Scotland put two fingers up at the IRB and Shingler trains with them despite him not being allowed to play for Scotland...!!!

First topic message reminder :

A SRU spokesman has confirmed that Shingler has been participating in training.

"We have made no secret of the fact that Steven Shingler is part of our Six Nations squad and continues to be so," a SRU spokesman told the Scotsman. "The IRB ruled he cannot play or tour for Scotland and we have appealed that decision but what we have done is invite him to our training camp and he has taken up that offer.

"Steven Shingler has been in St Andrews to meet the Scotland squad. As he played on Sunday afternoon he follows the protocol of all players who were in match action which meant he did not train."

http://www.espnscrum.com/six-nations-2012/rugby/story/158141.html

Well Shingler playerd for Irish at the weekend, seems his "training" was nothing more than a token gesture to show that the SRU dont consider the matter dead.

Played well too, until he went off with a shoulder injury. Might have helped his chances of Welsh selection a bit with that performance. Could be a good inside center option.

I can not see the IRB hearing the same case twice and going back on their ruling. It would make a mockery of their first decision.

I feel that Scotland are doing the right thing, until the IRB sort out the rules and make them clear then I don't think the WRU or the IRB have a leg to stand on if this was taken to court.

He never signed anything and it wasn't made clear to him that playing for Wales under 21's was commiting himself to Wales forever because Wales don't have a 'A' team.

Scotland should just play him, whats the worst that can happen?

HERSH wrote:I feel that Scotland are doing the right thing, until the IRB sort out the rules and make them clear then I don't think the WRU or the IRB have a leg to stand on if this was taken to court.

He never signed anything and it wasn't made clear to him that playing for Wales under 21's was commiting himself to Wales forever because Wales don't have a 'A' team.

Scotland should just play him, whats the worst that can happen?

Read an article on the subject before you post.

You haven't got the faintest idea what you are talking about and are just using this subject to write something derrogatory about Wales.

whats the worst that can happen?

They can lose heavily anyway with Shingler having a nightmare game. Then the SRFU can realise that they only wanted him because they thought they couldn't have him. Then the IRB could fine them for playing him, disqualify them from the 6N, the SRFU could then go to court, lose the case at the cost of millions and fall into bankruptcy, Scotland would then re-form an shamateur union, unable to pay players or organise a bun fight, become outcasts from global union, miss the 2015 world cup and remain on the fringes of the global game for two decades?

If Wales have no intention of playing him or including him in the squad why should he not play for Scotland.

If Wales genuinly want him they should have selected him for their training Squad.

This smacks of "if he can't play for us he won't play international rugby".

Politics of the SRU/WRU/IRB aside this is the young lads career we are on about.

Wales might want to see him develop further. He is certainly not going to oust other inside centre options from the welsh squad this year. He might next though.

maestegmafia read what I posted 1st before you post your preconceived thoughts about me.

Wales and the IRB would struggle if this was taken to court, Wales appear to do verbal contracts, not sure if that’s allowed and the IRB rules are as clear as mud.

I'd back Scotland to play the lad, as it seems to be a case of sour grapes more than anything else.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:If Wales have no intention of playing him or including him in the squad why should he not play for Scotland.

If Wales genuinly want him they should have selected him for their training Squad.

This smacks of "if he can't play for us he won't play international rugby".

Politics of the SRU/WRU/IRB aside this is the young lads career we are on about.

Im not sure why the WRU are taking blame for this! They could of packed his bags and bought his flight to Scotland but he still wouldn't be eligible to play for them due to the IRB rulings. The SRU should of checked with the IRB before naming him in the squad and his agent should of offered him a lot more guidance and protection than he seems to of gotten.

Maybe he hasn't got an agent, maybe he trusted the WRU officials to guide him when he was in the junior team.

Maybe the IRB should state that all of the 6 nations teams should have an A side, as this would remove all the confusion.

HERSH wrote:
Maybe he hasn't got an agent, maybe he trusted the WRU officials to guide him when he was in the junior team.

Maybe the IRB should state that all of the 6 nations teams should have an A side, as this would remove all the confusion.

He does have an agent, its Derwyn Jones the former Welsh 2nd row.

Maybe the IRB could suggest teams have an A side but i guess it down to the union if they want one or not.

HERSH wrote:
maestegmafia read what I posted 1st before you post your preconceived thoughts about me.

Wales and the IRB would struggle if this was taken to court, Wales appear to do verbal contracts, not sure if that’s allowed and the IRB rules are as clear as mud.

I'd back Scotland to play the lad, as it seems to be a case of sour grapes more than anything else.

