How much pride could this guy have?

First topic message reminder :

Antonie Claassen, son of Ex Springbok rugby Player Wynand Claassen has been called into the French 23 matchday squad for their clash with England on February 23.

He will be the ninth South African born player to represent France.

My question is this, your dad played for the Sprinboks, Your dad captained the Springboks, your dad played for the Bulls and Sharks, you decide to find your fortunes elsewhere for whatever reason.

Now you play for the French?

How much pride can you have with a rugby heritage like that?

Biltong wrote:If representing your country on the biggest stage in rugby union is merely seen as a profession then Test rugby has become merely a glorified club competition.

Which means pretty soon all pro sports will be seen that way and whether it be pro rugby, olympics or any other sport where you represent a nation is nothing more than just another form of a reality show based on sport.

Sums things up very neatly - internationals should be an 'us' against 'them' competition, not based on whose league can attract the best uncapped players from the rest of the world.

That's why I'm not happy with guys like Waldrom and Barritt (no matter how well he's playing) representing England - their representing England is merely opportunistic because they have a way of being eligible through ancestry, but their rugby up-bringing is entirely foreign and they moved for professional rugby reasons. By comparison I have no issues with Manu, who has been in England since he was about 14, and only a small issue with Hartley, who came over at college.

My solutions are simple:
1 - Get rid of the grandparents rule
2 - Far longer eligibility periods (somewhere between 7 - 10 years) for players who had professional contracts in their country of birth prior to moving to the country they are now looking to represent.
3 - Keep the short residence qualifications (3 years) for players who moved for non-rugby related reasons or who came over before the age of 18.

The point is that being excluded from international rugby is not really a restraint of trade - a good player is still able to make a very good living as a top club professional in England / France without the need to play representative rugby.

Also just to note, I grew up a big Rangers fan in Glasgow.

As many may know, old firm support comes mainly from your family ancestry and your religion (I'm sorry to say).

Most rangers fans are fanatics. Way beyond anything we see in rugby thank goodness. When I was growing up it was very serious, people often died through game related assults etc every year.

Yet many of the Celtic players came from a Protestant Rangers background... alltime greats like Danny McGrain and Kenny Dalglish.

It may be club football but it was far more important then playing for the national side IMO. They still had immense pride in wearing the shirt of Celtic, a personal pride of making the grade where millions faltered. These guys were rangers boys through and through yet within a few years their blood was green... and I'm sure their parents were cheering if they scored a winner vs. their own home team!

Biltong wrote:Yes I am selfish and am not ashamed of it.

Look at the way football does it, players playall over the world, and yet they represent their home nation.

By the same token as we are ready to boast with foreign players in our club teams and pay no heed that the reality of the situation is these teams are not representative of our towns which we are supposedly so precious about, which in itslef is a contradiction if there ever was one, we now say it is OK to have foreigners represent our countires.

That in turn means we can now all change our allegiances because our players play for another nation and therefor we afford ourselves the right to support that team.

It all eventualy means that we just support a team on a whim, with little required in the way of roots, pride, tradition etc.

Footballers generally earn enough money that they don't need the international game for anything but pride. If you look at England, they donate their match fees to charity. But thats easy to do when you earn £50,000 a week. Money isn't as much of an incentive when you have more money than you can possibly spend, although they do still seem to be grasping and greedy when it comes to their contract extensions. Match fees at international level are trifling by comparison. Rugby players don't have that luxury.

You raise an interesting point; do you think it's good for big rugby nations like the Boks to pick players who don't play in South Africa like the Argentinean and Brazilian football teams are forced to?

I don't think we are so different. I wish things were different too and I wish that the limits we have in Ireland on foreign players existed across the board. This would give players a chance to move abroad but ensure a level playing field. Because if left unchecked the richest nations will hover up all the existing talent and it will be to the detriment of the game globally. I also feel the same way about residency qualifications as you do.

But I'm not going to attack an individual for doing what he needs to do in the current system. I think that is selfish and probably hypocritical for most, when 90% of people would make the same choices in their career faced with the same choices. Instead, the IRB needs to enforce more regulations on things like residency. Unfettered capitalism is not going to deliver a healthy global game in decades to come and easily fulfilled residency requirements will skew the international game.

What I don;t understand is how rugby fans don't realise this problem is not unique to rugby, but affects society at large.

dummy_half

IMO you're wrong on Brad Barritt.

His parents are English, all his grandparents are English. He was born in Natal and Durban which was known until the 90s as the last post of the British Empire.

People there are English, more English then most Brits.

He could easily have become a springbok had he chosen so. 12 was a area of relative weakness for SA from 2008 onwards and he would have been in the mix given he was starting for the Sharks and was their SR player of the year in 2007.

Olivier was his b.itch whenever they faced off and he was conitnually capped throughout this period.

