Question about the Lions.

Myself and Aslongas were chatting about the lions the other day and a serious question came up. As we all know The Lions is a team that represents England Ireland Scotland and Wales but is there anything that says you have to have played for one of these countrys??


Example, if Isa Nacewa has an Irish passport through residenency/marriage, even though he ineligible to actually play for Ireland he is still however an Irish Citizen, could he play for the Lions??


Opinions appreciated

You have to be qualified for the home nations.

But you don't have to be capped.

Nacewa is not eleigible for one of the home unions therefore couldn't play.

He peed on his chips by playing for Fiji. But that's where he's from so I'm glad he played for them.

That's an interesting question Hughie me auld mate and one that I do not know a definitive answer to.

I may be wrong, but Lions caps are officially recognised by the IRB in terms of players capped international appearances, therefore, I suspect that for Lions test matches that the same eligibilty rules would apply as they do for other international matches, therefore rendering somebody like Nacewa ineligible.

The midweek games against club sides do not fall under the same criteria as far as I am aware, so theoretically he could be picked to play for Lions in one of those, however this may be considered by some as against the ethos of the Lions.

Ozzy3213 wrote:

The midweek games against club sides do not fall under the same criteria as far as I am aware, so theoretically he could be picked to play for Lions in one of those, however this may be considered by some as against the ethos of the Lions.

And a complete waste of a squad place

Interesting in that Nacewa is not eligible for the Lions as he has been capped by Fiji.

However, what would happen in the 'reverse; situation - a player is capped by the Lions before he plays for his country (EG - Derek Quinnell) , then he moves to Italy before being capped by his country / discovers an Italian grandparent ....etc. Would be allowed to play for Italy if selected ?

I reckon he'd be allowed to play Penfro. Not sure though.

Chunky Norwich wrote:Nacewa is not eleigible for one of the home unions therefore couldn't play.

He peed on his chips by playing for Fiji. But that's where he's from so I'm glad he played for them.

Actually he's from Auckland. Which is why he was so gutted when he discovered his 2 minutes for Fiji barred him from AB's selection (I understand he was told otherwise when he agreed to play in 2003).

Shame. But it's not like they need him. If he felt he was from New Zealand there is no way he should have even contemplated playing for Fiji.

It is an interesting question as Leinster hooker Richardt Strauss (sp?) has not been capped as far as I know (watch someone prove me wrong) and will have been in Ireland for the required 3 years by the time of the Lions tour. A suprise selection?

formerly known as Sam wrote:It is an interesting question as Leinster hooker Richardt Strauss (sp?) has not been capped as far as I know (watch someone prove me wrong) and will have been in Ireland for the required 3 years by the time of the Lions tour. A suprise selection?

What's his scrummaging like?

People will be suggesting Thomas Waldrom next.

You could add Paul Warwick, he has Irish citizenship and an Irish passport, but doesn't qualify for Ireland as played rugby sevens for Aus

(ps I don't believe 7's should count as stopping you, if he played international RL for Aus instead of 7's he could have played for Ireland)

I think they have to be be able to turn out for one of the Unions to play for the Lions.

In League, if you play State of Origin you had to commit to the Kangaroos. Hence why Brad Thorn played for Australia but then played for the ABs to realise his childhood dream.

I reckon with the Lions, you should then have to commit to the country which enabled you to get the Lions call-up. That said, when the 3N teams play the Lions, does it count as a cap for them and does it count as a cap for the Lions players? I don´t think it does for either in which case you could argue the player should be free to choose wherever. That said, if a player is good enough to get selected for the Lions, you´d think it´s the responsibility of the relevant Home Nation union to keep hold of his services.

So technically you could say the Lions is a representative team of the unions and not actually the countrys.

Whatever they are, I really like the Lion tours. Such a special thing that rugby needs to keep hold of. I sensed the SA tour did a lot to restoring faith in the concept after the disappointment of 2005. Imagine what a series win would do then in Australia.

It´s a shame there isn´t a Celtic equivalent of France, Ireland, Scotland and Wales as well. It´d change the dynamic of the team even though you could still pick a monster pack.

Why not just disband the Lions if we can posit a team that would not necessarily have an English, Scottish, Welsh or Irish player in the squad?

If the British and Irish Lions mean anything let's run with what it means or just drop it. We have enough Barbarian teams running around the planet as it is.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:In League, if you play State of Origin you had to commit to the Kangaroos. Hence why Brad Thorn played for Australia but then played for the ABs to realise his childhood dream.

