Good interview with Eliota Fuimaono-Spolu

Hi guys,

if anyone wants to read an interview where Eliota Fuimano-Sapolu actually talks about what he tweets in a reasonable way there is one available on rugby spectator and it is quite an interesting read and brushes on some big topics!

http://www.rugbyspectator.com/2011/11/spotlight-on-gloucester-eliota-fuimaono-sapolu-2/

Samoans,Tongans,Cooks etc who have played for any tier 1 teams especially Wallabies and ABs must be allowed the opportunity to go back and play for their islands of heritage and give something back.
We just have to now persuade the celtic nations, who seem to want just block the remit when it comes before the IRB. to some the longer the Celtic nations maintain this stance,the more defensive they look.

So EFS comes out with a few childishly selected words and sentiments on a social site and all of a sudden he's an advocate with brains worth picking? My opinion of him hasn't changed in the slightest.

Maybe every side who run into difficulties should recieve special treatment. Let's go ahead and ban Sunday games for Scotland and Euan Murray's sake shall we?

No mention of his rac!st rant against Nigel Owens and would somebody explain how these players are being 'forced' to play for nations other than Samoa. If you are approached by England/NZ/Aus/Wales ...etc because you qualify under the eligibilty rules, there's nothing stopping you turning around and saying "Thank you for the offer but I'm Samoan so I want to play for Samoa"
The guy should have been banned for a season for his "attack" on a referee. The point about scheduling was a very valid one, but I'm afraid that has been lost now

PenfroPete wrote:No mention of his rac!st rant against Nigel Owens and would somebody explain how these players are being 'forced' to play for nations other than Samoa. If you are approached by England/NZ/Aus/Wales ...etc because you qualify under the eligibilty rules, there's nothing stopping you turning around and saying "Thank you for the offer but I'm Samoan so I want to play for Samoa"
The guy should have been banned for a season for his "attack" on a referee. The point about scheduling was a very valid one, but I'm afraid that has been lost now

+1

I'm sure there's a nice box somewhere in the corner of Hyde Park for him to stand on and rant like all the rest of the nutters...erm...people with interesting viewpoints

Maybe that's a touch hard but he does seem to be rather selective in what he speaks about as has been pointed out already (of course that could simply be down to which bits the journalists printed.....is there somewhere where it states this is the transcript of "the interview, the whole interview and nothing but the interview"?

If I was to nit-pick at any one point....."Please do Lemons old fella " I hear you all cry...........then it would this this bit:

"Maximise the profit? Samoa sold out all of their pool games at the World cup. The only team to do that. To say other matches maximise profits is nonsense and how Samoa and Tonga are seen as incapable of doing so, considering that we were the most popular teams at the RWC, is beyond me."

I personally would be interested to know how much the tickets were for these mid-week pool matches compared to the so called tier 1 teams (so called because...well....they're in the first tier I suppose) and could the fact that there are nearly as many Samoans living in New Zealand as there are living in Samoa be relevant as to how big their customer base was? And dare I say it I - again personally - believe the cost of travel from their homes in New Zealand to a match is possibly a little bit less than mine for example from sunniest Guildford in the UK!

There are many contributing factors to how many people turn up to anything but let's just ignore that and say you were the most popular shall we?

Can you tell the Mrs gave me a bit of a nasty cold this week and I'm feeling a tad precious?!?! Sorry about the rant.......I'm just off to find my box at Hyde Park Corner

Making me feel a bit hungry seeing that enormous bag of chips on his shoulder.

aucklandlaurie wrote: Samoans,Tongans,Cooks etc who have played for any tier 1 teams especially Wallabies and ABs must be allowed the opportunity to go back and play for their islands of heritage and give something back.
We just have to now persuade the celtic nations, who seem to want just block the remit when it comes before the IRB. to some the longer the Celtic nations maintain this stance,the more defensive they look.

I'm sorry, laurie - I find myself on the opposite side of a debate from you again. - honestly, it's not intentional! . Once a player has nailed their allegiance to a particular flag, I'm afraid I see no reason to allow them to change that.

Knowsit17 wrote:So EFS comes out with a few childishly selected words and sentiments on a social site and all of a sudden he's an advocate with brains worth picking? My opinion of him hasn't changed in the slightest.

