• 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.

Tonga PM blasts 'unfair' World Cup

Bullrush

John Hipwell (52)
A lot of this could be solved if they hadn't already cheapened the National Jersey. You used to only get a "Cap" if you were picked in the starting XV. If you're only a benchy you shouldn't get a "cap". You don't get a "cap" and you can play for whichever nation you can prove you have heritage.

Allows players to develop anywhere but not force them to make a choice until they are cemented into a national side. Added bonus of making the National Jersey worth something again.

I believe the rule at the moment is that once you step on the field for the national team or the second team eg. Australia A then you are committed to that country for life.

'Caps' make no difference to this issue.
 

Lee Grant

John Eales (66)
Staff member
We have this discussion quite regularly and I don't know why the IRB don't put their imprimatur on it as it seems to be a no brainer.

All it needs is a bit of discussion and so long as Tier One players can go to Tier Two teams and not vice versa - and they would otherwise be eligible for them - and the home union of the team the fellow played for before gives it the OK - and the player can make only one move in his career - who loses?

If they want to get precious so as not to disadvantage too many up and coming players in the Tier Two nations, maybe there could be a limit to the number of such transplanted players who can appear in any test 22.
 

Bullrush

John Hipwell (52)
We have this discussion quite regularly and I don't know why the IRB don't put their imprimatur on it as it seems to be a no brainer.

All it needs is a bit of discussion and so long as Tier One players can go to Tier Two teams and not vice versa - and they would otherwise be eligible for them - and the home union of the team the fellow played for before gives it the OK - and the player can make only one move in his career - who loses?

If they want to get precious so as not to disadvantage too many up and coming players in the Tier Two nations, maybe there could be a limit to the number of such transplanted players who can appear in any test 22.

How many more wins might we see going PI teams way against the likes of Wales, Ireland and even England if they could select the best players??

Samoa are no strangers to beating Wales at RWCs and both Fiji and Tonga have pushed these teams hard at different times....the conspiracy theorist in me says this may be why the IRB aren't so keen to change this rule.

How would look if these big money programs were regularly being beaten by the smaller unions?
 

Novocastrian

Herbert Moran (7)
How many more wins might we see going PI teams way against the likes of Wales, Ireland and even England if they could select the best players??

Samoa are no strangers to beating Wales at RWCs and both Fiji and Tonga have pushed these teams hard at different times....the conspiracy theorist in me says this may be why the IRB aren't so keen to change this rule.

How would look if these big money programs were regularly being beaten by the smaller unions?

Can just image the turnaround from the NH rugby writes like Stephen Jones et al - one minute they're denouncing Australia and New Zealand for raping the Pacific and preventing the Umaga's, Mealamu's, Polota-Nau's and Palu's from playing for their countries of 'birth', the next they'd be whining getting trounced by PI teams laden with Australians and New Zelanders who waltzed in and took the position of the locals.
 

Lee Grant

John Eales (66)
Staff member
the conspiracy theorist in me says this may be why the IRB aren't so keen to change this rule.

How would look if these big money programs were regularly being beaten by the smaller unions?

I think it's simpler than that. Sometimes they are just dumb.

Maybe they are not and they have communicated cogent arguments for the status quo - but I missed that communication.
 

Gnostic

Mark Ella (57)
Can just image the turnaround from the NH rugby writes like Stephen Jones et al - one minute they're denouncing Australia and New Zealand for raping the Pacific and preventing the Umaga's, Mealamu's, Polota-Nau's and Palu's from playing for their countries of 'birth', the next they'd be whining getting trounced by PI teams laden with Australians and New Zelanders who waltzed in and took the position of the locals.

Just to be picky Nova - TPN was born in Sydney as was Cliffy Palu.
 

Sluggy

Ward Prentice (10)
Whilst I can see both sides of the equation I think dispensation can and should be made for players to play for the country of their birth if it is not a tier 1 in cases where the player has played less than 10 games for the tier 1 side. This would fix the cases of wasted talent that we have seen where a player who should have starred in tests has been prevented because they played once or twice for a tier one side and were discarded, such as Radike Samo.

