• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Queensland Reds 2025

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
I don't believe they set the All Blacks XV to be their second XV until after that game, I remember seeing something about it at the time. I can't find it now, but it is somewhat backed up by the fact that Pita Gus Sowakula played that game despite having already signed with Clermont (and all the reporting stating he'll be eligible).
This article says it was 2022


But now you mention it I seem to remember something about that too
 

Wilson

Phil Kearns (64)
This article says it was 2022


But now you mention it I seem to remember something about that too

Yeah, I wouldn't put too much stock in that quote - Levi Aumua played on that tour and all the talk when he moved to the Crusaders was that he was still eligible for all of the Wallabies, Fiji, Samoa and All Blacks. That also hasn't been tested though so it might not be accurate either.

At the end of the day it only matters when they officially inform world rugby of the change over, not what they say in the media.
 

Wilson

Phil Kearns (64)
And just after posting that I found the reference from the NZRU itself that refutes that article:
1733737051891.png


But just to keep it complicated that was in reference to the 2022 tour, it will depend on if they updated it before or after the 2023 game against Japan.
 

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
At the end of the day it only matters when they officially inform world rugby of the change over, not what they say in the media.

Just for completeness, there's the squad announcement for the Japan tour, including Ross, and the quote saying it's the next senior representative team
 

TSR

Andrew Slack (58)
If he’s Australian eligible, what’s the issue. I don’t see the difference in this as opposed to bringing someone back from Europe or Japan.
 

Wilson

Phil Kearns (64)
If he’s Australian eligible, what’s the issue. I don’t see the difference in this as opposed to bringing someone back from Europe or Japan.
I think you might have misread the debate here, it isn't around whether or not he should be signed, it's about when he becomes eligible. Specifically it's about if All Blacks XV games count (whether or not they're officially classed as "2nd national 15-a-side team" under reg 8).
 

JRugby2

Bob Loudon (25)
I think you might have misread the debate here, it isn't around whether or not he should be signed, it's about when he becomes eligible. Specifically it's about if All Blacks XV games count (whether or not they're officially classed as "2nd national 15-a-side team" under reg 8).
With Peter Horne coming out earlier in the year and saying he only wants Australian qualified players in Super Rugby (mostly) - I can't see why they would sign him unless he was immediately eligible.

Christy / The Roar also reporting he's a bolter for the Lions - he's usually pretty bang on with this stuff. I'd say he's eligible now.
 

Wilson

Phil Kearns (64)
With Peter Horne coming out earlier in the year and saying he only wants Australian qualified players in Super Rugby (mostly) - I can't see why they would sign him unless he was immediately eligible.

Christy / The Roar also reporting he's a bolter for the Lions - he's usually pretty bang on with this stuff. I'd say he's eligible now.
I'm certain he is too, but Lions aside it won't matter too much anyway - his first season of super will be 2026 and even if the All Blacks XV game resets his eligibility stand down he'll still become wallabies eligible during the July tour that year, only missing one or two tests after his Australian Super Rugby debut at a worst case.

The contract starting mid 2025 might be due to his eligibility coming online then, but the way the Reds have been building out their off season schedule (and with a Lions game in 2025), is just as likely they're pushing to get new signings on board as soon as possible to have them ready to go for their first super season. I wouldn't be surprised to see them shifting more contracts to the financial year window to get that turn over in early and better utilize the talent.
 

JRugby2

Bob Loudon (25)
I'm certain he is too, but Lions aside it won't matter too much anyway - his first season of super will be 2026 and even if the All Blacks XV game resets his eligibility stand down he'll still become wallabies eligible during the July tour that year, only missing one or two tests after his Australian Super Rugby debut at a worst case.

The contract starting mid 2025 might be due to his eligibility coming online then, but the way the Reds have been building out their off season schedule (and with a Lions game in 2025), is just as likely they're pushing to get new signings on board as soon as possible to have them ready to go for their first super season. I wouldn't be surprised to see them shifting more contracts to the financial year window to get that turn over in early and better utilize the talent.
If he's eligible (and good enough) they'll pick him straight away the Lions - I vaguely remember this being the case for Pete Samu back in the day. Still playing super rugby this year as well, it's just with the Chiefs.
 

