Waratahs 2015
- Thread starter RugbyReg
- Start date
- Status
I get that maybe Jackpot is limiting the opportunities of a local player playing in the 6 position for the Waratahs (this year. Last year it was generally at lock).
You're allowed a foreign marquee player though. It would be pretty silly in my opinion to deny signing the same player for a third year and a team just signs another foreign player instead. What's the difference?
I would feel the same way if it was another foreign player at a different Aussie side. It makes not sense to limit them to only two years if the player and the team both are keen for that relationship to continue.
You're allowed a foreign marquee player though. It would be pretty silly in my opinion to deny signing the same player for a third year and a team just signs another foreign player instead. What's the difference?
I would feel the same way if it was another foreign player at a different Aussie side. It makes not sense to limit them to only two years if the player and the team both are keen for that relationship to continue.
Every other team who has ever asked the ARU if they can sign a foreign player for more than the two years has been allowed.
Why would they now say no? Because the Tahs have been successful and he's been a good player for them?
That seems like a ludicrous stance to take. It's not like the Tahs are being allowed an extra foreign player.
Godfrey
Phil Hardcastle (33)
I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the Reds applied to keep Daniel Braid longer and were denied.
That's ended up being a good thing though, as an Aus player who otherwise may not have got much opportunity made his mark (Beau Robinson) and Liam Gill shone early.
Of course it makes sence. Foreign marquee players are meant to fill a temporary void in a side will the club develops/finds an Australian replacement. If a club can't attract a calibre or loses their development player the can apply for dispensation.
You're arguments that he should stay because 'he's popular' and 'we want him' don't fill either of those situations. You have plenty of young forwards desperate for a chance and Jackpot is blocking them from playing.
There are good reason for the two year policy and because it doesn't suit the Waratahs you want to chuck it out. The Reds would have loved to keep Daniel Braid, another popular player, another year but we followed the rule. Why can't you?
You're arguments that he should stay because 'he's popular' and 'we want him' don't fill either of those situations. You have plenty of young forwards desperate for a chance and Jackpot is blocking them from playing.
There are good reason for the two year policy and because it doesn't suit the Waratahs you want to chuck it out. The Reds would have loved to keep Daniel Braid, another popular player, another year but we followed the rule. Why can't you?
The Rebels and the force had legitimate reasons to keep their players. Yours are bullshit. Qld couldn't keep Braid.
Jagman
Trevor Allan (34)
Sully I tend to agree with you but can understand BHs point. If the Tahs let Pottgieter go they can contract a marquee international at lock or to replace Kepu. The ARU haven't approved it yet so I'm not sure what all the fuss about.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I completely agree, we should adhere to the rule, or chuck it. Don't make exceptions.
But, in reality, the Tahs could recruit another lock / flanker from OS legitimately ( as their allowed marquee player) and up and comers would still be blocked, so the "temporary void" argument is a bit thin too. Potentially. I'm assuming each team can have one marquee player in each year??
And that's fair enough. go out and find another guy. Even if you don't need one. I'd say finding a TH prop should be a higher priority.
Fact is other teams needed their foreign players you guys just want yours.
Hey, I'm on your side!!
But I agree, a THP would be good, although blocking any local development of THPs is hardly in Aus rugby's long-term interests. Just don't get another outside back.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
WARNING.
I sense a Waratahs/ARU conspiracy theory approaching. Break out the tin foil hats.
Wilson
Michael Lynagh (62)
Might be worth holding that young player back a bit if it means getting a top international tight head towards the end of his career involved, teach the young guys and transition him into a coaching role. For that to work I think you'd probably have to move Paddy Ryan on though, I think he's at a point where he really needs to be playing to improve.
Good point, as long as the young, up and coming THP is in the wider training group. A good scrum coach was lacking last year, there are signs that Ledesma is having a positive impact so far.
Totally agree re Ryan, but again, the coaching aspect is the biggest problem there in previous years.
Wilson
Michael Lynagh (62)
Ryan is interesting, when he first came onto the scene he looked to have a fair bit of potential but then seemed to regress significantly last year. It looks to have been a result of the transition from Foley to Chieka as coach which makes some sense, but he really needed to step up and take his development into his own hands to some degree. It'll be interesting to see what happens next year, Ledesma will be gone and if Ryan's still at the tahs he'll have a hell of a lot more responsibility.
Call what ever you like. Doesn't make you right.
The Reds sounded out the ARU and got a definitive no.
Really? I have looked for any evidence of this in the media and haven't found any.
It was suggested that they may lose him because the two years was up but then he re-signed with the Blues to try and make the RWC.
If the Reds actually seriously asked the ARU and were told no I'd be very surprised.
Godfrey
Phil Hardcastle (33)
Yes there is proof the Reds wanted to keep Braid. It was commonly mentioned at the time. Here are some results from the first page of Google in response to your calling of bullshit:
Reds Want to Bend Rules to Keep Braid
The following article, from NZ, casts a bit of doubt on your assumption that Braid didn't want to stay (not calling "bullshit", just providing info - he was 29 and about to sign his last contract and had previously targeted the UK before the Reds).
Braid Targets UK Deal
Don't get me wrong, I am not posting this information as an argument against keeping Potgeiter at NSW. I'm not opposed to that at all. This is just a correction of fact as to whether the ARU have said no before. Consistency-wise it indicates the ARU are inclined to help out the teams that don't have direct access to the same amount of players.
My personal stance is that he is bringing a lot to Australian rugby. He's not 23 and therefore going to be keeping someone else out forever - he's 28. Younger players can learn from him then replace him if they are good enough.
- Status