Changes to provincial teams player qualifications

First topic message reminder :

http://www.irishrugby.ie/news/25137.php

In short here's the juicy bits:

- One non-Irish eligible (NIE) player only in each of the 15 field positions across the provinces of Leinster, Munster and Ulster e.g. one foreign player allowed across all three teams per position.*
- For the 2013/14 season and onwards, for any given position involving a contracted NIE player, a province will not be permitted to renew that NIE player contract or bring in a new NIE player into that same position in its squad.
- All future provincial injury replacement players must be eligible for selection for Ireland.
- All future provincial non-Irish eligible player contracts will be position specific.

* The Connacht professional side is external to this process as it has recently commenced a new programme of structural and performance development agreed with the IRFU.

Ok, to be honest I had to read that a few times before I could even understand it. And now that I've read it I'm asking myself if I really do understand it.

From what I can make out:

Point 1 states that if, for example, Ulster have an NIE scrum half, then Munster and Leinster must have IE scrum halves. Not just in the team, but the entire squad.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Is that what point 1 is saying? I'm having trouble reading it any other way. So on the plus side we will no longer have the situation where every prop on the island is NIE. Ok, that's good, I guess. Now... who gets to decide who is giving up their props? Who gets to keep the NIE one?

Point 2 states that once an NIE players contract is up, they're gone. And the next player in must be IE

Goodbye Douggie Howlett, nice to have known ya, now get lost. No new contracts.

Very stupid decision. Teams will either offer ludicrously long contracts to keep the likes of Howlett and Nacewa, or they'll offer normal contracts and either break the bank to get marquee players, or they'll make offers and get snubbed. In the end this policy is an incentive to go for uncapped foreign players who will become IE after 3 years, so if you offer them a 3 year contract as an NIE, as soon as their contract expires they are IE and can renew. This is strengthening the 'project player' approach, I don't like that. Fans love Nacewa, Pienaar and Howlett and the IRFU are biting off their nose to spite their face.

The IRFU seem to think all you ever need is an internationally capped NIE for a short contract and that's enough, the young lads will come through almost immediately after. Let's call this The Rocky Elsom effect. It comes with absolutely no guarantees.

Again with point 4, if contracts are given out on a position specific basis, who gets to decide which of two provinces, both in search of a centre, say, get to sign one once an agreement is made.

I find this who announcement badly thought out. The Rock effect was so positive the IRFU seem to be getting a bit too sure of themselves. Yes the point of the provinces is to feed the international team, but the provinces have been much more successful than the national team recently and this plan could put that in jeopardy.

Sin é wrote:
Buckley wasn't really in the frame when he left - Ross's problem was John Hayes, the starting Irish prop and of course back in those days, it was 22 man squads so the bench option had to be able to play both sides.

Thats exactly my point so how would these changes have helped Ross?

red_stag wrote:Brennomac, I agree its completely illegal but the IRFU are adamant that it is NIQ not non EU citizens.

We'll find out just how legal it is when the first NIE player is told that they can't have a contract renewell or extension on the basis of their Nationality.

Sin é wrote:
No - the pack were all Irish - most of that pack were the starting players for the GS win the following year. The two Irish qualified props (Hayes & Horan) that played in both games played every minute of every game for the GS win the following season.

OK so Munsters proud all Irish side weren't actually all Irish at all then? But thats ok because they had two Irish props unlike Leinster who are reliant on foreign imports but also have two Irish props?

Did I miss anything?

roddersm wrote:

red_stag wrote:Brennomac, I agree its completely illegal but the IRFU are adamant that it is NIQ not non EU citizens.

We'll find out just how legal it is when the first NIE player is told that they can't have a contract renewell or extension on the basis of their Nationality.

Thats a fair point, the Provinces won't challange the IRFU, or bite the hand that feeds them, but an unhappy player might.

We'll definitely have another Bosman style ruling. Of that I'm certain.