I read what you wrote, re-read it too. Still agree that you have read nothing about the case and are just trying another attempt to have a go at the Welsh Wales, the WRU and anything you can do with Wales, your last post confirms that further.

maestegmafia wrote:

HERSH wrote:I feel that Scotland are doing the right thing, until the IRB sort out the rules and make them clear then I don't think the WRU or the IRB have a leg to stand on if this was taken to court.

He never signed anything and it wasn't made clear to him that playing for Wales under 21's was commiting himself to Wales forever because Wales don't have a 'A' team.

Scotland should just play him, whats the worst that can happen?

Read an article on the subject before you post.

You haven't got the faintest idea what you are talking about and are just using this subject to write something derrogatory about Wales.

maes, of course this numpty has not got the faintest idea as there has not been a Wales U21's team for years!

Just another chance for HERSH to latch on and continue bitching about Wales. It is obvious from his follow up comments that he has not read up or payed attention to the IRB rules.

Scotland are beginning to look really desperate now. A fourth choice Scarlet fly-half that is not even a starter for his new club, then in the space of a week all of a sudden wants to play for Scotland and "feels Scottish" somehow, as it was put? The IRB ruling is crystal clear. SRU need to move on.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:If Wales have no intention of playing him or including him in the squad why should he not play for Scotland.

If Wales genuinly want him they should have selected him for their training Squad.

This smacks of "if he can't play for us he won't play international rugby".

Politics of the SRU/WRU/IRB aside this is the young lads career we are on about.

Shingler has not done himself any favours, poor lad. It makes you wonder how much of a part that his agent and maybe the Scottish Union had in brainwashing him.

It doesn't smack of anything you say. Our players have to work their way into the team, this isn't Scotland where amateurs like Dan Parks can just walk into the team. The fact is Shingler didn't help his cause by going to play at London Irish then declaring he would like to play for Scotland, which has probably placed him down the pecking order. Had he stayed put it is likely Shingler would have started more games for Scarlets this season with the injuries they have had which would have helped his international cause.

Why am I having a go at the Welsh and Wales just because I think the WRU haven't advised a young player of the implications of playing for a youth team, the lad didn't sign anything therefore I don't see how that would stand up in a court of law seeing as the IRB rules are bent all the time.

I think Scotland have the right to challenge this, I'm guessing the SRU had their lawyers look at this before attempting to include him in their squad.

Some people are hell bent on abusing a fellow 606er just because they have no counter argument, and what makes it worse is that they know it, so keep it coming guys show your true colours, why hold back.

Since 2010 the WRU and Wales U20's have stated that playing for them (the U20's) will tie you to Wales.

Why do Scotland have the right to challenge the IRB rules? Should they change the rules to suit Scotland?

Ah, now I see you're just guessing. You haven't read anything. There is a lot in that wild imagination of yours, Bath being a european force for example. The SRU Lawyers clearly didn't look into it well.

This is not a counter arguement against you HERSH as you have no arguement.

I said don't hold back

Why shouldn't Scotland challenge the IRB rules if they feel that it wasn’t made clear to the player by the WRU, which in this case it clearly wasn’t?

As for the SRU lawyers not looking into it very well, how do you know this or are you having a guess?

Scotland wouldn't have put themselves in this position if they didn't think that they had a case.

HERSH wrote:Why am I having a go at the Welsh and Wales just because I think the WRU haven't advised a young player of the implications of playing for a youth team, the lad didn't sign anything therefore I don't see how that would stand up in a court of law seeing as the IRB rules are bent all the time.

I think Scotland have the right to challenge this, I'm guessing the SRU had their lawyers look at this before attempting to include him in their squad.

Some people are hell bent on abusing a fellow 606er just because they have no counter argument, and what makes it worse is that they know it, so keep it coming guys show your true colours, why hold back.

The IRB Laws are clear enough for them to make a ruling on the situation.

Tell me when is the hearing for the SRU's appeal?

A court would rule no differently to the IRB as it is the IRB that write the Laws, Classifications and Interpretations for Rugby Union within those is a stipulation that if a National team designates a team other than an "A" as their second string then a player is qualified for that nation alone after he has accepted selection and played.

The Law is very simple. This would not go to court. There is nothing to provide that this is not a simple clear cut case.

HERSH wrote:Some people are hell bent on abusing a fellow 606er just because they have no counter argument, and what makes it worse is that they know it, so keep it coming guys show your true colours, why hold back.

I think my initial point, which is still very clear and apparent is that you have no argument to counter, you have no argument.