I reckon with the Lions, you should then have to commit to the country which enabled you to get the Lions call-up. That said, when the 3N teams play the Lions, does it count as a cap for them and does it count as a cap for the Lions players? I don´t think it does for either in which case you could argue the player should be free to choose wherever. That said, if a player is good enough to get selected for the Lions, you´d think it´s the responsibility of the relevant Home Nation union to keep hold of his services.

Didn't Karmichael Hunt do the same? i.e - declare for Australia? quite a few have doenm it - shows how big Origin is.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:In League, if you play State of Origin you had to commit to the Kangaroos. Hence why Brad Thorn played for Australia but then played for the ABs to realise his childhood dream.

I reckon with the Lions, you should then have to commit to the country which enabled you to get the Lions call-up. That said, when the 3N teams play the Lions, does it count as a cap for them and does it count as a cap for the Lions players? I don´t think it does for either in which case you could argue the player should be free to choose wherever. That said, if a player is good enough to get selected for the Lions, you´d think it´s the responsibility of the relevant Home Nation union to keep hold of his services.

It does count as an international cap for both the Lions and the opposition.

Kingshu wrote:

(ps I don't believe 7's should count as stopping you, if he played international RL for Aus instead of 7's he could have played for Ireland)

.

Isn't it the team that is second in line hierarchically to the national team? Therefore I'm guessing Australia had no A side, at the time Warwick played 7s.

The Wales 7s players will all be able to play for Wales only at the moment I think.

Cheers Ozzy. Then if it does count as a cap to your own home union then there´s no debate.

As for State of Origin, there have been quite a few Chunky Norwich. Seems a cunning way by the Aussies to mop up some Kiwi talent but then again can´t blame the players for wanting to experience it. Love Origin footy.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:
As for State of Origin, there have been quite a few Chunky Norwich. Seems a cunning way by the Aussies to mop up some Kiwi talent but then again can´t blame the players for wanting to experience it. Love Origin footy.

It's not the Aussies fault if Kiwis turn their abck on their own country.

State of Origin is the 2nd best sporting contest in the world in my opinion.

Yeah but you want to experience the most intense thing in the sport. The World Cup is fine but nothing compares to the intensity of origin footy in league.

But like you say, you´re turning your back on your country so it´s a huge decision. At least Graham Lowe was allowed to still coach NZ when he coached Queensland!

People will be suggesting Thomas Waldrom next..

Flutey played against the Lions for the NZ Maori in 2005 and then for the Lions against South Africa in 2009.

If I had my way no residency qualified player who came to the UK or Ireland as a senior player should be eligible for Lions selection.
If they came here at a young age and went through the youth system then that's another story.

Tom Richards has played for Australia and the lions. Read this article recently, might interest.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1205/1224308581513.html

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Whatever they are, I really like the Lion tours. Such a special thing that rugby needs to keep hold of. I sensed the SA tour did a lot to restoring faith in the concept after the disappointment of 2005. Imagine what a series win would do then in Australia.

It´s a shame there isn´t a Celtic equivalent of France, Ireland, Scotland and Wales as well. It´d change the dynamic of the team even though you could still pick a monster pack.

The Lions concept is a dinosaur that should have been made extinct long before now. It harms rugby in the home nations to such an extent surely none of them let alone France would ever consider creating a Celtic version!

The truth is that if such a pack of animals existed in the Southern hemisphere they would perform a lot worse than their individual component teams and end up just as crocked. How are players and punters so brainwashed by the marketeers to think these quadrennial contests are in any way fair?

Why does it harm rugby in the home nations?

I rarely use the word stupid on this forum but I find it really stupid that people think a popular rugby tournament is a bad thing. I don't see the logic whatsoever.

It is simply in the eye of the beholder. If the Lions didn't exist we'd just have people bleating about the lack of variation in the international game.

Punters like the Lions
Players like the Lions
Television likes the Lions
Rugby likes the Lions

The only critics are people who over analyse and blame the Lions when their teams lose a few games.

I love the lions. Hope it continues even if it may be a little outdated.

If you could argue one traditional game is losing its shine, by all means take the Barbarians as an example but not the Lions.

Now the Barbarians seems to be played by people who can get the time off (like this year which meant a SH dominated team). Club rugby gets in the way of Barbarians duty which means home stars are overlooked to play the touring side.

No one denies the enormity of what the Lions face playing against a team that already has gelled combinations. But that doesn´t mean they can´t compete.

As for a four year tournament with players from SA, Australia, NZ picked to play one nation from the Home Nations, I´m not sure how that´d ruin the players. Too many games, risk of injury? That is always a risk in the modern era but players can be rested from Autumn Internationals from their respective countries as compensation. I don´t see the Lions as this oppressive tour bringing the Home Nations down. Indeed, in an era where there are not so many traditional series (2 next year at least which is good), I think the experience the Lions players get from touring those countries is an invaluable one.