He made a choice and he chose England. Don't let a dodgy accent tell you otherwise.

You know, thinking about this, I wonder if a couple of saffa, kiwis and an englishman, all excellent rugby players who have never played for their country yet, came over to Oz and then after a few years get selected for the Wallabies turning them into world beaters, how proud would I be still of the wallabies?

Thinking on it, I will still be proud as, and look on those non aussie born players as every bit one of us.

Of course I would rather home born talents, but hey ho, it is a profession now, and if they nailed their allegances to the wallabies mast, I'll support them.

My 2c worth

The first thing to go in professional sport is playing for your roots, where you grew up. The belief that the two are eternally linked is a myth. First and foremost its a career and the employer is the game, and the game is worldwide.

Once you have that perspective I think its about what you want from it as a player and as a fan.

For me I decided long ago to stop following just the Blues but to follow sides that I believe are playing what I perceive to be great rugby- the Crusaders are generally supported nationally when they win overseas and only when its a local derby do fans switch back to their home side.

In todays game I think you need that balance as a fan as well as a player.

In some ways nationalistic pride can be a barrier- it creates a perception that 'your country is better than mine, or his or his'

John Lennons song Imagine was so visionary in that respect- no countries, no borders, no religion, no idea of wealth- all aspects of our society that create a formal set of rules for separatism. I'm this and your that so we can never walk the same path. Those are the rules.

Todays rugby I reckon breaks down a lot of these barriers and although its largely money driven, underneath it all its a world wide rugby 'community' that is inherently self supporting. NZers get to live and breathe and raise families in Japan, France, Ireland- learn new languages, cultures. Things that would have been inconceivable to these people 10 years ago.

I thinks its great. Its a pity that concept is largely limited tom those lucky enough to be good enough to be paid to play the game but thats the way it is, so be it.

Notch wrote:

Biltong wrote:Yes I am selfish and am not ashamed of it.

Look at the way football does it, players playall over the world, and yet they represent their home nation.

By the same token as we are ready to boast with foreign players in our club teams and pay no heed that the reality of the situation is these teams are not representative of our towns which we are supposedly so precious about, which in itslef is a contradiction if there ever was one, we now say it is OK to have foreigners represent our countires.

That in turn means we can now all change our allegiances because our players play for another nation and therefor we afford ourselves the right to support that team.

It all eventualy means that we just support a team on a whim, with little required in the way of roots, pride, tradition etc.

Footballers generally earn enough money that they don't need the international game for anything but pride. If you look at England, they donate their match fees to charity. But thats easy to do when you earn £50,000 a week. Money isn't as much of an incentive when you have more money than you can possibly spend, although they do still seem to be grasping and greedy when it comes to their contract extensions. Match fees at international level are trifling by comparison. Rugby players don't have that luxury.

You raise an interesting point; do you think it's good for big rugby nations like the Boks to pick players who don't play in South Africa like the Argentinean and Brazilian football teams are forced to?

I don't think we are so different. I wish things were different too and I wish that the limits we have in Ireland on foreign players existed across the board. This would give players a chance to move abroad but ensure a level playing field. Because if left unchecked the richest nations will hover up all the existing talent and it will be to the detriment of the game globally. I also feel the same way about residency qualifications as you do.

But I'm not going to attack an individual for doing what he needs to do in the current system. I think that is selfish and probably hypocritical for most, when 90% of people would make the same choices in their career faced with the same choices. Instead, the IRB needs to enforce more regulations on things like residency. Unfettered capitalism is not going to deliver a healthy global game in decades to come and easily fulfilled residency requirements will skew the international game.

What I don;t understand is how rugby fans don't realise this problem is not unique to rugby, but affects society at large.

i don't think this is about attacking a player, it is about questioning the real issuehere, and you aptly mentioned it with football, they make enough money that they represent their nations with pride.

It does suggest that pride can be bought by those self same rich countries you are talking about. And I do agree professional rugby is going to ruin this game, the signs are already there.

Players are human and money wins out in the end, which brings into question every aspect I mentioned in this article.

We will all change our allegiances on a whim, imagine SA becomes so poor in rugby due to every player worth their salt leaves SA forbetter opportunities and a residency clause in their contracts. South Africans will start supporting foreign lands because that is where their heroes are.

I would lose all interest in rugby were that to happen. We already see it in our provincial rivalries where sons and fathers support different teams due to different sets of values when it comes to sport.

Taylorman, John Lennon never thought about rugby when he wrote Imagine.

By the way...fantastic post Biltong...very topical and an issue well worth pursuing in todays game, particularly as fans who follow the game...

I used to oppose Non-Irish players at Ulster, but then I saw that some of the players we sign show more commitment and passion in playing for Ulster than some of the homegrown players who took it for granted.