But I am not convinced a contract renewal could form the basis of a challange.

e.g. Pienaer signed a contract for two years which is up this summer.
If IRFU/Ulster say we are not renewing - he hasn't got a legal leg to stand on. His contract is for a finite period, once that period is over the employee is under no obligation to renew

Kingshu/ Geoff I'm not legal expert but I'd imagine that if a player can prove conclusively that they are being denied a contract extension or being treated differently based solely on their nationality then surely they have grounds to challenge it legally.

I am also no legal expert but I don't see how that can stick.

You are signed on a contract with a pre agreed completion date there is absolutely no obligation to extend it. You as the the employee have agreed to when the contract expires.

Other wise contract law is meaningless.
I do speak as someone who has work for myself and had contractural employment agreements with big organizations both in the UK and in Ireland.

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:
No - the pack were all Irish - most of that pack were the starting players for the GS win the following year. The two Irish qualified props (Hayes & Horan) that played in both games played every minute of every game for the GS win the following season.

OK so Munsters proud all Irish side weren't actually all Irish at all then? But thats ok because they had two Irish props unlike Leinster who are reliant on foreign imports but also have two Irish props?

Did I miss anything?

You missed just about everything. I'll write slowly for you


1. Quinlan writes article in Irish Times and mentions what a great influence John Langford was. Since Langford left, Munster had a couple of foreign signing in the pack like Jim Williams who was also very influential.
2. A couple of years after Langford has left and Williams retired - Munster field a Pack (1-8) of local lads who defeat the team that is one of the biggest spending teams in Europe in a European final (Toulouse try to have 1/3 of their team locals).
3. Alan Quinlan says its something they are proud of doing (and I'm sure the IRFU like what they did).

All I can hear is that the provinces won't be able to compete in Europe without the help of foreigners.
If the players think like that, it doesn't bode well for the national team.

Some of you have a shocking inferiority complex. We need foreign props, we need foreign coaches, we need foreign fullbacks, etc. etc. to compete.

Was it an 8 on 8 game Sin? Or were Howlett, Tipoki and Mafi not playing in that game either?

It's great for a pack of all Irish players to beat Toulouse, but they didn't do it on their own. Leinster had 2 foreign players in the back that beat Northampton, but only 1 foreign back, is that any worse?

Unfortunately Sin, I feel you would be singing a different song if Munster lost Botha and Du Preez. The pack you played against Ulster was absolutely shocking. Munster won't win anything if they played that pack, I guarantee it. If anything a foreign signing often helps add stability and confidence to a team, and to the younger players. Losing them will only cause panic if players such as Archer etc do not quickly improve. Just because there are no players in front of them "blocking their progress" doesn't mean they will instantly become better players. They could always be distinctively average or rubbish.

I don't think there'll be legal problems. The IRFU aren't under any legal obligation to offer contracts to EU players, or to extend contracts that have run their course.

The Bosman ruling was a result of a Belgian team refusing to "sell" a player (called Jean-Marc Bosman) after his contract had expired. Which seems bizarre and obviously illegal. The ruling meant that a player could leave on a free transfer to any team at the end of his contract.

The case also banned restrictions on players from other EU countries. Obviously the privately owned football clubs bought up as many foreigners as they wanted.

But the law does not legally obligate the IRFU to give contracts to non-Irish EU citizens if they don't want to, surely?

I could be wrong but that's my understanding of the legal situation.

Sin é wrote:

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:
No - the pack were all Irish - most of that pack were the starting players for the GS win the following year. The two Irish qualified props (Hayes & Horan) that played in both games played every minute of every game for the GS win the following season.

OK so Munsters proud all Irish side weren't actually all Irish at all then? But thats ok because they had two Irish props unlike Leinster who are reliant on foreign imports but also have two Irish props?

Did I miss anything?

You missed just about everything. I'll write slowly for you


1. Quinlan writes article in Irish Times and mentions what a great influence John Langford was. Since Langford left, Munster had a couple of foreign signing in the pack like Jim Williams who was also very influential.
2. A couple of years after Langford has left and Williams retired - Munster field a Pack (1-8) of local lads who defeat the team that is one of the biggest spending teams in Europe in a European final (Toulouse try to have 1/3 of their team locals).
3. Alan Quinlan says its something they are proud of doing (and I'm sure the IRFU like what they did).