Maybe every side who run into difficulties should recieve special treatment. Let's go ahead and ban Sunday games for Scotland and Euan Murray's sake shall we?

I like this idea!?!?

Aslongasbut
Thats Ok, I have mentioned my stance on this point on a previous occassion on this site,without success, and perhaps its because I'm an Aucklander who has had a lot experience with Polynesian rugby and league players and can identify with the way they think,live, their religion, and their roots to their home Islands,and their attitude to their sport,makes it very hard to explain to someone who hasnt lived it.
Pacific islanders are the most gifted (pro rata to population)rugby players on the planet,and it is a benefit to rugby that they choose rugby as their sport of ist choice,and rugby might then consider that these people might be allowed a special consideration.
from another unrelated aspect, The talent scouts and agents in American football dont call them the "Footbal islands" for nothing.
All they are asking is that if they have played for one of the bigger rugby nations earlier in their playing career,usually Australia and NZ,but its now encroaching into other countries as well,that they be allowed to go back and give something back to their Islands of heritage before they hang up their boots.and not the other way round.
My understanding is that the NZRFU and the ARU will again run this as an agenda item before the IRB mid next year.

All they are asking is that if they have played for one of the bigger rugby nations earlier in their playing career,usually Australia and NZ,but its now encroaching into other countries as well,that they be allowed to go back and give something back to their Islands of heritage before they hang up their boots.and not the other way round.

Would it be too much to ask that players who claim to care for their country of heritage prove so by committing their int'l career to said country rather than mixing it up and playing mercenary for another nation? I can't see how that is a problem. It's the player's responsibility to decide who he wants to play for provided that he's aware of the rules which I can't see how pro players wouldn't be.

My fear is that this'll open the door for players to switch national allegiance in future as easily as they are able to switch club allegiance today.

On another point:
If this player is to be the subject of an article on 606 v2, then should he not be affoded the dignity of at least spelling one of his names right in the title?????

Its Eliota Fuimaono-Sapolu. they are common names....

Knows it
if it only applied to tier 2 nations what would be the harm????

aucklandlaurie

If they are allowed to do as you say, play for NZ/Aus then go back to play for Samoa then that has to be opened up to everyone surely....or is that what you are advocating??

Doc
My understanding is that that the remit (which NZ is running on behalf of Samoa as they have only limited rcognition at the IRB ) is in terms of tier 2 nations, or at least that is my understanding.
Put it this way I cant see Samoa wanting to go through all this for the tier1 nations....

aucklandlaurie wrote: Samoans,Tongans,Cooks etc who have played for any tier 1 teams especially Wallabies and ABs must be allowed the opportunity to go back and play for their islands of heritage and give something back.
We just have to now persuade the celtic nations, who seem to want just block the remit when it comes before the IRB. to some the longer the Celtic nations maintain this stance,the more defensive they look.

You used to be allowed to do this, but it was stopped for good reason, it was a total disgrace the way this system was abused. Why should former All Blacks be allowed to play for Island sides once they are no longer wanted by the all Blacks, in what way is that fair to everyone else?

laurie, imo if you make exceptions for anyone then you're taking a considerable risk. More metaphorically, if you open the door even just a crack then you're still giving the other party sufficient leverage to open it wider. Allowing anyone to play for two national sides gives other countries reason to demand the same treatment in future and before you know it the floodgates will have opened.

I still don't see how it's too much to ask that players who want to go back and play for their countries of origin simply don't go away in the first place. Why should they be given more when they already have a fair choice of who to play for?

Knows it
So if you are so concerned about the inequality created by exceptions,then you wouldnt have any problems with Manu samoa having the same voting rights and recognition as say ireland and scotland at the IRB.
Its about tradition, its about religion, its about the love and pride in their Islands of heritage, its about fighting and being a warrior for youre island, its about respect of respecting youre elders and where you came from. Its also very hard to explain to people who havent lived in the Polynesian environment. balance that against the conflict that arises when they see New Zealand and Australia as the countries of opportunity and future and to take them away from poverty.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
All they are asking is that if they have played for one of the bigger rugby nations earlier in their playing career,usually Australia and NZ,but its now encroaching into other countries as well,that they be allowed to go back and give something back to their Islands of heritage before they hang up their boots.and not the other way round.