For instance, Ruan Pienaar has said he would happily finish his career at Ulster. I really hope that he is allowed to because some of the local lads could take a crash course in playing for the jersey from his and his compatriots.

Pedrie Wannenburg was especially passionate and it was a crying shame to see him forced out by the IRFU. You would naturally assume that the players in the Ulster squad who didn't grow up supporting the team would show less passion and commitment to the cause- but if anything their pride in wearing the jersey surpasses some of the homegrown players.

Cheers mate, I just thought if the son of a springbok captain is prepared to change his allegiance (imagine the bok fever household he grew up in) then what chance does any other guy have of remaining loyal to his nation.

Ospreydragon wrote:"If representing your country on the biggest stage in rugby union is merely seen as a profession ..." -- I don't think it is "merely" seen as a profession by most players.

If Wales, for example, were to be represented exclusively or almost exclusively by non-Welshmen or women, I would lose interest. I suspect a lot of Welsh fans would. But I accept that some individuals, through residency or grandparents (or parents), according to the rules, can qualify. Personally, I don't think grandparents should qualify someone. But if someone qualifies on residency, and is committed to a country because the club/region played a huge part in their development over at least 3 years, I think that's okay.

Looking at my own family, my sister and her partner are both welsh, but birn in England. They were working in Edinburgh when they started their family. All their kids have traditional (bloody awkward to spell) welsh names, but would only qualify through grandparents, or residency. So I can see how grandparents are relevant. That said they are back in wales now so i gueess they will qualify through residency soon enough.

Also thinking about Classens is it any different from the Leisley brothers and scotland a while back?

It is a predominant phenomenon in the modern era for players to play at an international level for a country despite being born in another country. The only IRB country which doesn't select players who weren't originally born in that country is Ireland.

gboycottnut wrote:It is a predominant phenomenon in the modern era for players to play at an international level for a country despite being born in another country. The only IRB country which doesn't select players who weren't originally born in that country is Ireland.

?? Is that a ....well what the hell is that? An idea that Irish posters are being holier than thou?

I think it's interesting that as the England team is improving it is becoming more "English" too.

Of our starting 22 on Saturday there was Hartley, Corbs, Barritt, Tuilagi, Vunipola and Waldrom who were not bron in England (I think)

Corbs is English (parents and brought up there)
Tuilagi and Vunipola I have no issue with either (brought up here)
Barritt - I don't know enough about to really judge. Above posters are saying that his family are actually very English)
Hartley - I have a slight issue with, but his mum is English
Waldrom - As English as BBqs on the beach at Xmas.

I think as time goes on they will reduce further as the academy system is starting to work.

As for the residency rules. It's been done to death on here. Most people think the Grandparents one is a bit stupid I think and most want residency time increased.

SecretFly wrote:

gboycottnut wrote:It is a predominant phenomenon in the modern era for players to play at an international level for a country despite being born in another country. The only IRB country which doesn't select players who weren't originally born in that country is Ireland.

?? Is that a ....well what the hell is that? An idea that Irish posters are being holier than thou?

Quite apart from anything else, we clearly do. There's not much Irish about Richardt Strauss for example! No moral high ground for us, thats for sure.

On another note I see in the last hour Juan Smith has been forced to retire. A real shame he really was a super player. I wonder will all his injuries can he filled under 'ultimately unfulfilled' career wise?

He was a great player. One of many forecd into retirement in the last 12 months.

Biltong wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:But he can make his living in England and play for his home nation (all his brothers have)

Where did Tuilagi grow up illegally?

Fixed that for you

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:On another note I see in the last hour Juan Smith has been forced to retire. A real shame he really was a super player. I wonder will all his injuries can he filled under 'ultimately unfulfilled' career wise?

Well he has a RWC medal, a number of Currie Cup medals, the only one that eluded him was the Super XV title.

He says he has other avenues avaiable to him in rugby, I suspect he is talking about coaching, but first he will take a week holiday and clear his mind.

For me he was the player of the 2007 RWC, scored 3 tries during the tournament and never stood back for anyone.

Simply a great Springbok.

Biltong wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:On another note I see in the last hour Juan Smith has been forced to retire. A real shame he really was a super player. I wonder will all his injuries can he filled under 'ultimately unfulfilled' career wise?

Well he has a RWC medal, a number of Currie Cup medals, the only one that eluded him was the Super XV title.

He says he has other avenues avaiable to him in rugby, I suspect he is talking about coaching, but first he will take a week holiday and clear his mind.

For me he was the player of the 2007 RWC, scored 3 tries during the tournament and never stood back for anyone.

Simply a great Springbok.

What I meant was more along the lines of 'achieved a lot but could have achieved a hell of a lot more' type unfulfilled if he hadn't been injured.