All I can hear is that the provinces won't be able to compete in Europe without the help of foreigners.
If the players think like that, it doesn't bode well for the national team.

Some of you have a shocking inferiority complex. We need foreign props, we need foreign coaches, we need foreign fullbacks, etc. etc. to compete.

Really surprised how much I agree with you today.

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Unfortunately Sin, I feel you would be singing a different song if Munster lost Botha and Du Preez. The pack you played against Ulster was absolutely shocking. Munster won't win anything if they played that pack, I guarantee it. If anything a foreign signing often helps add stability and confidence to a team, and to the younger players. Losing them will only cause panic if players such as Archer etc do not quickly improve. Just because there are no players in front of them "blocking their progress" doesn't mean they will instantly become better players. They could always be distinctively average or rubbish.

They will have a better chance of being better though. In any case foreign players will still be allowed. They will just be chosen more selectively.

Feckless Rogue wrote:I don't think there'll be legal problems. The IRFU aren't under any legal obligation to offer contracts to EU players, or to extend contracts that have run their course.

The Bosman ruling was a result of a Belgian team refusing to "sell" a player (called Jean-Marc Bosman) after his contract had expired. Which seems bizarre and obviously illegal. The ruling meant that a player could leave on a free transfer to any team at the end of his contract.

The case also banned restrictions on players from other EU countries. Obviously the privately owned football clubs bought up as many foreigners as they wanted.

But the law does not legally obligate the IRFU to give contracts to non-Irish EU citizens if they don't want to, surely?

I could be wrong but that's my understanding of the legal situation.

Feckless, I think you're wrong on that - I'm not a lawyer but mu understanding is that if any organisation or employer deliberately discriminates against an EU citizen because he's not from the employer's country in terms of access to employment then it's in breach of EU law and freedom of movement etc. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think so.

Alright you nutty Irish blokes, break it up.....

If you lads don't behave I will have to alter the direction of this topic into a discussion about the merits of Grand Slams and a 4th place World Cup spot, over a few Heinaken Cup wins, that normally gets you Irish boys all on the same page and pulling in the same direction.

*In this case Eastwards as your lobbing potatoes across the Irish sea at Wales.

Well technically speaking Wales would be South East for some of us...

brennomac wrote:Feckless, I think you're wrong on that - I'm not a lawyer but mu understanding is that if any organisation or employer deliberately discriminates against an EU citizen because he's not from the employer's country in terms of access to employment then it's in breach of EU law and freedom of movement etc. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think so.

Maybe you're right. I thought the restrictions in football were applied by UEFA or FIFA or whatever and they were rules which were preventing private businesses (football clubs) from hiring non-EU workers. This was illegal. But IRFU owns the provinces doesn't it? It can give or not give contracts in whatever way it wants. ie it's an organization that's imposing laws on itself, not anyone else. That would be my guess as to why it's legal. Although I'm not a lawyer either an have no idea really. I'm just going on the presumption that the IRFU wouldn't do something like this if it was blatantly illegal?

AlynDavies wrote:Alright you nutty Irish blokes, break it up.....

If you lads don't behave I will have to alter the direction of this topic into a discussion about the merits of Grand Slams and a 4th place World Cup spot, over a few Heinaken Cup wins, that normally gets you Irish boys all on the same page and pulling in the same direction.

*In this case Eastwards as your lobbing potatoes across the Irish sea at Wales.

Never interrupt a bunch of Irishmen when they are discussing legalese, Alyn!

We love all that guff: "Well technically I did say you were a lying, cheating piece of scum but on another technicality, I did say it whilst disgracefully inebriated and so was heretowiththerefore temporarily insane and entirely innocent of the affront, you dirty dog!"

AlynDavies wrote:Alright you nutty Irish blokes, break it up.....

If you lads don't behave I will have to alter the direction of this topic into a discussion about the merits of Grand Slams and a 4th place World Cup spot, over a few Heinaken Cup wins, that normally gets you Irish boys all on the same page and pulling in the same direction.