Certainly not "Hell Bent" on abusing you, I am taking the same opinion as everyone else on this thread that you are trying to stir argument and little else.

HERSH wrote:Why shouldn't Scotland challenge the IRB rules if they feel that it wasn’t made clear to the player by the WRU, which in this case it clearly wasn’t?

Now you are just typing BS.

Laws are there to be challenged, there is always a loop hole somewhere, which in this case seems to be that the WRU didn't inform the player of the implications of playing for a youth team. Oops!

The FACT is that the coach of the Under 20's team told all players in last years Squad that playing for the under Welsh 20s qualifies you for Wales and no one else is a fact that has been verified by the IRB in the previous hearing.

Whilst HERSH is as sual on the wind up its made pretty easy when you guys refuse to undesatnd that there is still some oncertainty over teh IRB rules and that the right to appeal exists so that you can...appeal. Scotland would not do this if they didnt feel there were some grounds for aargument, and perhaps evidence that wasnt at first considered.
As much as it was Wales' right to ask the IRB to rule in the first place its Scotlands right to challenge that ruling now. They clealry feel they have some grounds to do so.
I still expect to see the IRB uphold in favour of Wales, but its wrong to suggest taht this is somewhow a continued crime against humanity and 100% clear that Shinglers tie was binding.

For me its the IRB that comes out bad from this in not clealry recording tied players, and checking the paperwork before they are registered. Inform the player, and if they dont appeal within 3 months its binding.

maestegmafia wrote:The FACT is that the coach of the Under 20's team told all players in last years Squad that playing for the under Welsh 20s qualifies you for Wales and no one else is a fact that has been verified by the IRB in the previous hearing.

Now who's typing BS.

When did the coach tell them, just before kick off?

Surely the WRU would have sent out a letter explaining the situation seeing as they are a professional union?
I'm also sure that they would have wanted a signature from the player himself committing his future to them.

Good luck to Scotland if they do take this higher as there seems to be one or two stumbling blocks for the WRU case.

Lets make it clear I'm not on a wind up.

Peter

As we all know the IRB needs to re-evaluate its qualification laws, more so regarding residency than qualification as most qualification situations are simple.

I acknowledge the SRU's right to a hearing, but to say that either the player, the SRU or WRU did not understand or recognise the situation prior to Shinglers selection in the SRU squad is false.

The SRU are trying to select a player that would have qualified for them if he had chosen not to play in a match that qualifies him to Wales.

It is very much in the SRU's interest to do so and maybe in their interest to take this further as they have.

What is odd though is that there has been no resolution this close to the Six Nations.

Does anyone know if the Scottish appeal has actually been officially submitted or when if it has it is to be heard?

Mest,

Thats where we disagree I guess. From what Ive read Shingler is amdamant that he didnt beleive himself to be tied. With teh alck of any official register it was impossible for the SRU to be certain of that one way or the other.

No one comes out of this well, the top of that is the system that allows this ambiguity to come about.

maestegmafia wrote:Does anyone know if the Scottish appeal has actually been officially submitted or when if it has it is to be heard?

Not sure when it is to be heard but I can only assume it has been submitted. I'm basing this assumption on the fact that Shingler trained with the squad in St Andrews.

Is it just me or does anyone else feel sad that a young lad has had his dream of playing for his chosen country taken away from him because of some lazy/unprofessional Admin work by the WRU and the muddy waters created by the IRB?

From the Herald Scotland two weeks ago wrote:
The 20-year-old still has a chance of being available to play should the IRB decree in his favour when his case moves to the next stage. That will happen after Mike Miller, the IRB's chief executive, decides whether the case should go before its regulations committee or its judicial committee. Indications are that once he does it could be dealt with relatively quickly. Thereafter, there is still scope to appeal to the full IRB Council, but they will not meet until later this year.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/rugby/steve-shingler-to-stay-in-scotland-squad-as-andy-robinson-considers-options.16469037

It looks very unlikely that Shingler will be able to play for Scotland this Six Nations.

I am surprised that the London Irish have not protested his inclusion to Scotland's training squad as he can not currently play for Scotland at any level.

HERSH wrote:Why shouldn't Scotland challenge the IRB rules if they feel that it wasn’t made clear to the player by the WRU, which in this case it clearly wasn’t?

As for the SRU lawyers not looking into it very well, how do you know this or are you having a guess?

Scotland wouldn't have put themselves in this position if they didn't think that they had a case.

