England vs NZ Dec 1st outside the IRB window...!

Hi England fans.

Much debate on welsh threads regarding availability of overseas Welsh players for our final test on the 1st of December which falls outside the IRB window. Also that a fourth AI compromises our teams fighting in Europe... Same for you guys I guess?

A few of our players are in England so will they be available?

Will England players be available and why?

maestegmafia wrote:Hi England fans.

Much debate on welsh threads regarding availability of overseas Welsh players for our final test on the 1st of December which falls outside the IRB window. Also that a fourth AI compromises our teams fighting in Europe... Same for you guys I guess?

A few of our players are in England so will they be available?

Will England players be available and why?

I suspect Maes that the answer to that question is the same as last season - the RFU pays the English clubs for access to the players outside the window. From memory there's some sort of agreement that no player will turn out in all 4 tests? Could be wrong there though.

And since the PRL don't want to give the RFU a negotiating point by letting Wales have players outside the window for free, and since the WRU doesn't want to pay, I'd expect English (and probably French-based ones too) based players to be unavailable for the December match. Particularly as there's a European weekend following.

Now I can't remember, does the WRU pay the regions extra for access for the Dec match?

The EPS agreement includes the 4th AI test every other year. It's included in the extra funding the clubs receive in compensation so they can employ cover for the missing players. I believe in total there are about 6 or 7 extra weekends missing outside of the international window.

It's much like when Morgan had to go back to the Scarlets during the 6 nations whereas the Welsh players stayed in camp. The WRU compensate the regions for the missing player time. The RFU don't.

maestegmafia wrote:Hi England fans.

Much debate on welsh threads regarding availability of overseas Welsh players for our final test on the 1st of December which falls outside the IRB window. Also that a fourth AI compromises our teams fighting in Europe... Same for you guys I guess?

A few of our players are in England so will they be available?

Will England players be available and why?

Yes the english players playing for AP clubs will be available, because the RFU pays extra money to ensure they are available. this is the bone of contention the clubs have with Wales. They want the players, who are employed and paid by the clubs, outside agreed windows but are unwilling to pay insurance or compensation.

One of the biggest bones of contention in Wales is that the WRU are possibly weakening the regions chances in Europe being reduced because the regions international players return with only four or five days training pre Round 3 HEC.

Do English fans not see this as a concern too...?

I do not like that there is a 4th international every second year, but the clubs and RFU reached a compromise. Compromises never make people happy - but they prevent people being excessively upset I guess.

Exactly! They make Leinster look good because the English and Welsh play with fewer top quality players available

It was ridiculous when Wasps were missing something like 9 players (especially as they weren't any good). The teams are getting shafted out of it. Of course it's just an extension to them getting shafted during the international window. Something like 24 of the 32 players are from just 4 clubs. It does have the smearing effect over the league, the best teams are weakened for a significant period of the season, which means the others have more of a chance. It also gives us another excuse for failing in the HEC, which is always handy.

Out of the EPS the following players could be missing AND included in the HEC

Mouritz Botha (Saracens)
Chris Ashton (Saracens)
Brad Barritt (Saracens)
Owen Farrell (Saracens)
Alex Goode (Saracens)

Dan Cole (Leicester Tigers)
Tom Croft (Leicester Tigers)
Thomas Waldrom (Leicester Tigers)
Geoff Parling (Leicester Tigers)
Anthony Allen (Leicester Tigers)
Toby Flood (Leicester Tigers)
Manusamoa Tuilagi (Leicester Tigers)
Ben Youngs (Leicester Tigers)

Phil Dowson (Northampton Saints)
Dylan Hartley (Northampton Saints)
Courtney Lawes (Northampton Saints)
Tom Wood (Northampton Saints)
Lee Dickson (Northampton Saints)
Ben Foden (Northampton Saints)

Tom Johnson (Exeter Chiefs)

Joe Marler (Harlequins)
Chris Robshaw (Harlequins)
Mike Brown (Harlequins)
Danny Care (Harlequins)
Jordan Turner-Hall (Harlequins)

It doesn't effect English Premiership clubs anywhere near as badly as it does Welsh, Irish or Scots as we have a much smaller playing pool, less teams, lower budgets and less foreign imports of the quality needed to fill the gaps.

