What merits a full International cap?

Simply put, I suggest that once a player clocks up eighty minutes (or a multiple thererof), then an official 'cap' should be awarded.

The ease by which the likes of Gareth Edwards and Mike Gibson have been surpassed by frankly lesser mortals is unrepresentative. Twenty minutes here and a single minute there distorts the picture.

If you play in a test match then you deserve a cap simple.

Does any Nation still give caps for every game? or is it a statistic now?

Portnoy

there are far more international matches don't forget. six nations, summer internationals, autumn internationals, world cups. they all add up

welshjohn369 wrote:If you play in a test match then you deserve a cap simple.

Does any Nation still give caps for every game? or is it a statistic now?

a
Some sides decide to grant 'caps' against the BaaBaas. Others don't - there is no consistency. No rules and no true comparison.

mckay1402 wrote:Portnoy

there are far more international matches don't forget. six nations, summer internationals, autumn internationals, world cups. they all add up

True. So even more point to acknowledge playing time over a bit-part on the pitch?

welshjohn369 wrote:If you play in a test match then you deserve a cap simple.

Does any Nation still give caps for every game? or is it a statistic now?

I was under the impression that you were presented with a cap on your 1, 50 & 100 cap appearances.

All I'm proposing is that game time counts for a lot. It has to be a better evaluation of a country's representation than just a pitch presence for a random period.

I heard on the BBC once that your first cap is your only "physical" cap. You are not given others.

Oh, and if you come on as a "blood" replacement then go off again and take no further part in the match, you don't get a cap.

Counting to 80 each time is one way to keep the stato's employed, but I'm going to argue against my own job prospects and suggest something a little simpler. If you play over 40 minutes in a match you get a cap, if you play less than a half you get a half-cap.

Mr Bounce wrote:Oh, and if you come on as a "blood" replacement then go off again and take no further part in the match, you don't get a cap.

Really? I thought that any appearance on the pitch clocked up as an international 'cap' on the stats.

I think Caps can be awarded as current. Yes, great players from the past are indeed being past by lesser lights, but that is today's reality. Unfortunately. But there are so many more matches now, I guess its inevitable.

I wonder, though, if your suggestion about minutes could apply to one aspect of the residency debate. Using your plan, could 40, 50, 80 minutes played for one country prohibit a player from qualifying for another? At least for a tier two country?

Accumulated game time should count for something surely?

Compare Austin Healy and (at random) Parisse. I have no idea bout their relative number of caps, but I've got a big idea about game time played.

And that speaks volumes.

Portnoy wrote:

welshjohn369 wrote:If you play in a test match then you deserve a cap simple.

Does any Nation still give caps for every game? or is it a statistic now?

a
Some sides decide to grant 'caps' against the BaaBaas. Others don't - there is no consistency. No rules and no true comparison.

Wales only awarded Caps vs the Baabaa's as the game was organised to celebrate the 130th anniversary of the formation of the WRU.

They do not usually award Caps for Baabaa matches.

I must admit i don't think Caps in number have any relevance to anything in particular. As you may notice TV usually add the dates that a player recorded their first cap, and last if they are retired, as an indication of the experience rather than just mentioning the number of Caps awarded.

s idea is a good one not sure about half caps though like someone might say I've half a cap for Ireland it just doesn't sound right. Also would that stop someone playing for another country?

Portnoy wrote:Simply put, I suggest that once a player clocks up eighty minutes (or a multiple thererof), then an official 'cap' should be awarded.

The ease by which the likes of Gareth Edwards and Mike Gibson have been surpassed by frankly lesser mortals is unrepresentative. Twenty minutes here and a single minute there distorts the picture.

You can't compare 70's rugby to rugby 40 years later no chance.
Wales did play tier B nations even in the 70's. Wales played Japan quite a lot.

Wales 62-14 Japan, Cardiff Arms Park, 06-10-73
Japan 12-56 Wales, Hanazono Stadium, Osaka, 21-09-75
Japan 6-82 Wales, Tokyo Olympic Stadium, 24-09-75
Wales 29-24 Japan, Cardiff Arms Park, 22-10-83

However despite Wales winning fairly easy, why should Wales disrespect the Japanease by saying their not worth awarding caps against?
This is a choice for each Union. Wales always chose to look down on countries in my opinion.

France for example have always awarded caps for playing other countries, they have had capped games against Czechoslovakia, 15 games against Germany, 1 against West Germany, 3 against the Soviet Union, 1 against Tunisia etc.
In fact during the 90's as well as the 5 Nations France used to play in the Fira cup, with Argentina. Romania and Italy.

Australia are another team who are prepared to give full status to weaker Unions, including games against Korea and Spain, etc.

Personally I don't think you should disrespect a country by saying their not worth capping against, and the more countries we have playing rugby the better to be honest.

Alyn your post alludes to a far more pertinent issue, that top teams should be playing lesser sides more often to help the game grow.

Question is how many would rate caps if substitutes were not allowed?

Portnoy, I understand exactly your point of view but don't see any way around it, rugby has moved on. Your point opens similar thoughts to some that came up in my "Subs ruining rugby" post. Some things are good to move on with and rugby must move forward. Sometimes though the changes don't seem as attractive and we throw good things away.

Certainly there is no way now you can compare the quality of players based on caps. The example of Edwards above is a good one. We had a couple of excellent full backs (Bruce Hay and Peter Dodds, both double BI Lions) they each were awarded about 23 caps. We now have another full back who is nowhere near the standard (Hugo Southwell) who has more than both combined at 59 caps. Gordon Brown a test lock on 3 BI tours only got about 30 caps, these days that can be accumulated in about 3 or 4 seasons and you might come off the bench for most of them.

No answer to it though as not sure part caps will really work - I mean try telling Derek Quinnell when he ran on for the last minute in 1973(?) that he hadn't played for Wales.

Boston Exile,
I think you summed it up very well. The number of caps awarded is no measure of quality, most especially for players from different eras.

maestegmafia wrote:Alyn your post alludes to a far more pertinent issue, that top teams should be playing lesser sides more often to help the game grow.

I agree, however professional sport is about maximising income not helping the weak. In the amateur days, Wales would play 3 tier B nations in November then have a big one off game against Australia or New Zealand.

Why dont Wales put an A side out against Spain or something, just after the full side has played New Zealand?
Give the fans who want to stay behind the chance to see a game for free, give Spain some experience of playing at a large, full rugby stadium, oh and give the Wales fans a chance to see us win, after our customary defeat to a Tri Nation side

Not it's the opposite, 3 big games against the Tri Nation teams, then they squeeze in a game against a tier B side.
The IRB have come down hard on this though and the new touring schedule that has been announced will include more tier B tours.

emack2 wrote:Question is how many would rate caps if substitutes were not allowed?

I stick with my answer earlier on, you cant compare modern rugby with 70's rugby. Players get injured and subs were brought in for player welfare purposes. A read a story once about a player who scored a winning try for Wales after being concussed, he was muttering about aeroplanes as he got driven over the line! Hard lessons have been learned over the years about player safety, so subs are vital, especially with the size of modern professional players.
Besides for what it's worth Phil Bennett got his first cap in 1969 as a substitute! He replaced Gerald Davies.
So even if players can ease past Gareth Edwards and Mike Gibson, there were substitutes in their eras too.

My guess is that stattos will have game time information. And that would be a lot more meaningful than the number of times a player pitched up at the whim of a coach.

Eighty minutes is much more telling than one. Thus the thrust of my article.

So Huw Bennett for instance?
41 Welsh caps!
28 off the bench, with 13 starts