laurie, this is the crux of the matter for me. If they cared that much about their Island heritage, they would play for these countries in the first place and raise the standard there

Alandavies
I presume you are talking about Inga Tuigamala, that man's contribution to samoa has been huge.How was that a disgrace?how was that abuse? In what way did his contribution to his Islands of heritage, (Where he is a Matai) hurt anyone else?

as long as
Down this way it is a highly respected thing to become an All Black,and apart the odd exceptions like Fotuali'i and Wlliams alot of them who think that they can become an All black will go for it, you have to remember they are living in NZ, educated in NZ,and playing rugby in New Zealand.
Maybe William's dad told him that he wasn't good enough to be an All Black??

Why would I have a problem with Samoans having the same voting rights as anyone else? But you may be referencing an issue I'm not informed on as I wasn't aware they were given inferior rights.

TBH I don't see how any Samoan, Tongan, Fijian, Cook Islander or anyone from the PI skilled enough to be considered by New Zealand or Australia couldn't get a decent club contract in Europe or the Super 15. That way we wouldn't even have to talk about dividing national allegiance.

Come to think of it, who in the Samoa squad isn't on a good wage at a decent club? Fotuali'i and Stowers are with the Ospreys, Fuimaono-Sapolu himself at Gloucester, Tuilagi at Leicester, Mapusua previously of LI, Schwalger previously at Scarlets and Sale, the list goes on...

knowsit
Manu Samoa does have inferior rights to say New Zealand which is the reason why New Zealand is presenting and argueing this remit.
I dont see what the issue of Northern hemisphere club contracts or super xv contracts for that matter has to do with it, or have I confused you somewhere?sorry.

Auckland, you talk about tier 2 nations but only really talk about 'polynesian' nations. Does your idea extend to other tier 2 nations (and tier 3 for that matter) such as USA, Canada, Etc? If so, should Ronan O'Gara be able to go back to the USA after Ireland are done with him, to give them a helping hand?

You talk about Polynesians as if they are mythical creatures! Every country has people with religious and emotional ties to their land. Welsh born players may have emotional ties to their land too, and leaving for financial reasons to work in England where wages are higher may also mean that, due to ties to the motherland, they may want to come back and play at the end of their careers. For me, it should all or none. One rule for everyone.

Also, what is 'Tier 2'. Teams move up and down world rankings, so are the tiers based on this? Samoa are doing pretty well internationally considering they rarely get any time together to train. Maybe that's what should be tackled first. An IRB directive to secure ALL international teams X number of weeks together may be a start.

Would this even be an argument if Samoa were ranked, say, 5th in the world consistently? Yes, it was wrong that lower ranked teams had less rest at the WC, and that is being tackled. But surely positive discrimation just for the polynesian teams goes against the whole ethos of sport?


If you're looking for someone to blame, how about looking closer to home to SANZAR who have constantly overlooked the island teams when deciding on the tri nations, and what a snub now that you've chosen Argentina when Samoa would have been a much more competitive team, players are largely based close by in NZ etc., and the revenue would have really helped them to kick on and to afford better rugby infrastructure. If you want to blame the 6N for all that is wrong in the world the that's your business, but we had no hand in the snub of the island nations by their so called neighbours and allies in SANZAR. Shame on you!

P.s. with Scotland now ranked below Tonga, I would expect a rule allowing Scotland to call up those of Scottish heritage from other international teams, as they are clearly in need too. Ok, I'm being pedantic, but where do you stop?

laurie, you earlier suggested that Islanders made themselves eligible for New Zealand and Australia as these are the "countries of opportunity and future", so they could escape poverty. My response was that they didn't need to commit themselves nationally to these countries when they could get a good wage at a prestigious and resourceful club, which many of the Samoans have and are still able to represent Samoa for internationals. Understand?

I'd be interested to know how many of the Samoan squad actually are living in poverty after your claim.