I would imagine that for example Saracens will hardly notice any absence at all, though it is obviously harsher on Tigers and Saints, but nothing compared to the difference it will likely make to the Ospreys, Scarlets and Dragons.

I don't disagree with having a fourth international, the WRU need the revenue desperately; but i do wish that the season could be better organised to accommodate it.

WRU need it more than RFU - certainly if you look at income and profit etc.

LondonTiger wrote:WRU need it more than RFU - certainly if you look at income and profit etc.

We don't have the economic situation that England do to support clubs/regions on supporter attendance and shirt sales. International rugby is the life blood financing the game in Wales.

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:
Will England players be available and why?

Yes the english players playing for AP clubs will be available, because the RFU pays extra money to ensure they are available. this is the bone of contention the clubs have with Wales. They want the players, who are employed and paid by the clubs, outside agreed windows but are unwilling to pay insurance or compensation.

No thats not true. The WRU refuses to deal with the PRL, the RFU run English Rugby not the PRL.

http://www.espnscrum.com/wales/rugby/story/131808.html

agreed MM,

English clubs have a bigger available audience (ie population) so can agree bigger TV and other commercial deals.

the RFU can also negotiate much bigger deals - total revenue for the 2010/11 season was £136m - £33m from hospitality and catering, £32m from International TV rights, £30m from ticket sales, 16m from spnosorship being the biggest elements.

maestegmafia wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:
Will England players be available and why?

Yes the english players playing for AP clubs will be available, because the RFU pays extra money to ensure they are available. this is the bone of contention the clubs have with Wales. They want the players, who are employed and paid by the clubs, outside agreed windows but are unwilling to pay insurance or compensation.

No thats not true. The WRU refuses to deal with the PRL, the RFU run English Rugby not the PRL.

http://www.espnscrum.com/wales/rugby/story/131808.html

And therin lies the problem. The clubs are the players employer. If you want to pinch their staff for an unsanctioned game you should talk to them. The WRU are unwilling to do this. I understand why this is the case - but they do want something for nothing.

The Welsh regions, RRW and the WRU do not charge foreign unions for the use of their players that play for clubs or regions in Wales.

So you can see their point.

The WRU also deal with other National Unions regarding player release not their clubs/province representatives, there is a power struggle in English Rugby between the governing RFU and the elite professional clubs representatives. Until that is resolved the PRL will always use other nations to force their objective even if it is against the clubs they represents wishes.

Such a shame as it is the International game Wales rely on. Luckily most of Wales top overseas internationals are based in France not England so its not overly detrimental.

LondonTiger wrote:WRU need it more than RFU - certainly if you look at income and profit etc.

The NZRU aren't complaining about their share of the "take" either

Even allowing for the extra ~£9m a year from AIG for the new shirt deal, running the NZ game takes a fair amount of coin.

Apparently combined NZ's cash from the Adidas and AIG deals is worth £19-£20m - almost half of the NZRU's income.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:WRU need it more than RFU - certainly if you look at income and profit etc.

The NZRU aren't complaining about their share of the "take" either

Even allowing for the extra ~£9m a year from AIG for the new shirt deal, running the NZ game takes a fair amount of coin.

Apparently combined NZ's cash from the Adidas and AIG deals is worth £19-£20m - almost half of the NZRU's income.

Impressive stats.. I imagine the broadcasting rights are significant as well any corporate entertaining, though none of us could equal England or France on the Corporate entertaining profits...

maestegmafia wrote:The Welsh regions, RRW and the WRU do not charge foreign unions for the use of their players that play for clubs or regions in Wales.

So you can see their point.

The WRU also deal with other National Unions regarding player release not their clubs/province representatives, there is a power struggle in English Rugby between the governing RFU and the elite professional clubs representatives. Until that is resolved the PRL will always use other nations to force their objective even if it is against the clubs they represents wishes.

Such a shame as it is the International game Wales rely on. Luckily most of Wales top overseas internationals are based in France not England so its not overly detrimental.

I thought the French clubs wouldn't release players for outside-window games either? They're certainly not planning on releasing players for the Lions until their clubs have finished their season.

Aside from PI and other 2nd tier players (whose unions don't have any money), are there any international teams with players in Wales now that Tommy Bowe and Morgan have left?

MM,

Scarlets refused to release Morgan for a training session last season. WRU also has issues with French Clubs and are reliant on the players signing a contract that allows them the ability to play in extra matches (usually with a reduction in salary). this is something gethin Jenkins for instance chose not to do.