*In this case Eastwards as your lobbing potatoes across the Irish sea at Wales.

This is a fair point. Though I spose these days for some people Provincial rugby is more important than seeing the national team do well. Not for me though.

leinsterbaby wrote:I spose these days for some people Provincial rugby is more important than seeing the national team do well. Not for me though.

I'm greedy. I want both - equally.

brennomac wrote:

Feckless Rogue wrote:I don't think there'll be legal problems. The IRFU aren't under any legal obligation to offer contracts to EU players, or to extend contracts that have run their course.

The Bosman ruling was a result of a Belgian team refusing to "sell" a player (called Jean-Marc Bosman) after his contract had expired. Which seems bizarre and obviously illegal. The ruling meant that a player could leave on a free transfer to any team at the end of his contract.

The case also banned restrictions on players from other EU countries. Obviously the privately owned football clubs bought up as many foreigners as they wanted.

But the law does not legally obligate the IRFU to give contracts to non-Irish EU citizens if they don't want to, surely?

I could be wrong but that's my understanding of the legal situation.

Feckless, I think you're wrong on that - I'm not a lawyer but mu understanding is that if any organisation or employer deliberately discriminates against an EU citizen because he's not from the employer's country in terms of access to employment then it's in breach of EU law and freedom of movement etc. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think so.

2 points

1 - nearly every NIE players is not from the EU so that point doesn't apply.

2 - When a contract ends the 2 parties have parted company there is nothing to be broken the arrangement is over. You as the player agreed to a date when the contract was null and void. Basically I thiink you are wrong.

The logic of your arguement is Ulster have to give Danielli a contract extension this year. Sorry thats nonsense

leinsterbaby wrote:

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Unfortunately Sin, I feel you would be singing a different song if Munster lost Botha and Du Preez. The pack you played against Ulster was absolutely shocking. Munster won't win anything if they played that pack, I guarantee it. If anything a foreign signing often helps add stability and confidence to a team, and to the younger players. Losing them will only cause panic if players such as Archer etc do not quickly improve. Just because there are no players in front of them "blocking their progress" doesn't mean they will instantly become better players. They could always be distinctively average or rubbish.

They will have a better chance of being better though. In any case foreign players will still be allowed. They will just be chosen more selectively.

Yes they will but Munster will not be allowed a TH for 2013-14 as Afoa already has a contract with Ulster for that year.
No 3 is already taken as is 5 (Sykes) and 15 (Payne)

We will have a more mature Stephen Archer and <sigh> Peter Borlase.

I think we can reknew Wian du Preez contract before then though,

Mickado wrote:Was it an 8 on 8 game Sin? Or were Howlett, Tipoki and Mafi not playing in that game either?

It's great for a pack of all Irish players to beat Toulouse, but they didn't do it on their own. Leinster had 2 foreign players in the back that beat Northampton, but only 1 foreign back, is that any worse?

Quinlan was specifically referring to that game because of Toulouse's reputation. 14 of the 15 starters in the '06 final against Biarritz were Irish qualified. John Kelly played beside Trevor Halstead (only non-Irish qualified player) in the centre. Howlett took over from Anthony Horgan .

I don't think Northampton are in Toulouse's league - they would be in Biarritz.

Surely you must recall how the Toulouse scrum killed Leinster's scrum in the semi down there in '10?

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Unfortunately Sin, I feel you would be singing a different song if Munster lost Botha and Du Preez. The pack you played against Ulster was absolutely shocking. Munster won't win anything if they played that pack, I guarantee it. If anything a foreign signing often helps add stability and confidence to a team, and to the younger players. Losing them will only cause panic if players such as Archer etc do not quickly improve. Just because there are no players in front of them "blocking their progress" doesn't mean they will instantly become better players. They could always be distinctively average or rubbish.

No I would not be. I'm really glad that Munster have Botha, but I'm also very happy we only have him for 2 years. That means that minds will be focussed on Archer getting experience. I'm sure the game last week was a valuable experience for Archer and he will be all the better for it in two years time.