Is it really necessary for the Islanders to be victimised as much as they are? The only real thing I think should be amended is the RWC scheduling, in no other way have I seen evidence that they are unfairly treated.

knowsit
sorry, what i was trying to explain (not very well) during the 70s and into the 80s alot of samoans ,Tongans, migrated to NZ for education,employment,and prospects generally to avoid poverty, it is the subsequent first and second generation that have been educated,come through the rugby ranks in Nz that we are now talking about.
In so far as the poverty goes, you only have to get out of the towns in the Islands and the houses with running water and electricity are the exception.

griff
I am not sying that welsh people dont have things like religion, emotional ties,financial reasons etc impacting on their lives,what i am saying is that samoans for example regard these things from a different outlook and therefore live these issues differently.and you cant just jump in a car, drive down the road and be back in Samoa.
I understand what you are saying, as that reflects what is probably an Anglo saxon perspective.
I treated youre comments re SANZAR, etc as just a WUM and frivolous.

Why is the SANZAR thing wumming?

I thought that it was generally assumed that it was NZ policy to keep the islanders weak by acquirng their best players? Don't NZ look upon the islanders as a sort of nursery where many of their future stars are nutured?
What NZ certainly don't want is a strong Samoa/Fiji/Tonga. Where would they get their next generations from?
If they were even vaguely worried about islander rugby then NZ and Aus would surely include them in the Tri N? But if they did that (and cut them in on the TV money) then the islanders would then be become a unified, salaried threat rather than disorganised, poor opportunity

And your irrationall arguement re islanders playing for their homeland?
What part of this don't you follow?
If you are invited to play for another country other than your own and you are a proud Samoan (for example), then JUST SAY NO.

aucklandlaurie wrote: griff
I am not sying that welsh people dont have things like religion, emotional ties,financial reasons etc impacting on their lives,what i am saying is that samoans for example regard these things from a different outlook and therefore live these issues differently.and you cant just jump in a car, drive down the road and be back in Samoa.
I understand what you are saying, as that reflects what is probably an Anglo saxon perspective.
I treated youre comments re SANZAR, etc as just a WUM and frivolous.

Auckland, I'm Welsh of welsh and Irish parents so my views would be more Celtic than Anglo Saxon if you're classifying in that way, but obviously there's no way to tell for sure with 1000 years since the Saxons invaded. Did you mean 'western perspective'. Still, I'm not sure how being from the UK means I can't have an understanding of the Samoan outlook?! After all, aren't Samoans predominately Cristian, just like me?

And on the SANZAR point, no I wasn't WUMMING. I probably could have put it better though. If SANZAR had allowed Samoa or a combined PI team into the Tri Nations this could have done wonders for their standing on the international stage, would have given them regular meaningful competition and generated revenue through TV and sponsorship which they just don't get at the moment. How is that WUMMING?

I'm not trying to pick a fight as that's not my style, but I guess we'll just be at odds over this one. For me, and I'm from a sport development background, the best way to help Samoa and the other PI nations would be to give them an incentive to chose to represent their nation from the start, and not incentivising them to look elsewhere first and only go back when they've served their purpose with the top nations at the end of their careers. A place for these nations in the tri nations/S15 would surely be a good start. Players could then play in the S15 on good contracts, which they already do, and then represent their countries at the highest level in the show piece event.

Is the problem perhaps that the S15 teams will not offer PI players contracts if they will not commit to their national team as they are worried about exceeding quotas? If this is the case, then that's an issue for NZ and Aus and the IRB to sort out. Perhaps a PI team in the S15 would solve this? It could be based in NZ but contain only PI players? That would reduce the pressure for other teams to only pick NZ qualified players and would allow PI players to choose to play for their country of birth safe in the knowledge that their decision won't impact their professional club contract. Either that or increase the overseas quota on in the S15 clubs, but I can understand from a national point of view that this may not go down well!