Well he missed the last two years, so that would be 24 tests, another world cup and about a gazillion Super XV matches.

I know he was planning on doing a fewseason in France to bolster his pension, sadly that has been taken out ofhishands now.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Ospreydragon wrote:"If representing your country on the biggest stage in rugby union is merely seen as a profession ..." -- I don't think it is "merely" seen as a profession by most players.

If Wales, for example, were to be represented exclusively or almost exclusively by non-Welshmen or women, I would lose interest. I suspect a lot of Welsh fans would. But I accept that some individuals, through residency or grandparents (or parents), according to the rules, can qualify. Personally, I don't think grandparents should qualify someone. But if someone qualifies on residency, and is committed to a country because the club/region played a huge part in their development over at least 3 years, I think that's okay.

Looking at my own family, my sister and her partner are both welsh, but birn in England. They were working in Edinburgh when they started their family. All their kids have traditional (bloody awkward to spell) welsh names, but would only qualify through grandparents, or residency. So I can see how grandparents are relevant. That said they are back in wales now so i gueess they will qualify through residency soon enough.

Also thinking about Classens is it any different from the Leisley brothers and scotland a while back?

I don't know. I've always found Jones an easy name to spell. But then again we had the great Michael Jones when I was growing up so it was drummed into me at an early age. I suspect if I tried now I'd find it impossible.

Agree Kia. Not a lot of difficulty with any of the four ...Jones, Edwards, Evans and Williams. Whats hard about any of those?

Difficult one Biltong it`s not as if Meyer has said play for us or you`re in our sights is it?SA has picked players resident overseas but not him.I agree with
you about his heritage but in these pragmatic times he is free to be capped by his adopted country.
In days of yore he could have picked up a few France caps then gone home and been a Bok IF they wanted him.
HAD someone given him enough game time at home maybe he would`nt have seeked it abroad?

I was born and bred in North Wales and am a devoted supporter of Wales and always will be. I also support the AB's (apart from when they play Wales:) ). I have two son's who have been educated through the NZ education and have been trained in rugby by the local club. One of the lads was born in Wales the other in NZ, I as their father am now a citizen of NZ, whilst their mum is a Kiwi.

The rest is in the realms of fantasy but, my Welsh born son could play for the All Blacks whilst my NZ born son could play for Wales! I have told them both that they should play for Wales and have told them thatif one or both of them decided to play for the AB's their father would be cheering against them if they played Wales.

Despite the odds against it happening for me, both my sons would have very difficult decisions to make. Some would argue that their education and sports have been made possible by the NZ system, but this does not remove the fire in your belly and heart for where you have your sense of belonging.

Cash could become a huge issue with the cold bloodedness of some people. Imagine the USA wanting to really contend in Union offering Uni places and huge contracts for youngsters from Union playing nations? it's the $$$ sign that will destroy nations and the passion for playing for a nation you should play for.

Professionalism not even 20 years old in Union, it could be the tolling of its death.

rainbow-warrior wrote:I was born and bred in North Wales and am a devoted supporter of Wales and always will be. I also support the AB's (apart from when they play Wales:) ). I have two son's who have been educated through the NZ education and have been trained in rugby by the local club. One of the lads was born in Wales the other in NZ, I as their father am now a citizen of NZ, whilst their mum is a Kiwi.

The rest is in the realms of fantasy but, my Welsh born son could play for the All Blacks whilst my NZ born son could play for Wales! I have told them both that they should play for Wales and have told them thatif one or both of them decided to play for the AB's their father would be cheering against them if they played Wales.

Despite the odds against it happening for me, both my sons would have very difficult decisions to make. Some would argue that their education and sports have been made possible by the NZ system, but this does not remove the fire in your belly and heart for where you have your sense of belonging.

Cash could become a huge issue with the cold bloodedness of some people. Imagine the USA wanting to really contend in Union offering Uni places and huge contracts for youngsters from Union playing nations? it's the $$$ sign that will destroy nations and the passion for playing for a nation you should play for.

Professionalism not even 20 years old in Union, it could be the tolling of its death.

Gee telling a boy born and bred in NZ to a Kiwi mum that he shouldn't play for NZ cause his NZ citizen father was born in Wales, but doesn't want to live there, seems pretty harsh.

nganboy wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:I was born and bred in North Wales and am a devoted supporter of Wales and always will be. I also support the AB's (apart from when they play Wales:) ). I have two son's who have been educated through the NZ education and have been trained in rugby by the local club. One of the lads was born in Wales the other in NZ, I as their father am now a citizen of NZ, whilst their mum is a Kiwi.

The rest is in the realms of fantasy but, my Welsh born son could play for the All Blacks whilst my NZ born son could play for Wales! I have told them both that they should play for Wales and have told them that if one or both of them decided to play for the AB's their father would be cheering against them if they played Wales.

