Tonga PM blasts 'unfair' World Cup

[Bullrush]

From the SMH.

I'd agree with the Tongan PM - not all the best, fit players are participating in the RWC and it needs to change.

NUKU'ALOFA: Tonga's prime minister says this year's rugby world cup will not be a real competition because "unfair" eligibility rules prevent Pacific nations from fielding some of their best players.

Lord Tu'ivakano said International Rugby Board (IRB) rules barring a player who has represented one country from ever taking the field for another, protected the game's traditional powers from being challenged.

The law is a sore point for Pacific nations, whose best players are often lured to New Zealand or Australia as youngsters, but cannot represent their homeland even after their careers with their adopted countries are over.

Advertisement: Story continues below "If they're going to have a real World Cup, then they need to give the other countries the chance to have their own players," he told AFP in an interview on Tuesday.

Tu'ivakano said Tonga had players in top international competitions who could not represent their country at the World Cup, which runs from September 9 to October 23 in New Zealand, robbing the team of valuable experience.

"Now we're just trying to find people who are playing regional in New Zealand," he said. "Now some of our boys don't have international experience."

Tu'ivakano said rugby league allowed players to switch nationalities but the IRB had proved inflexible in November when it rejected a New Zealand-sponsored move to relax eligibility rules.

"It's very unfair, I think they really need to look at it," he said.

 

[en_force_er]

He has a point, I don't think it should be anywhere near as relaxed as league but how great would it be if Matt Dunning rolled out for Canada this World Cup?

Better still, how unfair is it that Erik Lund will never play in a World Cup because in his younger life he thought playing for Norway was as far as his carrer would go. I don't even have to MENTION Isa Nacewa.

I'd love to see a genuinely competitive WC.

 

[Bullrush]

He has a point, I don't think it should be anywhere near as relaxed as league but how great would it be if Matt Dunning rolled out for Canada this World Cup?

Better still, how unfair is it that Erik Lund will never play in a World Cup because in his younger life he thought playing for Norway was as far as his carrer would go. I don't even have to MENTION Isa Nacewa.

I'd love to see a genuinely competitive WC.

***sigh***Isa Nacewa.....Auckland Blues....***sigh***

 

[TOCC]

Ive always preferred the tier system, essentially the top 8 are considered Tier 1, everyone else is considered Tier 2.. This would be revised annually with the major influence been whether a nation has a professional competition and what level that professional competition is at.

-A player can move down from a Tier 1 nation but cant move up from a Tier 2
-A player may only move down to a Tier 2 nation from a Tier 1 if he qualifies for that nation through family heritage(residency isnt accepted)
-A player may only move from a Tier 1 nation down to a Tier 2 nation if he has not represented the Tier 1 nation in the past 2 years


I think this would be the best possible solution if such a rule were to be introduced, i would hate to see it get any more liberal then that..

 

[en_force_er]

Ive always preferred the tier system, essentially the top 8 are considered Tier 1, everyone else is considered Tier 2.. This would be revised annually with the major influence been whether a nation has a professional competition and what level that professional competition is at.

-A player can move down from a Tier 1 nation but cant move up from a Tier 2
-A player may only move down to a Tier 2 nation from a Tier 1 if he qualifies for that nation through family heritage(residency isnt accepted)
-A player may only move from a Tier 1 nation down to a Tier 2 nation if he has not represented the Tier 1 nation in the past 2 years


I think this would be the best possible solution if such a rule were to be introduced, i would hate to see it get any more liberal then that..

Good policy, 2 years would probably be enough but I wouldn't be disappointed if it were more.

I'd love to see players able to move up from a Tier 2 nation but you are completely correct that it couldn't happen, it would cheapen their jerseys and the Islands would become Australia/NZ development sides.

I wouldn't want the Kiwis adding Cencus Johnston to their arsenal anyway.

 

[TOCC]

I think you want to avoid a few things, firstly we dont want to see the PI nations become development sides for Australia, New Zealand and England.. Secondly, we dont want to see a country like Japan buying top players for the ultimate purpose of having them representing Japan a couple of years down the track, thirdly and most importantly we dont want to see rugby union turn into a farce like international rugby league..

I would be interested to see the stats of how many players are out there who these sort of rules could apply to..