PRL choose not to allow players to do this - because they get paid for the "extra" international. If they gave the players up free to WRU then why should RFU pay for the privilege.

The English clubs do not expect payment for games within the international window - which of course they are not entitled to.

I understand where WRU are coming from. I understand where PRL are coming from. A compromise was offered to WRU last year - but as you said WRU refuse to talk to PRL. Yet they talk to French Clubs and the LNR.

maestegmafia wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:WRU need it more than RFU - certainly if you look at income and profit etc.

The NZRU aren't complaining about their share of the "take" either

Even allowing for the extra ~£9m a year from AIG for the new shirt deal, running the NZ game takes a fair amount of coin.

Apparently combined NZ's cash from the Adidas and AIG deals is worth £19-£20m - almost half of the NZRU's income.

Impressive stats.. I imagine the broadcasting rights are significant as well any corporate entertaining, though none of us could equal England or France on the Corporate entertaining profits...

The stats are based on a reporter in NZ piecing together various pieces of info out of the NZRU over the years, so may not be bang on the money, but probably aren't too far off. The deal with AIG was said to be the 2nd biggest shirt sponsorship in rugby, after the Adidas one, which was supposedly in the vicinity of $NZ20m - apparently the Wallabies' combined Qantas/Kooga and England's CCC/O2 deals are worth around £8 or £9m.

It can only be explained as an English plot for world domination.

LondonTiger wrote:MM,

Scarlets refused to release Morgan for a training session last season. WRU also has issues with French Clubs and are reliant on the players signing a contract that allows them the ability to play in extra matches (usually with a reduction in salary). this is something gethin Jenkins for instance chose not to do.

That was the Scarlets call not the WRU or RRW.

Reference the Stuart Lancaster quote from The Independent at the time.

"Yes, we tried to talk Scarlets into letting Ben stay with us, but ultimately it was their call and they told us they required him for their game this week, because Ben plays his club rugby in Wales he's not covered by the Elite Player Agreement, like those playing in the Premiership. You can have the negotiation when these things arise, but you're not in a very strong position."

LondonTiger wrote:PRL choose not to allow players to do this - because they get paid for the "extra" international. If they gave the players up free to WRU then why should RFU pay for the privilege.

The English clubs do not expect payment for games within the international window - which of course they are not entitled to.

As I mentioned it is the call of the PRL and not the clubs they represent, there have been a number of occasions where English clubs like Sale RFC and Exeter have been perfectly happy to release Welsh players only for the PRL who represent those clubs to go against the Clubs wishes and prevent Welsh players from playing. Despite the appeals by the WRU to the RFU to resolve this matter amicably.

LondonTiger wrote:I understand where WRU are coming from. I understand where PRL are coming from. A compromise was offered to WRU last year - but as you said WRU refuse to talk to PRL. Yet they talk to French Clubs and the LNR.

I think most rugby fans, particularly international level rugby fans, understand where the WRU and many other unions, effected by this stance by the PRL, are coming from.

The WRU talk to clubs and to national Unions they do not talk to organisations that represent clubs owners (like the PRL and LNR). The PRL do not run the game in England, they are just there to look after the interests of club owners a governing body would not address such an organisation, it would be undermining that countries national Union.

The clubs say they're willing to release players but of course they've already agreed not to. And they're also happy to take the RFU money for the EPS releases.

The RFU have no say whatsoever in the release of English players outside the window. That's the whole point of the window. They can mediate with the PRL on behalf of the WRU but the PRL are well within their rights to refuse the middle man. Remember all the clubs have given the PRL the control of these things. If the WRU refuse to talk to them it's up to them. But they represent the clubs and the clubs have all agreed to this.

When you say "stance by the PRL" you mean "this stance taken by pretty much all professional domestic bodies", right? The Regions don't release players outside of the window. The French Clubs don't release players outside of the window. The Highlanders didn't release Haskell outside of the window. Remember the PRL released players for Scotland and the PI teams before they had to for the World Cup. They didn't for the WRU because they refused to speak to them. The WRU already compensate the RRW for the extra time with the players. Why on Earth shouldn't they compensate the English clubs for the same? And also, wasn't their latest deal worked out with RRW (the Welsh equivalent of the PRL)?