Despite the odds against it happening for me, both my sons would have very difficult decisions to make. Some would argue that their education and sports have been made possible by the NZ system, but this does not remove the fire in your belly and heart for where you have your sense of belonging.

Cash could become a huge issue with the cold bloodedness of some people. Imagine the USA wanting to really contend in Union offering Uni places and huge contracts for youngsters from Union playing nations? it's the $$$ sign that will destroy nations and the passion for playing for a nation you should play for.

Professionalism not even 20 years old in Union, it could be the tolling of its death.

Gee telling a boy born and bred in NZ to a Kiwi mum that he shouldn't play for NZ cause his NZ citizen father was born in Wales, but doesn't want to live there, seems pretty harsh.

Who says I do not want to live there? Ever heard of employment and the fact I may be contracted to work here?

It is typical of a Kiwi just to look at kiwi things though, you are far to insular as a race, possibly bordering on the egocentric thinking that this entire earth is constantly thinking of you guys 24/7! ... and before you start making up any further crap, I have highlighted some of the things I said. Yes I have told them I want them to play for Wales but they also know as my sons I would back their decisions.
My sons spent many years in Wales and return there often, they both speak Welsh as does their mum:) Oddly enough there is a Maori guy with his wife and kids living about a mile away from where I used to live in N Wales. He has settled there and his kids speak Welsh too:) I know his son used to play for the local rugby club and he is Maori through and through but Welsh by birth, if good enough I do hope he plays for Wales:)

woops settle down people...interesting story ..often wondered about the rainbow warrior thing. So you're in NZ now?

How are you finding the differences at the local level. I wouldnt have thought it would be too different at the younger age groups as its more at the regional level and up where all the emphasis goes on high performance etc.

What about training styles, grounds and conditions and parental involvement with the clubs? Are there obvious differences or 'is the game the same everywhere' as some believe it to be?

Taylorman wrote:woops settle down people...interesting story ..often wondered about the rainbow warrior thing. So you're in NZ now?

How are you finding the differences at the local level. I wouldnt have thought it would be too different at the younger age groups as its more at the regional level and up where all the emphasis goes on high performance etc.

What about training styles, grounds and conditions and parental involvement with the clubs? Are there obvious differences or 'is the game the same everywhere' as some believe it to be?

I am from North Wales Taylor, so there would be some contention between me and my brothers further down South who believe they own the game:) Unfortunately funding for North Wales has always been dire but if you can ignore 80,000 people so be it. We have had a few play for Wales but I argue many have been lost over the decades. There are great little clubs in North, Mid and East Wales but like other areas in Wales kids are sucked into football and it is an enduring battle in Wales to keep them rugby orientated.

Certainly one huge difference is from that early age to be honest. Here in NZ you see most young kids with a rugby ball in their hands or oddly basketballs (still hand skills). Training starts earlier and kids football (mixed) is there for the fitness and less body contact, but it develops quickly into the boys growing up wanting to play union. From that time onwards NZ beats any other nation hands down it it's involvement with the players. Grounds at grass roots level are pretty much the same local support, great clubhouses etc. NZ has better grounds than Wales, I am talking Hamilton, Whangarei, Nelson, Dunedin (now), Tauronga, Rotorua, New Plymouth, Palmy North, Invercargil, even the new set up in Christchurch etc etc all are modern facilities. When it comes to Eden Park, Wellington then Cardiff beats you hands down. That's why I always say Hamilton it the best international ground you have, it just needs both ends built up and you have a great international stadium because you are right on the field of play.

Anyway I ws not going to slag off NZ for it's infrastructure Union wise, you can not anyway. You can nit pick, but I have too much respect for the education and training my lads have had in NZ hence the dichotamy I could find myself in! Thankfully I never forget I am Welsh, my mam won't let me:) So even if my lads did have the honour of playing International rugby if they chose NZ I would still support Wales when they played.

My daughter loves netball, I have no problems with her wanting to play for the Silver Ferns, for obvious reasons.

gboycottnut wrote:It is a predominant phenomenon in the modern era for players to play at an international level for a country despite being born in another country. The only IRB country which doesn't select players who weren't originally born in that country is Ireland.

Ronan O'Gara was born in San Diego.