Just FYI all, Samoa offered a chance to put in a proposal for a Super franchise last expansion, but opted not to (the Melbourne Rebels wound up getting the spot)

grif
I am not sure whether I am phrasing it right by using the terms of either Anglo saxon,western or celtic but I do know that unless you have lived and been involved in rugby in a Polynesian environment then it is very hard to explain, Auckland is the largest polynesian city in the World.
I presumed you were wumming when you tried pass off this issue as a Super xv/tri nations issue, The Super xv arguement was examined,reexamined and cross examined a couple of years ago,Samoa just doe not have the where withall and infrastructure to participate in Super xv.and to add a Pacific Islands team to Tri nations would be like me suggesting to you that you entertain a team made up of Russia,Georgia and Romania in to 6nations to raise the standard of rugby in those countries.
The issue is not a SANZAR or Super xv issue,it is an IRB issue ,Samoa is trying to do the right thing by everyone by trying to field asevens team made up of samoans who only live in Samoa,they are trying to be independent,but when it comes to 15 aside it becomes a lot more complicated and samoa want to compete In world rugby at the highest level. What they want is for a player like Mils Muliaina , after he has finished playing for the All Blacks being able to share his knowledge by playing for Manu Samoa with the younger Samoan players,and at the same time he his doing a service to his Island of heritage,The Samoans are convinced that this is the forward for them to be able to develop their young players into a team that can compete with other top International teams. I dont know if it will work,but I do think they deserve as a developing rugby country that they should be allowed the opportunity ti try it even if it fails.

aucklandlaurie wrote: grif
I am not sure whether I am phrasing it right by using the terms of either Anglo saxon,western or celtic but I do know that unless you have lived and been involved in rugby in a Polynesian environment then it is very hard to explain, Auckland is the largest polynesian city in the World.
I presumed you were wumming when you tried pass off this issue as a Super xv/tri nations issue, The Super xv arguement was examined,reexamined and cross examined a couple of years ago,Samoa just doe not have the where withall and infrastructure to participate in Super xv.and to add a Pacific Islands team to Tri nations would be like me suggesting to you that you entertain a team made up of Russia,Georgia and Romania in to 6nations to raise the standard of rugby in those countries.
The issue is not a SANZAR or Super xv issue,it is an IRB issue ,Samoa is trying to do the right thing by everyone by trying to field asevens team made up of samoans who only live in Samoa,they are trying to be independent,but when it comes to 15 aside it becomes a lot more complicated and samoa want to compete In world rugby at the highest level. What they want is for a player like Mils Muliaina , after he has finished playing for the All Blacks being able to share his knowledge by playing for Manu Samoa with the younger Samoan players,and at the same time he his doing a service to his Island of heritage,The Samoans are convinced that this is the forward for them to be able to develop their young players into a team that can compete with other top International teams. I dont know if it will work,but I do think they deserve as a developing rugby country that they should be allowed the opportunity ti try it even if it fails.

Laurie, in your example, would Muliani not be better off coaching?

Auckland, that's a bit disrepscrful to Samoa comparing them to Georgia and Russia. They're arguably better than Argentina so their addition to the 3N would not be like Russia joining the 6N at all.

I agree with As, give something back through coaching, a rugby school, foundation or something, not through a rule bend.

Aslongasbut100
good morning, A number of former All blacks of samoan extraction have gone and coached manu samoa and all to some degree of success,Michel Jones, Inga Tuigamala and Bryan Williams to name but a few.
Seven ex All Blacks have played for Manu Samoa Bachop, Bunce,Ieremia,Jones,Lam,Tonu'u,and Inga the winger.but that was prior to the law change in the early 2000's. which was trying to achieve a completely different issue, and this situation is a collateral consequence of that law change. which to be honest was blatant "poaching".
A number af New Zealanders are presently involved with the Manu Samoan team in various forms of specialist coaching and always will be. i personally believe that some one like Kevin Mealamu has a lot to offer if he could take his on field management skills ( All Blacks,Auckland Blues) and instill it in Manu samoa,and he really can only do it as a player,even though it has been a pet project of Graham Henry and Pat lam, for the last couple of years.

aucklandlaurie wrote: griff
I am not sying that welsh people dont have things like religion, emotional ties,financial reasons etc impacting on their lives,what i am saying is that samoans for example regard these things from a different outlook and therefore live these issues differently.and you cant just jump in a car, drive down the road and be back in Samoa.
I understand what you are saying, as that reflects what is probably an Anglo saxon perspective.
I treated youre comments re SANZAR, etc as just a WUM and frivolous.

Just wanted to make a point that the RFU (Anglo-Saxons if you want) voted for this motion. I think they were the only NH union to do so.

