Ploughing with another man's cattle.

First topic message reminder :

Over the past week I have read an alarming number of threads that has to do with players that have qualified or will soon qualify for nations they have been playing in for the last few years. For me this is an issue that I want to clear the air with and explain why it is such an issue for me.

Just in the last week I have heard the names mentioned of Hanno Dirksen, Andries Pretorius, Michael Paterson, Tim Visser, George Earl (yes he hasn’t even signed his contract yet and there are already rumours the carrot for going to Scotland is to represent them), Richard Strauss, Robbie Diack and Jared Payne.

Then of course there are players such as Brad Barrit and Mouritz Botha who represented England over the last year.

The scary thing is that it is no longer only applicable to england being the culprit, it seems all the home nations have now joined in this “project” frenzy to see which “New Country Qualified” players are good enough to join their international squads. Although it hasn’t become a common feature yet, from what I have read a good number of these players mentioned stand realistic chances to represent their “qualified” country.

We all understand that privately owned clubs search the globe for quality professional players that can provide instant success and gratification for their supporters and on the whole, I have no issue at all with a player that makes money by way of the best financially rewarding contract. It is what we all do, if company X is prepared to pay you a higher wage, of course you will consider it.

What I do have a problem with is the plethora of players who these days change allegiance on a whim and a cheque.

I heard the other day Kobus Wiese mentioning that SA currently has 235 players playing professional rugby outside of South Africa, I don’t know how accurate the figure is, but either way it is a significant number of players.

In France alone there are over 50 players, but the biggest concern for me there is the number of relatively young players in France. The question is how many of them will follow the route of French prop Pieter de Villiers who also left at a young age only to represent France later on.

Now for some this may be a non-issue and your reasoning would be, “hey if we can pay them better then why not?”

True, if your clubs can pay them higher wages then I see no issue with that. But it seems that there is now a collective effort to attract players from SA (and other countries) to come play for a specific club and then the little carrot of over three years you could represent our national team if you are good enough.

For me there should be a clear distinction of when you should be able to represent a new country and when there should be proper residency qualifications put in place.

If you leave for another country whilst still a minor and dependent on your parents for food, clothing, shelter etc. you literally have no choice but to go.

If you are no longer financially dependent then it is simple. You leave and sign contracts out of your own free will, so a minimum of 7 years residency should be completed before you represent another country.

Why do I say that, because there is a major difference in plying a professional trade in another country and representing another country on the world stage of sport.

The one is a job and the other is a privilege and to just have the ability to leave the country where you learnt to play the game and now someone else reaps the rewards is simply just plain wrong.

I cannot believe that a patriotic supporter can be proud of a system that is circumvented by such a feeble residency law as parents, grandparents or 3 year residency rule.

Is the whole idea of rugby not to enter the battlefield with home grown talent?

There is a saying in Afrikaans “jy ploeg met n’ ander man se kalwers”

Loosely translated it means “you are plowing with another man’s cattle”

...or some of us just don't recognise certain international borders.

Ruby, thanks. When will Cuthbert be ready to come back ?

gregortree wrote:Ruby, thanks. When will Cuthbert be ready to come back ?

As soon as you ditch a few Saffers

Ruby, haha, well send Cuthbert to Biltong and we'll call it quits !

gregortree wrote:Ruby, haha, well send Cuthbert to Biltong and we'll call it quits !

As much as I rate Cuthbert, you just keep him in his Red Jumper.

Biltong, fair enough. But just keep on sending your RSA citizens up here to London, they are doing a great job for us.

gregortree wrote:Biltong, fair enough. But just keep on sending your RSA citizens up here to London, they are doing a great job for us.

ha ha

rodders wrote:No but it still isn't a Frenzy.

Ireland are ending the project thing after next season meaning all NIEs will be viewed the same i.e. no additional players who may become IQ.

I don't like to see players manipulate the resisdancy rule but blame the players not the Union. No one is forcing anyone to play against their will.

Where did you hear that from, Rodders? I hope its true.

I think the IRFU should set up academies or links to clubs in eastern European countries where by young and talented props etc. are given scholarships to Irish schools.

On a related issue about borrowing of cattle in this modern professional age.
It is also contentious when the owners of the cattle - the clubs (well they think they are) get their cattle back crocked from renting out on international ploughing duty. 'Ploughing with another man's cattle' (“jy ploeg met n’ ander man se kalwers”) - great phrase there Biltong.
It has a broader relevance in modern rugby, in terms of: well, who do the cattle belong to ?
And BTW for example, who would deny Brendan Venter from grazing in pastures new:

"In 2001 Venter came back to the United Kingdom with his wife and two children to coach and play for London Irish. "I was very analytical as a player and had always wanted to try out my ideas as a coach."

profitius wrote:

rodders wrote:No but it still isn't a Frenzy.

Ireland are ending the project thing after next season meaning all NIEs will be viewed the same i.e. no additional players who may become IQ.

I don't like to see players manipulate the resisdancy rule but blame the players not the Union. No one is forcing anyone to play against their will.

Where did you hear that from, Rodders? I hope its true.

It is in the announcement for the new rules to come into play from 2013-14.

The concept of project players is being droped - we will just be talking about NIE players

Aren't NIE players essentially the same thing?

leinsterbaby wrote:Aren't NIE players essentially the same thing?

No. They're just players who aren't currently eligible for Ireland. They may never gain eligibility due to previous caps. It may be possible if they haven't got any. But from the IRFU point of view they're the same as they're not eligible now (or then)

EDIT: It would certainly stop certain individuals trying to claim the IRFU are actively trying to poach players

leinsterbaby wrote:I think the IRFU should set up academies or links to clubs in eastern European countries where by young and talented props etc. are given scholarships to Irish schools.

I presume this is a joke?