I think the stats for the 2012 calendar year were:

Country %players born in Country
Argentina 100%
South Africa 97%
New Zealand 97%
France 97%
Ireland 84%
Australia 76%
Wales 73%
Scotland 72%
England 70%
Italy 66%

I think the long term issue will relate to schools and academies effectively taking foreign players. Messi is an example in football. It's common in rugby league and we've seen a bit of it already in union. I'm not sure how, or even if, you can police it. I see that the Australia rugby league state of origin is looking to set the criteria for representation at your location when you were 15.

blackcanelion wrote:I think the stats for the 2012 calendar year were:

Country %players born in Country
Argentina 100%
South Africa 97%
New Zealand 97%
France 97%
Ireland 84%
Australia 76%
Wales 73%
Scotland 72%
England 70%
Italy 66%

I think the long term issue will relate to schools and academies effectively taking foreign players. Messi is an example in football. It's common in rugby league and we've seen a bit of it already in union. I'm not sure how, or even if, you can police it. I see that the Australia rugby league state of origin is looking to set the criteria for representation at your location when you were 15.

Source please?

Scrum.com stats advanced search for a players by date and nation (i.e. 1 jan 2012 to 31 dec 2012). Gives all the players. Most of them have the origin. Those that aren't are listed in club bios or other sources. Could be wrong but I can give you the list if you want. by my reckoning the following players who represented their country were born outside their country :

South Africa
Mtawarira Zimbabwe

New Zealand
B Franks Australia

France
Dusautoir Ivory Coast

Ireland
Court Australia
Heaslip Isreal
O'Gara USA
McCarthy England

Australia
Samo Fiji
Ioane New Zealand
Timani Tonga
Cooper New Zealand
Genia Papua New Gunea
Harris New Zealand
Moore Saudi Arabia
Pocock Zimbabwe

Wales
Cuthbert England
Davies England
I Evans South Africa
Faletau Tonga
North England
Lydiate England
Charteris England
Shingler England

Scotland
Barclay Hong Kong
Denton Zimbabwe
Hamilton England
M Evans England
Morrison Hong Kong
Jackson England
Kalman England
Parks Australia

England
Barritt South Africa
Botha South Africa
Corbisiero USA
Dickson Germany
Hartley New Zealand
Stevens South Africa
Tuilagi Western Samoa
Sharples Hong Kong

Italy
RJ Barbieri Canada
Botes England
Burton Australia
Canale Argentina
Geldenhuys South Africa
Parisse Argentina
McLean Australia
Castrogiovanni Argentina
van Zyl South Africa
Furno Australia
Vosawai Fiji

Could be errors here, or players I've missed.

Interesting stats black, but how many of these guys are bona fide journeymen? I.e. - Dickson was born in Germany. Now, my initial thoughts would be that he was an Army/Forces brat. So he's about as German as my big toe nail in the big picture.

As Rainbow pointed out as well, a lot of the Welsh guys born in England doesn't mean they identify as English at all. There are no borders, both are consituent nations in one country, and there is a huge amount of cross over. I.e - my nan was a primary school teacher who lived in Penllergaer (i guess nearest 'big' rugby town would be considered Llanelli), and i spent a fair amount of time at the local Gorseinon primary school. I never have or ever will consider myself Welsh. The same goes for a WQP who was born/spent time in England. Outside of the jingosim that is Rugby tribes, the home nations really are so integrated there are no defined lines.

Stories like this will be rife through that list i bet.

AlastairW wrote:Interesting stats black, but how many of these guys are bona fide journeymen? I.e. - Dickson was born in Germany. Now, my initial thoughts would be that he was an Army/Forces brat. So he's about as German as my big toe nail in the big picture.

As Rainbow pointed out as well, a lot of the Welsh guys born in England doesn't mean they identify as English at all. There are no borders, both are consituent nations in one country, and there is a huge amount of cross over. I.e - my nan was a primary school teacher who lived in Penllergaer (i guess nearest 'big' rugby town would be considered Llanelli), and i spent a fair amount of time at the local Gorseinon primary school. I never have or ever will consider myself Welsh. The same goes for a WQP who was born/spent time in England. Outside of the jingosim that is Rugby tribes, the home nations really are so integrated there are no defined lines.

Stories like this will be rife through that list i bet.

Same as Daf Jones being born in Namibia, or Ian Evans being South African. Your birth place is sometimes very misleading, especially when you look at England/Wales/Scotland/Ireland, as people tend to travel the UK for where the work is. I believe a fair number of the English born Welsh players are from a long line of welsh born family, have lived in the country before they could pick up a rugby ball (probably lived here from before they can really remember) and a handful of them are Welsh speakers too. But that said Cuthbert is an English mole that was planted in the Welsh squad to ensure that we are dire in defence.

I would agree with that. National lines are very much blurred in the UK. People work in different nations for a few years, move on to the next etc. However like you all say you are stuck to your culture and traditions.

That is very much understandable.

From my perspective I see rugby culture as something you get exposed to from an early age.

Take Barrit as an example. He may have english parents and grew up in an english household, however his rugby mentality will be pure South African, he learnt his trade here, our mentality onfield and offfield will have not only rubbed off on him but formed his mentlity, skills and rugby brain.