I don't see why it's such an issue for a person to play for two sides. Can't a person have strong ties to two countries? A Samoan born and bred in New Zealand will still probably have very strong ties to Samoa. Same goes for any person who's family have recently immigrated anywhere. For example Falatau. He's had to completely turn his back on his Tongan heritage (the team his father played for). Is he being mercenary playing for Wales? Of course not. Would he want to play for Tonga if he wasn't wanted by Wales? Maybe. Should he be allowed to? Yes in my opinion. As long as it's controlled (e.e. can't qualify for 2nd team by residency) then fine by me

My view in this is that New Zealand want to be able to take players from Fiji, Samoa and Tonga to play for NZ then when they are done with them those players can go back to play for their country.

I find it incredibly childish to be honest, if you want these guys playing for their islands dont pick them for NZ. Simple as that, demanding that special circumstances should be made for New Zealand and the Islands is immature and somewhat gluttonous as well.

What I find particularly galling is that Celtic nations are blamed for stopping this from happening by using their vito. New Zealand will look for every which way to argue that they arent damaging the Island nations by taking their players and it is in fact the fault of Celts - warped and bizarre.

hammerofthuner
Yes,you are quite right England did support the motion, and in all my remarks I have intentionally avoided naming England,but rather the Celtic nations.
When I used the words Anglo saxon,I wasnt specifically referring to England but rather the caucasian non Polynesian way of thinking.
Yes Falataus father played for Tonga, A prop if I remember correctly.

Artful
you're comments have no reflection af what New Zealand actually does,or what it is trying to do.

Auckland, I concede to you on the fact that I'm not from one of the pacific Islands, and I'm not Polynesian, and I don't come from Aukland, so I don't have the insight into this. I'll trust your judgement on it, but I still think that part of the problem is that some PI players feel pressured into choosing NZ as their representaive side so that they can secure an S15 contract. Am I on the right lines with that?

Another thing that has occurred to me is why do you think these nations need help? They're actually doing pretty well as they are. Ex all blacks going to play for them will not get them into the tri/4 nations, so what good will it do? Yes, they'll bring experience but most of the Samoan team, for example, are at big clubs and have a lot of experience. I'm probably missing something, but what is it that you hope ex all blacks/ ozzies will bring to the table? The game is already big in the PI countries, so it wouldn't be a marketing thing like it would for a player like Yachvili to go from France back to Georgia, or Simon Shaw back to Kenya, etc. I think you overestimate the need for these players to go home. For me, it's the nations where we're trying to grow the game and get it on the radar that needs ex internationals to go home, but the players from the top nations born or with links to these countries (USA, Japan, China, India, African nations, Russia, Canada, etc.) are few and far between.

Also, a quick query about the Celtic nations vote. Are the 3 Celtic nations really that powerful in the IRB that they could overturn a vote about this? There's only 3 of them. What's the make-up of the board. It must be others who voted against too? If so, why single out the Celtic Nations?

griff
the IRB executive council consists of 8 nations with 2 seats (Votes) each, scotland,Ireland,wales,England,Australia,New Zealand,SouthAfrica and France.
4 nations have one seat each( 1 vote)Argentina,canada,Italy and Japan.
Samoa and Tonga do not have a seat and therefore can not present a project to the Council, New Zealand presented this project on behalf of Manu samoa, and in doing so New Zealand can not vote on its own projects.
My understanding is that the only nations that voted in support of New Zealands motion were Australia,South Africa and England.
All players are under pressure when it comes to getting aSuper 15 contract in New Zealand,No player gets a contract because he has voiced any preference to for the ABs, (Haskill wants to play for England). I think you may have a point about being under pressure, but from a different tangent and thats when these players are in School and age group rep teams, and they go along with their peers towards the ABs.
Generally I think we all should try to improve the playing standard of all teams for the general health and well being of the game (not just Samoa and Tonga).Maybe I do over estimate the progress of Manu samoa if their players do return after representing another nation,but I am convinced that Manu samoa's progress has faltered since the rule change in the early 2000s.

Aukland, I agree with a lot of the points you make there. For me, Samoa are a top 8 team and have been for a while. I know people will say that the IRB rankings do not lie, but the only time they seem to have a lot of time together is a world cup. They pushed Wales and South Africa really close and perhaps could have have won both and beat Australia a while back. For a team not together very often and not fully rested between games that was a real demonsration of how good they are. I honestly believe that they're a better team than Argentina now that they seem a lot more structured in their play and set piece, and I really think that if they were in the 4 nations instead, with the same amount of time together as the other 4 nations teams, that they would do pretty well.