HammerofThunor wrote:The clubs say they're willing to release players but of course they've already agreed not to. And they're also happy to take the RFU money for the EPS releases.

The RFU have no say whatsoever in the release of English players outside the window. That's the whole point of the window. They can mediate with the PRL on behalf of the WRU but the PRL are well within their rights to refuse the middle man. Remember all the clubs have given the PRL the control of these things. If the WRU refuse to talk to them it's up to them. But they represent the clubs and the clubs have all agreed to this.

When you say "stance by the PRL" you mean "this stance taken by pretty much all professional domestic bodies", right? The Regions don't release players outside of the window. The French Clubs don't release players outside of the window. The Highlanders didn't release Haskell outside of the window. Remember the PRL released players for Scotland and the PI teams before they had to for the World Cup. They didn't for the WRU because they refused to speak to them. The WRU already compensate the RRW for the extra time with the players. Why on Earth shouldn't they compensate the English clubs for the same? And also, wasn't their latest deal worked out with RRW (the Welsh equivalent of the PRL)?

Welsh Regions and French clubs release outside, so do the Irish provinces.

Welsh regions never caused problems for Tommy Bowe or Nicky Little or Sean Lamont, the French clubs released Welsh players outside of the Six Nations window too.

So yes the PRL are an exception.

In most countries a Union will address the club and the Union because by addressing an organisation like the PRL first, you are undermining the authority of the RFU.

Thankfully there are very few Welsh players in england that would be called upon by the WRU for International duty.

maestegmafia wrote:Welsh Regions and French clubs release outside, so do the Irish provinces.

When?

The RFU have no say whatsoever in the release of players outside of the international windows so how does it undermine them? That doesn't make any sense.

Also, when do Fiji ever play outside the window? So when would releasing him outside the window be an issue?

HammerofThunor wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Welsh Regions and French clubs release outside, so do the Irish provinces.

When?

Pre six nations 2012, Byrne Phillips and Hook all went to Spala.

HammerofThunor wrote:The RFU have no say whatsoever in the release of players outside of the international windows so how does it undermine them? That doesn't make any sense.

It makes perfect sense, it is what all unions do. Example above when England wanted Ben Morgan last year they spoke to the Scarlets directly, not to RRW.

When wales want to know a players availability they speak to the players club. The PRL then intervene.

As I said England's PRL is the exception. In all other dealings with overseas players Unions speak directly to clubs and/or the fellow National Union.

LondonTiger wrote:I do not like that there is a 4th international every second year, but the clubs and RFU reached a compromise. Compromises never make people happy - but they prevent people being excessively upset I guess.

Noticed on the Tigers vs Os thread you mentioned a number of Tigers players out injured. This 4th international could seriously effect your round 2 in the HEC...?

maestegmafia wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I do not like that there is a 4th international every second year, but the clubs and RFU reached a compromise. Compromises never make people happy - but they prevent people being excessively upset I guess.

Noticed on the Tigers vs Os thread you mentioned a number of Tigers players out injured. This 4th international could seriously effect your round 2 in the HEC...?

On current form, not many tigers will be in the england party. The fact we are carp will have a bigger effect.

LondonTiger wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I do not like that there is a 4th international every second year, but the clubs and RFU reached a compromise. Compromises never make people happy - but they prevent people being excessively upset I guess.

Noticed on the Tigers vs Os thread you mentioned a number of Tigers players out injured. This 4th international could seriously effect your round 2 in the HEC...?

On current form, not many tigers will be in the england party. The fact we are carp will have a bigger effect.

Wishful thinking on your part. Tigers will still make up a large contingent of the England squad and rightly so.

This game is not listed on the upcoming Sky Sports list. Does anyone know why? Are they just missing the game off their list?

Is it on ESPN...?

MichaelT wrote:This game is not listed on the upcoming Sky Sports list. Does anyone know why? Are they just missing the game off their list?

I suspect it is because Sky have yet to do a proper December Schedule on the website, so have just forgotten to put it on the list.

The main point is are for example France based players available for training and selection.To face the All Blacks a chance to beat ANY RWC holder at home let alone them.Must surely be a huge draw Tv rights,Corporate bookings
,bum s on seats etc.
To face Australia,SA,and NZ in the same year at home must surely show where
they currently stand.To win all 3 would be a huge boost for Englands pride and why not.
The Sh sides are at the end of a long season maybe these will be a match to far like the Boks 2009.

