George Smith - Will / Should He Play Against The Lions?

[Quick Hands]

If ever there was a case of not being able to see the forest for the trees this is it. You pick your best available team. At the very least he should be considered for selection and if thought good enough selected.

It is ARU policy to only consider Australian based players - it's not an IRB rule or directive. All the home unions regularly pick players who are playing in the French Top 14. The ARU could change it if they wished without referring to anyone - the fact that they are unable or unwilling to do so does not fill one with confidence.

Re the club v country issue, I think that you'll find that Suntory MUST release players for test duty, provided the test falls within an IRB test match window.

Another one for you Mr Pulver.

 

[Slim 293]

It will be great if they can get him for the Wobs, but I think the priority will be to extend his stay at the Brumbies now that Pocock is injured....... and if Suntory grant such a wish on the basis that he can't play for the Wobs then I'm fine with that........

However, it should be an option that's explored........

 

[jay-c]

even if smith, gill and hooper were even steven in abilities i believe having smith in the team would be an immeasurable psychological influence> anyone whos played rugby against a big name in opposition team can understand this- now imagine if it were george smith!
he would also bring a moral boost to the forwards alongside him -one which gill and hooper combined are unlikely to ever achieve.
results aside-fast forward a few years and think how we'd feel if arguably one of our greatest every players wasnt given special treatment to enable him to play.

 

[Quick Hands]

It will be great if they can get him for the Wobs, but I think the priority will be to extend his stay at the Brumbies now that Pocock is injured... and if Suntory grant such a wish on the basis that he can't play for the Wobs then I'm fine with that....

However, it should be an option that's explored....

Under IRB rules, I don't think either the Brumbies or Suntory can stop him playing a test if he's selected.

 

[Braveheart81]

results aside-fast forward a few years and think how we'd feel if arguably one of our greatest every players wasnt given special treatment to enable him to play.

I don't think this is arguable. George Smith is definitely one of the Wallabies greatest ever.

I also don't think that warrants special treatment. George Smith retired from test rugby, moved overseas and the ARU policy is that foreign contracted players aren't eligible to play for the Wallabies. I don't see why that should change.

If the ARU changes the rule now, they should make it a blanket change and make foreign players eligible. I think that would be a poor decision. I also don't think they should temporarily change the rule just for George Smith.

 

[Braveheart81]

Under IRB rules, I don't think either the Brumbies or Suntory can stop him playing a test if he's selected.

Ordinarily no, but the fact that he retired from test rugby and the ARU has a policy that foreign based players aren't eligible for the Wallabies would probably mean that Suntory has in his contract that he is not available for Wallaby selection without their permission.

 

[Jets]

I don't think he should play. I am very happy with the ARU policy on this. If they open up Wallaby selection to players based overseas then watch all of the talent in Australia go overseas and see the ARU try to battle with clubs for player availability. Also if they make an exception on the basis that he is playing for an Australian team a few guys will be looking for short term contracts back here every year on the off chance they will get selected. It just doesn't sit right with me. If he wanted to be selected for the Wallabies he should have moved back to Aust and signed a contract with the Brumbies and ARU.

 

[sammy3191]

If George Smith is the best option for Wallaby rugby at flanker then he should be picked for the team.

However it is 2 years out from a World Cup and is he going to be around in 2 years time? I think it's a great opportunity to give some of the young guys, Hooper & Gill spring to mind, a crack at the Lions or even in the Rugby championship. Test match rugby is a world apart from Super rugby and without a third tier competition like the National Provincial Championship in NZ to hone the skill the guys on the fringe are missing quality rugby to hone their skills.

 

[jay-c]

i wouldnt want to see foreign based players picked either
tim horan suggested players who had played 80 tests should then be allowed to be selected from overseas>
this i think is a good balance>

 

[wamberal]

If George Smith is the best option for Wallaby rugby at flanker then he should be picked for the team.

However it is 2 years out from a World Cup and is he going to be around in 2 years time? I think it's a great opportunity to give some of the young guys, Hooper & Gill spring to mind, a crack at the Lions.

Picking Smith does not preclude picking Hooper and Gill. They should all be in the squad, IMHO. Two of them should be in every Test match 22.


Let's worry about the World Cup much later on. After all, we have absolutely no idea who will be injured, and for all we know a new star might appear on the horizon.

 

[Scoey]

Lets have a think about why the ARU has the rule that they do. It is aimed at keeping our top level talent in Australia. If they could head overseas and play Top14 or HEK or whatever and earn their mega bucks then lob home to play for the Wallabies come RWC time they would. The result being, that Aus can't field competitive teams in the S15, interest in Rugby falls, grass roots playing numbers fall, GaGR turns into a Mungoball forum.

 

[Merrow]

Rules are meant to be broken.

 

[Dan54]

Too true Scoey, both NZ and Aus have a very good policy on this I believe. Once the door opens to change it will be bloody hard to close. For every person going crook at ARU remember, Smith knew the rules when he happily left country, and has anyone even asked Smith if wants to play for Wallabies,he has retired after all!!!

 

[BDA]

Yes I think if the ARU is going to go outside of the rules, they should made an official amendment to the rules rather than make a one-off exception and that is highly unlikely to happen within the next two months. I don't mind the idea of letting test veterans (who have played X amount of tests) being allowed to play overseas and remain eligible. But as the saying goes "it's a slippery slope". If the rule is that you must play 80 tests to be eligible abroad how long is it before we have a player who has played 70 tests go overseas and seek permission to play, the ARU allow it, and so on and so forth.

 

[terry j]

thanks for the last few posts.

was gonna ask 'why' the rule against OS players, after all soccer selects people like that all the time.

after reading the last few posts I think I have been convinced of the rightness of this policy.

 

[BDA]

Picking Smith does not preclude picking Hooper and Gill. They should all be in the squad, IMHO. Two of them should be in every Test match 22.

Do we really need 3 no.7s in a 30 man squad?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Wallabies Watch
Maybe we want him more than he needs us?

 

[Quick Hands]

Ordinarily no, but the fact that he retired from test rugby and the ARU has a policy that foreign based players aren't eligible for the Wallabies would probably mean that Suntory has in his contract that he is not available for Wallaby selection without their permission.

I'd like to see the fine print on that one. The IRB ruling is absolute, clubs must release players for test duty if that test falls within the test match window. ARU policy and Suntory contract are irrelevent.

Assuming of course that the ARU want to pick him and we've heard nothing one way or another from them (unless they've said it very quietly). I can't see Deans picking him as he's too experienced and would have the gravitas to question some of the non-tactics employed by the Wallabies.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I'd like to see the fine print on that one. The IRB ruling is absolute, clubs must release players for test duty if that test falls within the test match window. ARU policy and Suntory contract are irrelevent.

Strictly, you cant say the ARU policy is irrelevant - they need to "change" it one way or the other if he's to play. No doubt Smith would not want to piss his Suntory masters off so that could influence his position on the matter, and his position could be determinative.

 

[Dave Beat]

Do we really need 3 no.7s in a 30 man squad?

Our awesome coach thought we needed only one for the world cup.

A player like George has
Respect from the ref.
Respect from the team.
Respect from the opposition.
But then he is still a world class player to boot.