This is the perennial argument, whenever some clubchoses "A" over "B" and "B" does better, the sky is falling, whether it be Waugh over Smith, there will always be the one who got away. (the Eels in the NRL are always being given the same shit)
Meakes when he went overseas wasn't any better than the options they already had.
Meakes returning to Aus? well the Tahs decided to go for the best young talent in the NRC, who so far has struggled, but the choice was a valid one.
In the end it really depends on the slots open in any one season, sometimes the slots are contracted, other areas need to be filled and another one gets away.
I think people often view players as black-and-white, without accounting for any sort of development or regression, and this doesn't help the situation either.
Reece Hodge made the Australian schoolboys at the last minute as injury cover for Lalaki Foketi (whatever happened to him by the way?)
I knew a lot of people who weren't happy as they simply thought he wasn't up to it.
As a u19 the same people thought he'd gotten a bit better, and they were genuinely impressed by the time u20s came around. He literally became better as a player, and we've seen that he's continued to do so as he was one of the first players in his age cohort to debut for the Wallabies.
Around the same time he filled out massively from a lanky schoolboy to quite a large center by international standards (indicative of his commitment and attitude)
On the other hand, you have people like Frisby, Godwin, CFS, Browning, Kellaway (to an extent) who have regressed or not lived up to their initial expectations. The recruiters simply can't get it right every time as there are so many unknowns.
I think Meakes probably falls into the former category. Just because he's a good player now doesn't mean the Waratah's recruitment process failed miserably when he left years ago to play at some of Europe's smallest and weakest clubs.