Wilson

Phil Kearns (64)
If he's eligible (and good enough) they'll pick him straight away the Lions - I vaguely remember this being the case for Pete Samu back in the day. Still playing super rugby this year as well, it's just with the Chiefs.
Yeah, definitely looks like an important coverage option as an experienced loosehead, given Slipper's current state and the general injury history we've had there. It's a pity he won't be eligible until after the Fiji game though.
 

Ignoto

Peter Sullivan (51)
I wouldn't be surprised to see them shifting more contracts to the financial year window to get that turn over in early and better utilize the talent.
It does make you wonder if these early contracts points to Les being in charge of the Reds for 26?

There was some talk with Joe being somewhat vague on whether he will still be here post Lions tour that Les would make sense to have a crack at the Wallabies.
 

Wilson

Phil Kearns (64)
It does make you wonder if these early contracts points to Les being in charge of the Reds for 26?

There was some talk with Joe being somewhat vague on whether he will still be here post Lions tour that Les would make sense to have a crack at the Wallabies.
I don't think it indicates too much one way or another there - if Les Kiss moves into the top role, Zane Hilton has got to be the odds on favourite to take over as Reds coach, or alternatively it could be more transitional under Joe's direction with Kiss still in charge of the Reds in a dual role for 2026 (I don't really like dual roles, but it is still an option). With Cordingley also the one who manages the contracts, there will be a lot of continuity whatever happens.
 

dru

David Wilson (68)
I don't think it indicates too much one way or another there - if Les Kiss moves into the top role, Zane Hilton has got to be the odds on favourite to take over as Reds coach, or alternatively it could be more transitional under Joe's direction with Kiss still in charge of the Reds in a dual role for 2026 (I don't really like dual roles, but it is still an option). With Cordingley also the one who manages the contracts, there will be a lot of continuity whatever happens.

Really? I think the HC is fundamental. You'd anticipate a new HC coming in to be given some breathing room - the usual 3 years to settle, develop and then produce. Whereas Kiss staying aught be around expecting performance. I'd much prefer that RA left Les alone, though Less himself will have a plan. Likely to include Wallabies you'd think.
 

Wilson

Phil Kearns (64)
Really? I think the HC is fundamental. You'd anticipate a new HC coming in to be given some breathing room - the usual 3 years to settle, develop and then produce. Whereas Kiss staying aught be around expecting performance. I'd much prefer that RA left Les alone, though Less himself will have a plan. Likely to include Wallabies you'd think.
To be clear, the "it" there was specifically in reference to early contracts. As in, "I don't think the Reds signing early contracts (like Ross') indicates too much one way or another if Les Kiss will be head coach of the Reds in 2026."

There's a lot more squad planning that is (or at least should be) done, outside of, and independent to, what any one head coach's future plans are. The counter to this would be us passing on a player like Ross just because we might have a different coach next year and that's no way to run a team.
 

dru

David Wilson (68)
To be clear, the "it" there was specifically in reference to early contracts. As in, "I don't think the Reds signing early contracts (like Ross') indicates too much one way or another if Les Kiss will be head coach of the Reds in 2026."

There's a lot more squad planning that is (or at least should be) done, outside of, and independent to, what any one head coach's future plans are. The counter to this would be us passing on a player like Ross just because we might have a different coach next year and that's no way to run a team.

Oh I'm completely cool with an early contract. HC being sniffed at by RA bothers me though.
 

The Ghost of Raelene

David Codey (61)
Well Larkham and McKellar have more successful records with none of them including Kiss having any major trophies to their names as a HC.

Good on RA for doing this stuff, stupid if they weren't. I hope Schmidt can work something out even if it was extended leave periods if he can have a team he trusts and a playing group he believes in which I think he does.

O'Gara wants that Irish job right? Seems a slightly odd character but I wonder what his thoughts on the Wallabies job are.... It's better than Wales.
 
Top