Perhaps it is more Tonga and Fiji that needs the help, but they're not exactly bad teams with Tonga beating France, etc. Fiji have fallen a bit but isn't there civil unrest there after a military coup? That's always going to have a knock on effect on its people and sports.

Griff, Samoa may be a top 8 team if they have good training time together, etc. But that's with quite a few kiwis of Samoan decent in their team. Do you think that any of these players didn't want to be All Blacks first and foremost? How is that any different than if they were actually good enough for the All Blacks? They may well be kiwis first but still have very strong attachments to the Islands. If they can't play for the All Blacks they'll play for their Island. They'd prefer to be able to represent both. I honestly can't see the problem with it (again, as long as it's controlled in some way).

Hammer, I don't mind the idea in principle if it is applied to all, not just the PI teams. My argument is that Samoa seem to be doing OK, so what difference would Mils Muliaina or Keven Mealamu make going back at 35? Would dropping Paul Williams (15) and Mo Schwalger (2) in favour of the two former all blacks suddenly make Samoa a lot stronger? What they need, in my opinion, is a meaningful competition to play in so that they get regular high level competition and generate more income, and more time together.

If applied to all then teams that really need it such as Russia etc. could benefit and grow the game. I just don't see that in sport we should have one rule for a few counties and not for others.

It's not just the top All Blacks though. It's all the one or two capped players as well.

I don't think it was ever going to be just the PI teams. I think they were talking about tier 2 sides (although the difficulty comes when you have to define tier 2, as you've pointed out with Samoa).

griff
The problem is that we do already have rules that favour a few countries and not others,
This whole arguement displays the inequality of some countries having two votes in the IRB when others have none and when one of those countries tries to get something, which they believe will improve their performance they are stymied, and then we see the people of Wales , Ireland and Scotland come out and say why should Samoa get preferential treatment.
Hence we have guys like Eli Fuimaono Sapolu running around acting in the manner that he does.

Auckland, I agree that it's ridiculous that some have 2 votes and some have none. A change is needed there, no doubt.

Hammer, if it's the whole of 'tier 2' and below then fine. That's what I thought, but Auklandlaurie seemed to be suggesting that it was the PIs because of the spiritual ties to the homeland that didn't exist or were not as strong in the rest of the world. I could have misunderstood that point though. I've been arguing that all those outside tier 1 could benefit from this, so I guess we're in agreement there. As you mention, there is the difficulty of defining tiers. Are they in line with rankings? What's the whole point of this proposal? If it's to make lower ranked teams stronger then Scotland and Italy would have to be included as they are ranked below Tonga and Samoa respectively. It then gets a bit messy, which is why I suggested one rule for all.

Griff
The remit is being put forward by the NZRFU on behalf of Manu Samoa,noone else,If the IRB argued the matter then details of how such an amendment can be aplied,then that is the time for that to occur.

Ok, cheers Aukland. Wasn't sure of that.

Suspended for 3 weeks by RFU.

Does this mean his IRB 'suspended' sentence comes into play ?

PenfroPete wrote:Does this mean his IRB 'suspended' sentence comes into play ?

Quite possibly. I believe the IRB are meeting on the 20th to discuss, but it sounds pretty clear cut that this will lead to the 6 month ban. Which is absolutely absurd!

EFS has chosen some pretty poor analogies but the points he has made are very valid. If you're going to have a competition to find the best in the World then at least treat each team the same, rather than stack the odds heavily towards the favourites. He went too far with his criticism of Owens, but why was he in charge when Wales had a direct interest in the result? I'm a sure that Owens wasn't bias in the slightest, but it was incredibly niave of the IRB to allow such criticism.

I am firmly of the belief EFS deserves a ban for his poor choice of words, but this will end up being a 26 week ban. If you put this into perspective is it any worse than the following: Burger 8 weeks, Parisse 8 weeks, Quinlan 12 weeks or Ghiraldini 15 weeks. I defy anyone to suggest EFS has committed a crime that is 3 times as bad as Burger's!