No matter what or who he is, his rugby genius (for the want of a better descriptive word) is purely South African.

Until of course he moved to England which would have either added or subtracted to his moulding as a player.

George North was born in Engalnd as his old man was in the RAF, he then went to Honk Kong before returning to Anglesey at the age of 2. I know George moderately well through N Wales rugby and talked Welsh to him. Call him Engish at your peril...unless you have a large plate of Nando's on you:)

I bet during the 'Empire' days in the Raj, many English players would have been born in India. These guys would have been entitled to play for India I guess. What if my Mrs had given birth in transit my son could have been born in Dubai! In NZ guys with only 64th Maori blood are allowed to play for the NZ Maori. There in lies another problem altogether and one very good reason why Maori will never have their own rugby National side which can compete in things like the world cup and 4 nations.

What if ...... you were born in International waters or in a plane 35,000 up?

Maybe so Bilt; almost definatley.

Not really sure what to say to that to be honest. Outside of the UK, maybe they did move for the £££ and have no pride in the SA Jersey, maybe they wanted to play International and were told early on they wouldn't be good enough for the Boks, it's all speculation. I can understand from a SA point of view it must be frustrating to see, and my nation is unfortuantley rather guilty of 'poaching' i have to say, and not only in Rugby.

If there is a dirge of players leaving, such as Claassen, then maybe there should be a look into why? There has to be a reason, humans (in general) tend not to act in absence of thought or reason. If they have been told they'll never represent their country at the sport they love though, can you really blame them for looking else where?

ScarletSpiderman wrote: ... that said Cuthbert is an English mole that was planted in the Welsh squad to ensure that we are dire in defence...

Curses! Busted!


.. Agent Cuthbert ... your cover ... is blown ...

Alastair there are only three possible reasons players leave, and they will justify to themselves why they do it.

1. Money
2. Transformation
3. Doesn't want to live in SA as they don't beleive there is a future here anymore.


Some will say crime and corruption as well. Although I can tell you now that corruption doesn't affect them, it affects the poor who are waiting for houses, and jobs etc.

Crime can be managed in SA, we live in a nature estate that is very secure, and similar to any other nation, you just don't walk in certain parts of town in the middle of the night.

I've struggled through the yards of comment on this post and it's interesting.

My point would be that the whole issue is clouded by people filtering other peoples' values through their own viewpoint. Which is of course prejudicial.

As I read, I was listening to an ex-big-wig in the English catholic church describing the Pope's resignation as 'heroic'.

Not a description I would have used but like some describe globally returning combatants from Afghanistan, 9-11 bombers, etc as heroes. Not appropriate in my view, but dependent on the commentator's prejudiced personal perspective.

So it is with this national pride guff. There is no objective measure. Only a subjective view of another's subjective view. Personally I'd side with Biltong that there must be a lack of national pride, but clearly others are untroubled by it.

You're venturing awfully close to an commentary on social issues there Bilt, and that i am in no place to comment, not even in passing, as i've never been to SA (Still on the to do list!).

It's an interesting point, but i think beyond discussing such issues, anyone outside of SA is in no position to pass comment without looking either arrogant or ignorant. Again, both of which my nation is accused of on a pretty regular basis!

Biltong true about Barritt but he is basically a dual citizen.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jan/28/six-nations-2012-brad-barritt-england

Barritt was enjoying a successful career with his native Sharks when Eddie Jones, then director of rugby at Saracens, invited him to England towards the end of 2008. He was 22 and had been vice-captain of the Sharks and played at fly-half as well as centre after making his Super 14 debut in 2006.

"I have never had cause to regret the decision to move," said Barritt. "I have a strong English background. My parents both have British passports and I have family links in Devon and London. When Brian Smith [the then attack coach] asked me in 2009 to pledge my allegiance to England, it did not take me long to agree. I had grown up in Durban, living somewhat of a sheltered life, and it was a great opportunity for me to live in London and grow as a person.

In another article:

My grandparents were born in England and grandfather played for England Universities. I have strong English roots and a lot of my extended family, aunts and uncles, live in England… so no, no issues.

I would say the most similar equivalent to him is Kevin Pietersen.

Brad Barritt had a choice - he could have pursued an international career in SA but instead he chose to come to England.

I would say his scenario is different to Flutey,Hape,Waldrom,Vainokolo etc.

Plus you could see the likes of Barritt and Manu belting out the national anthem.

greytiger wrote:I've struggled through the yards of comment on this post and it's interesting.

My point would be that the whole issue is clouded by people filtering other peoples' values through their own viewpoint. Which is of course prejudicial.

As I read, I was listening to an ex-big-wig in the English catholic church describing the Pope's resignation as 'heroic'.

Not a description I would have used but like some describe globally returning combatants from Afghanistan, 9-11 bombers, etc as heroes. Not appropriate in my view, but dependent on the commentator's prejudiced personal perspective.