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Welsh Regions and French clubs release outside, so do the Irish provinces.

When?

Pre six nations 2012, Byrne Phillips and Hook all went to Spala.

They were released for three days 13 days before the first international. They then went back to the their clubs before joining Wales the week before the international. That IS the international window. They were not released outside of the window.

The ONLY deviation was that one of them was released by his club a day early and released back to his club a day early due to a midweek game.


The clubs have given that responsibility to the clubs. If the club says you have to mediate through a body then that's what you have to do. The union has nothing to do with it. If the Scarlets DID say go through RRW then it wouldn't matter it just would have happened. This isn't something forced on the clubs. It's something they decided to do.

emack2 wrote:The main point is are for example France based players available for training and selection.

No, they won't be unless they have release clauses written into their contracts

HammerofThunor wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Welsh Regions and French clubs release outside, so do the Irish provinces.

When?

Pre six nations 2012, Byrne Phillips and Hook all went to Spala.

They were released for three days 13 days before the first international. They then went back to the their clubs before joining Wales the week before the international. That IS the international window. They were not released outside of the window.

The ONLY deviation was that one of them was released by his club a day early and released back to his club a day early due to a midweek game.


The clubs have given that responsibility to the clubs. If the club says you have to mediate through a body then that's what you have to do. The union has nothing to do with it. If the Scarlets DID say go through RRW then it wouldn't matter it just would have happened. This isn't something forced on the clubs. It's something they decided to do.

Thats not true. Players returned to clubs for a weekend game. They were still released to Wales outside of the International window. And on a couple of occasions, in fact on all occasions we have requested them for Welsh duty Six Nations and Summer tour.

http://www.wru.co.uk/eng/news/22278.php

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/16427344

And here is a list from the wru website of the players that were in Spala pre International Window for training with Wales:-

Forwards: C Mitchell (Exeter Chiefs), Adam Jones (Ospreys), R Bevington (Ospreys), G Jenkins (Cardiff Blues), P James (Ospreys), R Gill (Saracens), Rhodri Jones (Scarlets), M Rees (Scarlets), H Bennett (Ospreys), K Owens (Scarlets), B Davies (Cardiff Blues), I Evans (Ospreys), L Reed (Scarlets), Ryan Jones (Ospreys), D Lydiate (Newport Gwent Dragons), S Warburton (Cardiff Blues, capt), J Tipuric (Ospreys), T Faletau (Newport Gwent Dragons), A Powell (Sale Sharks).

Backs: M Phillips (Bayonne), L Williams (Cardiff Blues), R Webb (Ospreys), R Priestland (Scarlets), J Hook (Perpignan), J Roberts (Cardiff Blues), J Davies (Scarlets), S Williams (Scarlets), G Henson (Cardiff Blues), A Beck (Ospreys), G North (Scarlets), L Halfpenny (Cardiff Blues), A Cuthbert (Cardiff Blues), H Robinson (Cardiff Blues), L Williams (Scarlets), L Byrne (Clermont Auvergne).


Provide a link to back up your claims...!

HammerofThunor wrote:

emack2 wrote:The main point is are for example France based players available for training and selection.

No, they won't be unless they have release clauses written into their contracts

There is no such thing as a release clause. It is a "made up" term created by the press.

Release clauses are common practice in contracts for many sports (and other endeavours). They do exist.

I don't actually think it's as much of an issue as some people are making it out to be. International coaches are aware of the pressures on clubs/regions etc and that these entities pay the wages and are entitled to understanding and compensation as applicable. It's fairly naive to think that clubs wouldn't have their own best interests at heart.

International rugby isn't the be-all and end-all.

Well Charteris claims to have one in his contract so that he doesn't miss additional training with Wales. Also, Haskell got away with staying with England during the 6 nations even when Stade Francais didn't want him to.

Right, I'll go through it again as you're clearly not up to date with the IRB international windows (and nor are the BBC obviously).

In the BBC article Phillips was released on 22/01/12 for 3 days of Wales training. Right? He was back with Bayonne for 25/01/12 for a match. Then he was returned to Wales for the week before their first game against Ireland on 05/02/12. Right?

So that's 3 days the week before the main training week, back to the clubs for a weekend, then back to the national camp for the week preceding their first game. Do we have an agreement on that?