The Lions tour definitely effects the players the next season. How could it not? They play such a long season and get such a short break. Quite a few of the Irish contingent on the last one weren't quite on top form the next year and our injury rate seemed to be higher too.

Some people don't like their best players being worn out by the length of the tour and think it's to much for the players in the pro era with its higher attrition. There's nothing stupid about that stag. But you could say the same about the RWC I guess.

But you're right, the players like it and the fans like it and most importantly now it's very lucrative so it's not going anywhere. I personally wouldn't mind if they stopped it to be honest. I'd be just as happy to watch Ireland go on tour.

Of course it effects the players the next season. Look how many times France have won the 6nations the season after a Lions Tour.

But for me, it's the last little reminder (now the barbarians are a farce) of the good old amateur days, and what rugby really symbolises in these shores. The greatets sporting contest on earth.

Chunky Norwich wrote:Of course it effects the players the next season. Look how many times France have won the 6nations the season after a Lions Tour.

But for me, it's the last little reminder (now the barbarians are a farce) of the good old amateur days, and what rugby really symbolises in these shores. The greatets sporting contest on earth.

Barbarians have always has ups and downs. High profile squads and low profile squads. They beat NZ only a couple of years ago in a cracker. How fickle fans can be sometimes.

Who cares if Lions players are tired after the tour. It's once every four years and therefore not really a threat to international rugby. The real threat is club rugby and the emergence of the Heineken cup as the premier rugby tournament in the world.

Lions and Baa Baa's should be taken outside and put out of their misery.

No place for either of these in the modern game as proven recently in that joke of a Baa Baa's game.

Disband them now!

leinsterbaby wrote:Tom Richards has played for Australia and the lions. Read this article recently, might interest.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1205/1224308581513.html

Really good article thanks, I have been a fan of the Pyrenees too. Wonderful part of the world.

Interesting scenario that saw Richards become a Lion, more circumstance than pomp.

I do disagree with players not born in the British Isles representing them. Certainly players that have played against the Lions should bot be selected to represent them, that was an appalling decision. Though it seems proven that players who have spent the majority of their life dreaming of playing for a nation not of their birth, qualifying through that countries youth scheme, and eventually being capped for that country, make far better internationals than those who qualify after having played Rugby, Union or League, for enough years to qualify on the IRBs foolish residency Laws.

Players like Manu Tuilagi, Toby Faletau are definitely proving to be far more useful than players like Shontayne Hape or Lesley Vainakolo

formerly known as Sam wrote:

People will be suggesting Thomas Waldrom next..

Flutey played against the Lions for the NZ Maori in 2005 and then for the Lions against South Africa in 2009.

No he didn't

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/jun/13/lions2005.rugbyunion2

It was Wellington he played for against the Lions

HammerofThunor wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

People will be suggesting Thomas Waldrom next..

Flutey played against the Lions for the NZ Maori in 2005 and then for the Lions against South Africa in 2009.

No he didn't

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/jun/13/lions2005.rugbyunion2

It was Wellington he played for against the Lions

Correct. He played for the Wellington Lions against the B&I Lions

It was a decision that really annoyed a lot of people. I hope that it doesn't happen again. Though as i mentioned earlier, I think we all noticed the difference between players who qualify on short term residency and players who have grown up in a country and feel part of it even if they and there parents were not born there. Those short term Residency qualified players are not good enough to get in to a Lions team at the moment.

maestegmafia wrote:

leinsterbaby wrote:Tom Richards has played for Australia and the lions. Read this article recently, might interest.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1205/1224308581513.html

Really good article thanks, I have been a fan of the Pyrenees too. Wonderful part of the world.

Interesting scenario that saw Richards become a Lion, more circumstance than pomp.

I do disagree with players not born in the British Isles representing them. Certainly players that have played against the Lions should bot be selected to represent them, that was an appalling decision. Though it seems proven that players who have spent the majority of their life dreaming of playing for a nation not of their birth, qualifying through that countries youth scheme, and eventually being capped for that country, make far better internationals than those who qualify after having played Rugby, Union or League, for enough years to qualify on the IRBs foolish residency Laws.

Players like Manu Tuilagi, Toby Faletau are definitely proving to be far more useful than players like Shontayne Hape or Lesley Vainakolo

I love the Pyrenees too. Enjoyed that story myself a lot. Flutey playing for the lions was a discrace. I don't mind players being born outside b and I as long as they learned their trade there.