Young players will grow up. You don't want them getting too dependent on a bit of magic from a foreign player to pull them through. The get two years beside an experienced player to sink or swim. Thats plenty of time.

roddersm wrote:Well technically speaking Wales would be South East for some of us...

Feel free to hit England too!
2 birds, one potato and all that!

Sin e, I think that everyone agrees with your sentiments there. We all agree with the long term principle in this. It's the actual details of some of the specific rules we're finding trouble with. In fact, Quinlan himself expressed concerns with the rule on renewing contracts and the possible negative consequences.

I have a problem with an experienced rugby man like McGahan or Schmidt having to call a an old fart in a blazer and ask permission to play a player in a certain position. I think everyone can agree that McGahan and Schmidt are better qualified to make this rugby decision than an administrator. Some players can play in a variety of positions and are needed in different places depending on the situation. These rules don't really accept that reality.

On the other hand the rule forbidding a province from signing a foreign player as an injury replacement is one most would agree with. Injured player? Tough break. You'd better use those academy players you've been working on.

roddersm wrote:

Sin é wrote:
That gives the national side great confidence that they can also compete with the best as well.

There in lies the problem. Kidney's mentality and the old Irish and Munster one was about competing with and even beating the best.

The current mentality that we are seeing in the young players, most markedly in Leinster, is not that we should be beating the best...but that we are the best, at least within Europe anyway.

With the crop of players we have we should not be going into games with an underdog mindset and trying to shut down other sides but with the mindset Leinster have which is that other sides should be trying to stop us.

Nail on the head. The team/squad are out-growing the ability of the coaches to improve them. It kills me to see them waste all that talent with negative game plans. The Irish sporting pysche needs a mental shift. And not just in rugby. Expect to win. Not give it a lash and see what happens

The games with the foreigners in them put on Sky..the games with the home growns put on terrestrial ...that should solve the whole thing. Thinking outside the box always works. I'll write to the IRFU and throw that idea at them

Irish newspapers are the worst. 10 pages of English soccer and 1 page of Irish rugby. Says it all.

Give the punters what they want I spose. The gobshites.

Feckless Rogue wrote:On the other hand the rule forbidding a province from signing a foreign player as an injury replacement is one most would agree with. Injured player? Tough break. You'd better use those academy players you've been working on.

Don't agree with this rule at all. Surely the whole point of a squad is that there is adequate injury cover, but this rule isn't about injury cover it's about finding a temporary replacement for a longer term absentee. Some young player's may be ready for carefully chosen gametime but not for prolonged week on week endurance for several months. Recently Ulster were in the position of having a young prop on the bench but didn't think it right to bring him on for ten minutes card cover and chose instead to bring on a hooker as prop - just the thing to boost a young player's confidence.

Last season both Ulster and Leinster had major injury problems at tighthead and the IRFU refused to allow any NIQ players to be signed temporarily. This resulted in Jerry Cronin and Simon Shawe getting provincial time. Without being derogatory to either it is asking too much for these guys to step up immediately from AIL level (not even top AIL). Simply elevating stop gaps is unlikely to unearth future talent but it will hamper a province immediately and maybe have the added detriment of a loyalty contract to stymie the real prospects in the future. So did this dry run add to Ireland's prospects at TH significantly? Not one iota.

Quinlan thinks that the rules will be modified/clarified soon. However he did say there was a level of hysteria over the rules that was over the top. There has been a growing over reliance on foreign players in specific positions and this will concentrate the minds specifically of coaches that seem to forget that at the end of the day they are employees of the irfu and that their primary role is to bring players through for the development of the Irish team.

That will affect teams for sure but the base is there, the academies are getting the support they need. If coaches are here for reasons other than the role outlined then they should stick to the top14 or premiership. If certain coaches were in Aus or NZ they would have similar if not harsher constraints.

Sin é wrote:Some of you have a shocking inferiority complex. We need foreign props, we need foreign coaches, we need foreign fullbacks, etc. etc. to compete.

I don't believe we would... if it wasn't for the fact that the big English and French clubs will go after those players and get them. So they have the cream of their homegrown talent AND the best of the rest. So yes, we do need the NIE players to keep up with them. Not all through the team, but a select few in certain positions.