How do you know it wasn't made clear HERSH, because Andy Robinson said so? As I have said the IRB lays down the laws and the WRU are obeying them in this instance. Scotland were wrong to put themselves in this position, as previously mentioned they should have at first consulted the IRB before deciding to pencil him into their 6 Nations squad. This to me makes it clear the SRU lawyers didn't look into it well, if they even did consult their lawyers. You brought lawyers into it. I'm not guessing anything child, you must have mistaken me for an opponent in your guessing game!

HERSH wrote:Is it just me or does anyone else feel sad that a young lad has had his dream of playing for his chosen country taken away from him because of some lazy/unprofessional Admin work by the WRU and the muddy waters created by the IRB?

HERSH wrote:Lets make it clear I'm not on a wind up.

Oh the contradiction...!

What's really surprised me about this is not a single Welsh poster has agreed it makes no sense for some U20 games to bind you to a country and others to not. Even the idea that an U20 cap is the same as a senior cap.

I've already said I think that it's bad for the game and bad for players, because dual-qualified players will miss out on test rugby if they can't make the grade for their first choice nation. Thats bad for rugby.

And it's inconsistent. An Ireland U20s cap means nothing but a Wales one can bind you to a nation?

The law supports Wales. But the law needs to be rethought.

The FACT is that the coach of the Under 20's team told all players in last years Squad that playing for the under Welsh 20s qualifies you for Wales and no one else is a fact that has been verified by the IRB in the previous hearing..

That's not quite right though is it - it's only true if the opposition themselves have nominated their u20's side as an A team, so not quite a FACT.

This variation in the rules (ie not every u20 game is counted as representative) is something that the Scot's will be likely to highlight, and if this question eventually ends up in court - which is likely to happen if the IRB continue with their original stance - the IRB are going to have a hard time explaining the elasticity of the rules around elegibility.

One big question that seems to need answering is why the Welsh administators allowed him to play even though he had refused to sign the disclaimer.

Lawyers on both sides will be rubbing their hands with the prospect of a nice little earner coming up.

maestegmafia wrote:

HERSH wrote:Is it just me or does anyone else feel sad that a young lad has had his dream of playing for his chosen country taken away from him because of some lazy/unprofessional Admin work by the WRU and the muddy waters created by the IRB?

HERSH wrote:Lets make it clear I'm not on a wind up.

Oh the contradiction...!

From your twisted anti English point of view.

This isn't and England v Wales debate.

Morgannwg wrote "if they even did consult their lawyers."
Of course they would have they are a professional union.

HERSH contradicted himself again eh Maes.

Please show us some evidence in which Scotland had consulted their lawyers about the matter HERSH.

Notch wrote:What's really surprised me about this is not a single Welsh poster has agreed it makes no sense for some U20 games to bind you to a country and others to not. Even the idea that an U20 cap is the same as a senior cap.

I've already said I think that it's bad for the game and bad for players, because dual-qualified players will miss out on test rugby if they can't make the grade for their first choice nation. Thats bad for rugby.

And it's inconsistent. An Ireland U20s cap means nothing but a Wales one can bind you to a nation?

The law supports Wales. But the law needs to be rethought.

The Law supports most countries with regards to Under 20s being a recognised second team as only England, Ireland, Scotland and Italy use second teams with any regularity. Any other nation carries token second sides that play irregularly against touring teams.

It is more likely that Under 20s will be included in the Law on Qualification for all nations than the Law remain the same, due to the changing nature of rugby. All Nations have under 20 sides, not all have A sides.

Morgannwg wrote:HERSH contradicted himself again eh Maes.

Please show us some evidence in which Scotland had consulted their lawyers about the matter HERSH.

I enjoy debate on rugby and not some idiot trying to start a bunfight.

Morgannwg wrote:HERSH contradicted himself again eh Maes.

Please show us some evidence in which Scotland had consulted their lawyers about the matter HERSH.

You would have to be pretty dim to think otherwise, this is the 21st century big companies/organisations have lawyers on the payroll all the time, you seem to have another motivation for this debate other than the fact that a player is being hung out to dry because of poor Admin clarification of the rules.

I guess the fact that i'm English discussing a matter between Wales, Scotland and the IRB bugs you, grow up we're all British.

Morgannwg wrote:

Our players have to work their way into the team, this isn't Scotland where amateurs like Dan Parks can just walk into the team.

Yet Henson can walk strait back into the squad after what 3 games for the same team in 2 years, and shingler is not considered even being hyped as one of the next golden generation?

European Court of Human Rights, here we come

Maes, I'm pretty sure it's only France and Wales that have U20 as their second team. I've certainly never heard of any other sides doing it. Don't you have to designate your A side every 4 years and it's fixed for that period? Most sides have a few A games in a 4 year period.