What do the IRB regulations say? Regulation 9 covers player availability.
9.9 covers the time immediately before a match

Period of International duty for Matches
9.9 In each case of release a Union shall be entitled to exercise its Right to Release for Matches so that Players are assembled at a location determined by the Union selecting the Player and available to train at least five clear days prior to the commencement of the International Match, International Tour or International Tournament. If an International Tournament is not played on consecutive weekends then the five clear day period shall commence five days before each Match in the Tournament

So that covers the 5 days preceding the 6 nations and AI period. This is how it has been for ages.

In 2008 or 2009 the following part was added, Regulation 9.13

Limitation on the number of Squad sessions to which the Right to
Release applies
9.13 The Right to Release for Squad sessions pursuant to this Regulation 9 will apply to three Squad sessions for up to 30 Senior National Representative Team Players each calendar year each of a maximum of three consecutive days (excluding travel). Such periods shall be in addition to the release provisions for International Matches, International Tours and International Tournaments. Such sessions shall be taken as set out below subject to the three consecutive day periods not preventing a Player(s) from participating in a Match for his Rugby Body or Club:
(a) For all Unions, Monday to Wednesday of the week preceding the assembly period for the November window.
(b) For Northern Hemisphere Unions, Monday to Wednesday of the week preceding the assembly period for the Northern Hemisphere Release Period.
(c) For Southern Hemisphere Unions, Monday to Wednesday of the week preceding the assembly period for the Southern Hemisphere Release Period.
(d) The third squad session may be taken from a Monday to Wednesday at the discretion of the Unions provided that the Union in which the Player is Registered is notified of the dates for the third Squad session prior to the commencement of the relevant season.

That's pretty clear. The three days Phillips was released for the Poland camp are included in the IRB mandated window. So goes for all of them.

HammerofThunor wrote:Well Charteris claims to have one in his contract so that he doesn't miss additional training with Wales. Also, Haskell got away with staying with England during the 6 nations even when Stade Francais didn't want him to.

Right, I'll go through it again as you're clearly not up to date with the IRB international windows (and nor are the BBC obviously).

In the BBC article Phillips was released on 22/01/12 for 5 days of Wales training. Right? He was back with Bayonne for 26/01/12 for a match. Then he was returned to Wales on the 29/01/12 before their first game against Ireland on 05/02/12. Right?

So that's 3 days the week before the main training week, back to the clubs for a weekend, then back to the national camp for the week preceding their first game. Do we have an agreement on that?

I have corrected your mistakes

HammerofThunor wrote:
What do the IRB regulations say? Regulation 9 covers player availability.
9.9 covers the time immediately before a match

Period of International duty for Matches
9.9 In each case of release a Union shall be entitled to exercise its Right to Release for Matches so that Players are assembled at a location determined by the Union selecting the Player and available to train at least five clear days prior to the commencement of the International Match, International Tour or International Tournament. If an International Tournament is not played on consecutive weekends then the five clear day period shall commence five days before each Match in the Tournament

So that covers the 5 days preceding the 6 nations and AI period. This is how it has been for ages.

In 2008 or 2009 the following part was added, Regulation 9.13

Limitation on the number of Squad sessions to which the Right to
Release applies
9.13 The Right to Release for Squad sessions pursuant to this Regulation 9 will apply to three Squad sessions for up to 30 Senior National Representative Team Players each calendar year each of a maximum of three consecutive days (excluding travel). Such periods shall be in addition to the release provisions for International Matches, International Tours and International Tournaments. Such sessions shall be taken as set out below subject to the three consecutive day periods not preventing a Player(s) from participating in a Match for his Rugby Body or Club:
(a) For all Unions, Monday to Wednesday of the week preceding the assembly period for the November window.
(b) For Northern Hemisphere Unions, Monday to Wednesday of the week preceding the assembly period for the Northern Hemisphere Release Period.
(c) For Southern Hemisphere Unions, Monday to Wednesday of the week preceding the assembly period for the Southern Hemisphere Release Period.
(d) The third squad session may be taken from a Monday to Wednesday at the discretion of the Unions provided that the Union in which the Player is Registered is notified of the dates for the third Squad session prior to the commencement of the relevant season.

That's pretty clear. The three days Phillips was released for the Poland camp are included in the IRB mandated window. So goes for all of them.