Along those lines I would like to see a couple of Super Spots in Oz teams allowed for Islander eligible players, not a quota or anything like that just a dispensation rule if a Super Team wanted to recruit islander eligible players. I do think its time that more than just lip service was done to support elite Rugby for the Pcific Island teams.

Hi Gnostic, +1 on that idea
 

WorkingClassRugger

David Codey (61)
Whilst I can see both sides of the equation I think dispensation can and should be made for players to play for the country of their birth if it is not a tier 1 in cases where the player has played less than 10 games for the tier 1 side. This would fix the cases of wasted talent that we have seen where a player who should have starred in tests has been prevented because they played once or twice for a tier one side and were discarded, such as Radike Samo.

Along those lines I would like to see a couple of Super Spots in Oz teams allowed for Islander eligible players, not a quota or anything like that just a dispensation rule if a Super Team wanted to recruit islander eligible players. I do think its time that more than just lip service was done to support elite Rugby for the Pcific Island teams.

Absolutely agree. I think its time SANZAR adopted a free trade arrangement for players within the alliance (Argentina included) and the PIs to be able to play with or in any franchise they choose as long as its in Super Rugby. Not only would this open up playing positions but provide the opportunity to further widen the reach of Super Rugby as a competition in each conference with suddenly the ability to look to further expand the size of each conference.
 

Novocastrian

Herbert Moran (7)
Just to be picky Nova - TPN was born in Sydney as was Cliffy Palu.

ymtp3.gif
 

Piglet

Herbert Moran (7)
My reasoning also covers the issues the PI players have experienced in many cases getting releases from their Euro clubs to play in the RWC or how some have been "encouraged" to retire from international Rugby.

Plus I do think it would add to the flavour of the competition without damaging the depth arguments of Australian Rugby.

Why can't the IRB simply put a stop to Euro club rugby in the two weeks leading up to and including the RWC? That would enable the island players to turn out for their countries.

Or do these clubs have too much power?
 

Novocastrian

Herbert Moran (7)
Ah no I didn't Nova. Just if you want to make a point at least get the facts right, and they aren't even obscure facts.

doublefacepalm.jpg


I'm well aware that TPN and Palu are were born in Syd, same as I know that Umaga and Mealamu were born in NZ. My point was that shitstirrers like Jones regularly pontificate about Aus/NZ 'stealing' the best talent from the Pacific and their 'evidence' (for want of a better word) is guys like TPN or Umaga who should supposedly be playing for Tonga or Samoa not the Wobs or the AB's.

If eligibility rules like the ones teh NZRU proposed came in and the home unions started regularly losing to PI teams with former AB's or Wallabies I imagine ther'd be a damascene conversion and their articles would decry players turning out for their tier 2 nations of heritage.
 

Joe Mac

Arch Winning (36)
I can only see one problem with this tier1, tier 2 system.

It may act as an incentive for PI players to play for the WB/NZ teams to get paid more money while they are in their prime, knowing that when their career is nearing its end they can always move home and play for their home nation in the WC.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
I can only see one problem with this tier1, tier 2 system.

It may act as an incentive for PI players to play for the WB/NZ teams to get paid more money while they are in their prime, knowing that when their career is nearing its end they can always move home and play for their home nation in the WC.

thats why you try to include a '2/3 year' hiatus period.... If a player plays for the Tier1 nation purely to make his money in his prime(ie 20-27), by the time his 'hiatus' from international rugby is over, he will be bordering on the 'to old' category, there will be very few players who would make the transition i imagine.
 

Proud Pig

Ted Thorn (20)
There needs to be a limit though, as that list pointed out someone like Jerry Collins who had a fine career with the ABs could now go and play for Samoa if he was allowed to switch to the country of his birth.
I think the rule should be made that once you have had say 10 full first team caps for a country you can then not qualify for another country. Less than 10 and you get a two or three year qualifying period.
 

DPK

Peter Sullivan (51)
There needs to be a limit though, as that list pointed out someone like Jerry Collins who had a fine career with the ABs could now go and play for Samoa if he was allowed to switch to the country of his birth.

And take the place of another PI player who's worked hard to get a chance to play at the RWC. I agree, players shouldn't get a second bite at the cherry in the twilight of their career.
 
Top