Thats why we have the allowances to bring them in. I think there has been an overreaction but some of these rules do need to be softened.

Totally agree Decco. It has to be the way forward long-term. We'd moan if they didn't plan way ahead. It will be tweaked and eased-in, is my bet.
They must have been ready for some strong reactions in the Provinces. Then, after laying down the law, they will give temp concessions. Smart.

But, they could have done without behaving like the Old IRFU, in bringing the Directive to the table, with no provincial consultation. That brings back nightmares for me.

Also, Quinlan is really making a name for himself as sports-writer and a commentator. Really refreshing views, reading of the game and with minimum bias.

More.

Yeah Gibson, Quinlan is a breath of fresh air. Am not surprised at the lack of bias as he says it like it is.

One thing a lot of guys are missing is that we do need foreign coaches and foreign perspectives. We can't recruit Irish guys who know what it is to play in an RWC final or even semi final because they don't exist. The experience these foreign guys bring is invaluable. Our two top coaches in the Irish set up are an Australian and a Saffer. a big problem at ulster is the insular nature of the coaching. Very few if any have experience of rugby outside ulster and it shows.

I'm all for lowering the number of NIQ s and even protecting certain positions (much as they already do) but not being able to renew is farcical.

Standulstermen wrote:One thing a lot of guys are missing is that we do need foreign coaches and foreign perspectives. We can't recruit Irish guys who know what it is to play in an RWC final or even semi final because they don't exist. The experience these foreign guys bring is invaluable. Our two top coaches in the Irish set up are an Australian and a Saffer. a big problem at ulster is the insular nature of the coaching. Very few if any have experience of rugby outside ulster and it shows.

I'm all for lowering the number of NIQ s and even protecting certain positions (much as they already do) but not being able to renew is farcical.

+1 on all counts

geoff998rugby wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:One thing a lot of guys are missing is that we do need foreign coaches and foreign perspectives. We can't recruit Irish guys who know what it is to play in an RWC final or even semi final because they don't exist. The experience these foreign guys bring is invaluable. Our two top coaches in the Irish set up are an Australian and a Saffer. a big problem at ulster is the insular nature of the coaching. Very few if any have experience of rugby outside ulster and it shows.

I'm all for lowering the number of NIQ s and even protecting certain positions (much as they already do) but not being able to renew is farcical.

+1 on all counts

+ 1 from me too.

Stand. No disagreement on what you say. Quinlan thinks the re-sign issue is the major problem with the new rules and hopefully that will change.

Other than that the rules are a good thing going forward. Interesting what you say about Ulster.

Interesting comments from Elwood in the IT this morning. Although the changes don't affect Connacht directly there is a worry that Ulster, Munster and Leinster will be less likely to let Irish players go to Connaght.

Connacht's current position is that they are allowed 4 NIE players plus additional project players were required.

He seems to be indicating too that the other provinces are fighting these changes and it may not yet be a done deal.

Yeah that's true about Connacht. They'll be less likely to get Irish players from the other provinces. And Ulster really do struggle to get Irish players from any of the other provinces so it's going to effect them more than Munster or Leinster.

It would have just made far more sense to just reduce the number of NIQ's by 1 next year. Then by 1 again a few years down the line. And by 1 again further down the line. While quietly refusing to permit NIQ signings in certain positions like tighthead.

It's the gritty details of the rules as they stand and the seeming inflexibility that makes me think they just won't work well when they bump into the reality of day to day rugby.

Feckless Rogue wrote:
It would have just made far more sense to just reduce the number of NIQ's by 1 next year. Then by 1 again a few years down the line. And by 1 again further down the line. While quietly refusing to permit NIQ signings in certain positions like tighthead.

Yup. That certainly would have made more sense.

Hi All.

I have been reading this topic and have felt the need to post. I'm an Irish rugby follower, I watch most provincial games and like to see all the provinces doing well just like eveyone else. I attend Irish internationals when possible and have been to a few Leinster HC games.