 

[fatprop]

How about, three years for players trying to play for their country of birth and four years for residency changes

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I see no reason not to have it the same way as cricket. You move to another country, play a defined period of time in that country and you are then able to play for them. I think the IRB's policy, while well intentioned, has probably backfired on them and done nothing to help the smaller nations.

[RANT]What I do get crapped off with, however, is the the smear against countries like Australia and NZ, where we are accused of poaching younger islander players. A lot of these blokes have either been born here or come here at a young age and in many cases played a lot of underage rugby in these countries. In other words, they have actually been developed here. What is wrong with that? I know it's a funny concept, but people actually migrate to countries like Australia and NZ (and the UK) in search of this thing called a better life. But no, we get these sneering, contemptuous attitudes from other countries accusing us of plundering the rugby stocks of other nations. [/RANT]

 

[Gnostic]

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.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I could come at that Gnostic, especially the idea of PI blokes playing Super rugby. It would make it much easier for them to play test footy for their home nations too.

 

[Gnostic]

I could come at that Gnostic, especially the idea of PI blokes playing Super rugby. It would make it much easier for them to play test footy for their home nations too.

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.

 

[en_force_er]

Perhaps an independent panel could be elected to decide whether a player can switch eligibility.

Obviously, you'd give them guidelines like listed above but you'd allow exceptions. For example if theoretical 33 year old Will Genia hasn't played for the Wallabies for a year or two and wants to play for Papua New Guinea you'd allow him to do so based on his obvious strong passion and association with the nation.

Whereas a player that's decision to play for a country is along the lines of "oh look, I have X grandparent from X nation" would perhaps not be approved at all.

 

[Gnostic]

Perhaps an independent panel could be elected to decide whether a player can switch eligibility.

Obviously, you'd give them guidelines like listed above but you'd allow exceptions. For example if theoretical 33 year old Will Genia hasn't played for the Wallabies for a year or two and wants to play for Papua New Guinea you'd allow him to do so based on his obvious strong passion and association with the nation.

Whereas a player that's decision to play for a country is along the lines of "oh look, I have X grandparent from X nation" would perhaps not be approved at all.

I hate the idea of "Independent" panels, enforcer. They invariably get corrupted like the ultimate in corrupt sports panels the Fifa World Cup body. It is better to set out a set of rules that are clear and transparent and everyone knows where they stand. Everyone has that know but the current situation is encouraging the development of an inequity.

 

[Bullrush]

Perhaps an independent panel could be elected to decide whether a player can switch eligibility.

Obviously, you'd give them guidelines like listed above but you'd allow exceptions. For example if theoretical 33 year old Will Genia hasn't played for the Wallabies for a year or two and wants to play for Papua New Guinea you'd allow him to do so based on his obvious strong passion and association with the nation.

Whereas a player that's decision to play for a country is along the lines of "oh look, I have X grandparent from X nation" would perhaps not be approved at all.

Personally, I don't care. If a player is no longer wanted by a Tier 1 team and can add value to a country that they have a connection to eg. grandparents - let them play.

The best players in the world should be playing in the RWC

 

[Gnostic]

I should say that I really don't want to see a situation like the farce that is the League World Cup where they make up teams from people who have the most tenuous link to a country, have no residency history there etc. It just devalues the whole competition.

 

[Bullrush]

Here's some former AB's from the past 6 years who would possibly have played after their AB stint was done:

Saimone Taumoepeau
Jerry Collins
Kees Meeuws
Mose Tuiali'i
Rodney So'oialo
Casey Laulala
Tana Umaga
Doug Howlett
Sam Tuitupou
Sione Lauaki
Chris Masoe
Sosene Anesi
John Schwalger
Ross Filipo
Anthony Tuitavake
Rudi Wulf
Lelia Masaga

Some pretty impressive names in there I reckon....even a couple that we should be seeing at the 2011 RWC if not for this IRB Law.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Some impressive names, no doubt, but interestingly a good number who didn't exactly set the world on fire as AB's either.

 

[Bullrush]

True....but I doubt a lot of those guys still wouldn't have made the squad for their 2nd tier nation.

And some of these guys didn't get much of a chance....I would have LOVED to have seen Anthony Tuitavake more in a black jersey. Ross Filipo got 2 games I think. Masaga about the same and Anesi about the same.

2-3 games and they are lost to international rugby forever.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

No argument there.

 

[120kg Winger]

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.