And it is also really clear that Hook and Phillips were released for the pre Baabaas game training by their french clubs before the IRB window.

HT

Here is the Article from the WRU website, you obviously didnt bother to read the link i gave you. Not the first time that you ignore everyones FACTs so that you can back up your erroneous claims...

www.wru.co.uk

HOWLEY APPLAUDS EARLY PHILLIPS AND HOOK RELEASE

15 May 2012 15:57pm
By WRU

Phillips and Hook have secured early release from their clubs in France© Huw Evans ImagesMike Phillips and James Hook have been released early from their clubs in France to return to Wales in time to join the Welsh squad at the start of the preparation for the international against The Barbarians on June 2 and the three Test tour of Australia.

Both the players will join their team-mates at the WRU National Centre of Excellence on Monday, May 21 for the start of the full training schedule.
The French Rugby Union has formally told the WRU of the players' May 21 release and informed the two relevant clubs in France.

Wales caretaker head coach Rob Howley has praised the decision as an example of northern hemisphere co-operation during international preparations.

The May 21 date falls outside the formal IRB date of release for players involved in international duty and release is either contracted by individual Unions or discretionary.

Howley said: "This is fantastic news for us as it means Mike and James will be fully involved in the complete preparation programme we have in place.

"They are both experienced international players but it is still a huge advantage to have them working within our environment from day one.

"We are extremely grateful to the French Rugby Union and the individual clubs involved for taking this step.

"It is a gesture which will undoubtedly benefit the players and I know they will want to thank their individual clubs for helping them fulfil their international commitments with Wales.

"It is an example of northern hemisphere rugby working in unity for the benefit of our players and the game in general.

"We are all aware of the difficulties we can encounter when Welsh qualified players are based outside Wales, but this decision shows there are opportunities for us to realise mutual benefits."

Both the former Ospreys players left Wales for France this year with Phillips joining Bayonne and Hook linking up with Perpignan.

Yesterday they were both named in the 38-man training squad to prepare to face the Barbarians at the Millennium Stadium on Saturday, June 2 before embarking for Australia.

Clermont Auvergne full back Lee Byrne was not selected as he is still likely to be involved in domestic competition in France until the date the tour party departs.

The one you mention in the summer is after the season has finished. The PRL have released players once the season has finish, just not to the WRU because they won't ask. They've released them to the SRU and PI teams. The PI certainly wouldn't pay for the privileged and the SRU would've had to indicate if they had to. End of season is no big deal.

I was responding to the 6 nations claim. You claimed they were result early before the 6 nations. That didn't happen.

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Well Charteris claims to have one in his contract so that he doesn't miss additional training with Wales. Also, Haskell got away with staying with England during the 6 nations even when Stade Francais didn't want him to.

Right, I'll go through it again as you're clearly not up to date with the IRB international windows (and nor are the BBC obviously).

In the BBC article Phillips was released on 22/01/12 for 5 days of Wales training. Right? He was back with Bayonne for 26/01/12 for a match. Then he was returned to Wales on the 29/01/12 before their first game against Ireland on 05/02/12. Right?

So that's 3 days the week before the main training week, back to the clubs for a weekend, then back to the national camp for the week preceding their first game. Do we have an agreement on that?

I have corrected your mistakes

The BBC article says

Mike Phillips has been cleared by Bayonne to attend part of Wales' pre-Six Nations training camp in Poland.
Bayonne are to release the scrum-half for the first three days of Wales' ice chambers visit in Spala from 22 January.
Phillips has to be back in France for Bayonne's Top 14 match against Toulon on 25 or 26 January.

HammerofThunor wrote:The one you mention in the summer is after the season has finished. The PRL have released players once the season has finish, just not to the WRU because they won't ask. They've released them to the SRU and PI teams. The PI certainly wouldn't pay for the privileged and the SRU would've had to indicate if they had to. End of season is no big deal.

I was responding to the 6 nations claim. You claimed they were result early before the 6 nations. That didn't happen.

Im not carrying on this conversation.

I just showed you several times that that did happen.

Believe what you want.

There is good reason the WRU only discuss rugby matters with national bodies. I also explained that before.

The French clubs DID release players before they had to but it was after the season finished.

The French clubs DID NOT release players before they had to before the 6 nations. Unless you can provide evidence that they were released for more than the three days