I have just returned from Australia having spent the last year there and feel the need to post. While I was there I have watched a fair amount of S15 rugby. The topic of NIQ's has made me think about the S15 champions Queensland Reds. Their team for the final was as follows:

1. Ben Daley , 2. Saia Faingaa , 3. Greg Holmes , 4. Rob Simmons , 5. James Horwill (c) , 6. Scott Higginbotham , 7. Beau Robinson , 8. Radike Samo , 9. Will Genia (vc) , 10. Quade Cooper , 11. Digby Ioane , 12. Ben Tapuai , 13. Anthony Faingaa , 14. Rod Davies , 15. Jono Lance

Replacements : 16. James Hanson , 17. Guy Shepherdson , 18. Adam Wallace-Harrison , 19. Jake Schatz , 20. Liam Gill , 21. Ian Prior , 22. Will Chambers

Now I'm not fully sure regarding the nationality of all their players but I'm pretty sure their 1st 15 are all AQ.

Without being too simplistic about the proposals, this team is a template for what the IRFU are hoping to achieve. I don't understand why posters from Ulster are so against the IRFU proposed changes??? They just like all the rest of the provinces, have vast amounts of young talent which need to be trusted and given an opportunity. These proposals will force the provinces hands and I for one think this is a good idea.

Thats my two cents, it's there to be shot down....

Just before I finish could anyone ever picture a S15 side signing a journey-man european player of the calibure of Clint Newland or Stefan Terblanche??

Welcome Nipps!

Good points but I'm not sure why you think it is only the Ulster supporters against the changes?

You've hilighted the Reds as an example of an all AQ side however the Reds are not competing with big spending French sides who have no such quota on players nationality.

If the Irish sides cannot attact the Afoas, Nacewas, Howletts etc. they will simply end up with their rivals.

roddersm wrote: Welcome Nipps!

Good points but I'm not sure why you think it is only the Ulster supporters against the changes?

You've hilighted the Reds as an example of an all AQ side however the Reds are not competing with big spending French sides who have no such quota on players nationality.

If the Irish sides cannot attact the Afoas, Nacewas, Howletts etc. they will simply end up with their rivals.

Thats right Rods, the Reds are not competing against big spending teams. They just have to compete with the really good ones like Carter & Sonny Bill, Nonu etc. when they are in their prime and not when they've headed up to the NH to sort out their pension.

By the way, there is a rumour doing the rounds that Will Chambers is going back to the Reds.

Another thing to note is that the clubs in the S15 are not as rich as some of the HEC clubs. They can't afford to buy a world class player in a position they may be lacking, which many of the french times can do. The S15 does seem to take a lot of pacific islander players as well, who then go on to represent their adopted country. Something that has been discussed here is Ireland possibly doing something similar, taking young players from the likes of NZ and offering them a 3 year contract so they become IQ. That is the same thing as NZ/Australia taking the samoans/fijians/tongans IMO.

Well actually Sin Sonny Bill and Carter have already had stints in Europe with big spending teams.....

How's Howlett and BJ's pensions coming along there by the way? I don't recall you compaining about Howlett's signing or any extensions hes had before?

roddersm wrote:Well actually Sin Sonny Bill and Carter have already had stints in Europe with big spending teams.....

How's Howlett and BJ's pensions coming along there by the way? I don't recall you compaining about Howlett's signing or any extensions hes had before?

Thats the point. We had them for a couple of months (I don't think any Irish province actually came up against them), the Reds have them x 2 every season for 10+ seasons.

Super Rugby also lose a lot to Japan. I think that is the reason that Chambers wasn't given a new contract with the Reds - they couldn't afford to because they had to match another player's offer from Japan (1m dollars per annum).

By the way - talking about money - the Indo says that POC is on 350K per annum x 2 years. Now this will raise a few people's blood pressure, and that DOC is on 300K x 3 years!

Sin é wrote:By the way - talking about money - the Indo says that POC is on 350K per annum x 2 years. Now this will raise a few people's blood pressure, and that DOC is on 300K x 3 years!

DOC must have some agent, thats all I can say...