Knackeredknees wrote:

Morgannwg wrote:

Our players have to work their way into the team, this isn't Scotland where amateurs like Dan Parks can just walk into the team.

Yet Henson can walk strait back into the squad after what 3 games for the same team in 2 years, and shingler is not considered even being hyped as one of the next golden generation?

Shingler was Hyped as the future Flyhalf Great of Wales, you don't get more hyping than that, he didnt show enough to get in to the Welsh squad for this year, he does look good and has been on the radar for Wales, though as you know and as with most nations our coach would rather he was playing in Wales.

Nothing bugs me HERSH but I am suprised you have not been banned from this site yet as these V2 guys are pretty strict.

There has been no record so far of Scotland leaving the case with their lawyers. What do you expect them to do, sue the IRB and WRU for complying with IRB regulations? Bit dim... Please, enough of your BS postings now. If Shingler has been hung out to dry then it is by the SRU, with a helping hand from his agent which could have all been averted had they just kept quiet and again, consulted the IRB before making the matter public. Do not expect us to now cap Steve because this matter has arisen. He needs to earn his place.

HammerofThunor wrote:European Court of Human Rights, here we come

Maes, I'm pretty sure it's only France and Wales that have U20 as their second team. I've certainly never heard of any other sides doing it. Don't you have to designate your A side every 4 years and it's fixed for that period? Most sides have a few A games in a 4 year period.

Currently you are correct though New Zealand Australia and SA will apparently all go the same way as Wales soon as they rarely use their second sides, NZs last outing for the Junior ABs was in 2010, same as France. It is in the National interest of any National Union to follow suit.

Knackeredknees wrote:

Morgannwg wrote:

Our players have to work their way into the team, this isn't Scotland where amateurs like Dan Parks can just walk into the team.

Yet Henson can walk strait back into the squad after what 3 games for the same team in 2 years, and shingler is not considered even being hyped as one of the next golden generation?

I think Henson is a bit/a lot better than Parks... Why would Shingler be hyped up in that manner, he has not done anything of note to deserve the hype where as Gavin Henson did when he was Steve's age. I don't agree with the Henson inclusion btw, but you should note that this is just the training squad that is to be slimmed down.

Morgannwg wrote:Nothing bugs me HERSH but I am suprised you have not been banned from this site yet as these V2 guys are pretty strict.

There has been no record so far of Scotland leaving the case with their lawyers. What do you expect them to do, sue the IRB and WRU for complying with IRB regulations? Bit dim... Please, enough of your BS postings now.

The reason I haven't been banned is that I’m not rude or abusive towards other posters on 606v2, there is no record as lawyers often work in the background because they will want to present their case on the day if this does go any further, how nieve/dim to think otherwise!

Good luck to Scotland if they do go further with this.

It's naive actually HERSH.

Okay, allow me just to do what you do and guess for a moment. Considering the lawyers were consulted, why did the lawyers not 'work in the background' and not announce that the Union was planning to include Shingler in Scotlands 6 Nations squad? The lawyers were a bit dim in this instance for not researching into it prior to that decision, the SRU have now caused an eligibility row and although it is not entirely all their fault it has the potential to harm the players career.

Is that all you’ve got left, picking out spelling errors that usually means that your argument has dried up.

Anyway Scottish law works differently.

As far as destroying a player’s career the WRU have done a fine job on the lad just because he felt more Scottish than Welsh, talk about sour grapes.

Morgannwg wrote:Nothing bugs me HERSH but I am suprised you have not been banned from this site yet as these V2 guys are pretty strict.

There has been no record so far of Scotland leaving the case with their lawyers. What do you expect them to do, sue the IRB and WRU for complying with IRB regulations? Bit dim... Please, enough of your BS postings now. If Shingler has been hung out to dry then it is by the SRU, with a helping hand from his agent which could have all been averted had they just kept quiet and again, consulted the IRB before making the matter public. Do not expect us to now cap Steve because this matter has arisen. He needs to earn his place.

You would think that as a man who has played Professional Rugby at the Premiership/Championship level in both Wales and England Hersh might have had an interesting insight into this?

I think it was all BS maes, like his online postings.

HERSH, did you neglect the rest of what I said then orrr..... ?

I am amazed how people, i:e; yourself and the scottish can claim how Shingles feels more Scottish than Welsh in the space of...a week! . Personally, I think it was more of a case of not being selected for Wales so take whatever else you can get. That's the sour grapes there. All the WRU has done is comply with the rules set out by rugbys governing body. Slag them off and have a pop as much as you desire but you can't beat facts and that is where you are getting shown up.