract because he choose to go to this World Cup.
  3. Show-n-go Banned

    Likes Received:
    At some point there needs to be some personal responsibility on the players for their decisions though, if you go for the money then fine (well not fine id really prefer they didn't play if their heart wasn't 100% in it) but you've made your bed.

    Also highly doubt Nadolo et al would get any more money or bargaining power worth noting, from repping the AB's than they currently have. If you're good enough to be asked to be in the Wallabies or AB's you can name your price in Europe or Japan and represent your island nation and come out financially better for it.

    if you have played Tier 1 it may in some cases give you a little extra but nothing over the span of a career compared to playing in Europe for X amount of years as opposed to that same amount of years in super rugby + tests for AUS, NZ whoever. That's why Charles Piutau left, he chased the money and best of luck to him for making that decision.
  4. Bullrush Jim Lenehan (48)

    Likes Received:
    Again, it's a bit rich to change the rules so that it detrimentally effects these Island nations and then turn around and tell them they need to take some personal responsibility for their decisions.

    The notion that representing a country is and should be about having your "heart 100% in it" is almost as insulting or condescending as it is ridiculous. Take all the money out of Tests if it's not about money. World Rugby and the Tier 1 nations make MASSIVE amount of money because of Test rugby but players should be doing it for love?!?! Again, this is such a colonial mindset which seeks to take as much profit and benefit out of someone else for as low a cost as possible.

    And the idea that playing for the ABs or Wallabies etc doesn't increase your value is silly. If you think Piutau's value was the same pre and post ABs, I have a bridge to sell you. Players don't get "asked" to play for these teams, they get selected. Because the selectors know in advance who is eligibe, who has made themselves eligible and select accordingly.

    So, just to recap, the "devalue jersey" has been left behind and I think this "personal responsibility" argument is worse.
    cyclopath likes this.

Share This Page