So it is with this national pride guff. There is no objective measure. Only a subjective view of another's subjective view. Personally I'd side with Biltong that there must be a lack of national pride, but clearly others are untroubled by it.

So you are not proud of whatever nationality you are? Good job you don't play Union at international level you'd be off to the highest bidder.

God, this goes back ages. John Robbie, the old Ireland scrum-half, emigrated to South Africa, where he was picked twice for the Boks (although I don't think he was ultimately capped). If you decide to live in a different country, I don't see why you shouldn't play for that country, especially if you feel a part of it.

There are shades, of course. Someone like Mike Catt, who is still contributing mightily to English rugby, is clearly an example of someone with his heart in his adopted country. Others haven't been - Brian Smith, who went from Australia to Ireland, back to Australiafor League, and has been a bit of a gun for hire as a coach, would seem to fit into the "flag of convenience" category.

I understand that Claassen has lived in France for six years or so, and he hasn't actually played rugby for his nation of birth. As for the question of pride, I don't see why a person can't feel pride in the achievements of their father while wanting to carve out their own path. In any walk of life, people emigrate and make a new life elsewhere. So it is with rugby - it doesn't have to mean that you are disowning your family.

Why can't a player move to a nation and love it like his own?

He's been there for 6 years, he was a young man when he emigrated and had nearly zero first class rugby behind him (Currie Cup Premier Division minimum).

He's lived there long enough to get citizenship and I doubt he could live there for so long without learning the language and the culture. There is a lot he could be grateful to France for; employment, family security, perhaps a family.

Is it that impossible to have national pride in ones adopted nation?

Sure he's Afrikaans and his da was a springbok captain... he will never be a full frenchman but national pride is a personal thing... some people have distinctive love for their nation, some don't. It doesn't make him any less of a person.

His Da was bok captain yes but only played 10 odd times for the boks when they were in isolation... its not like he had 80 odd caps.

There are just as many reasons for South Africans to be ashamed of their country as there are to be positive I'm afraid to say so its quite easy to cut yourself off from it.

While I think about it, the great New Zealand cricketer Martin Donnelly played rugby for England while at Oxford University in the 40s. I think Clive van Ryneveld also played rugby for England in the 50s, although a South African cricketer and a South African man through and through.

The point is that this issue is far from modern and it's also exceedingly complex.

beshocked wrote:Biltong true about Barritt but he is basically a dual citizen.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jan/28/six-nations-2012-brad-barritt-england

Barritt was enjoying a successful career with his native Sharks when Eddie Jones, then director of rugby at Saracens, invited him to England towards the end of 2008. He was 22 and had been vice-captain of the Sharks and played at fly-half as well as centre after making his Super 14 debut in 2006.

"I have never had cause to regret the decision to move," said Barritt. "I have a strong English background. My parents both have British passports and I have family links in Devon and London. When Brian Smith [the then attack coach] asked me in 2009 to pledge my allegiance to England, it did not take me long to agree. I had grown up in Durban, living somewhat of a sheltered life, and it was a great opportunity for me to live in London and grow as a person.

In another article:

My grandparents were born in England and grandfather played for England Universities. I have strong English roots and a lot of my extended family, aunts and uncles, live in England… so no, no issues.

I would say the most similar equivalent to him is Kevin Pietersen.

Brad Barritt had a choice - he could have pursued an international career in SA but instead he chose to come to England.

I would say his scenario is different to Flutey,Hape,Waldrom,Vainokolo etc.

Plus you could see the likes of Barritt and Manu belting out the national anthem.

Yeah mate, I am fully aware of his dual citizen ship, I just his experience as an example of where the tradition and rugby culture comes in.

the whole point of this situation for me is important because of the follwing factors.

1. Club rugby has lost its identity in the sense that what we all held dear to our hearts was the sense of tribalism, in other words, my town against your town. It has disappeared since pro rugby has come about, I see it in our Provincial rugby. Just look at the Sharks and you will see that more than half their first choice XV comes from other provinces, the same with the Bulls, when Bryan Habana scored the winning try in the 2007 Super Rugby tournament, he was a Transvaal (Lions) wing that was bought for money. Hence the tribalism has all but disappeared.
2. Test rugby is the last stand. Once the lines are blurred here, there isn't even nationalism anymore, just a bunch of pro players making money out of rugby, and we as fans support teams that have absoltely nothing to do with tribalism or nationalism. It is a token contest then. Who has the most money, cause they can afford the better players.
3. Once rugby has lost its nationalism, people will no longer identify with their teams, rugby has always been built on pride, passion and patriotism. when you remove those ingredients from a rugby contest, what is left? Nothing more than 30 players plying a trade.
4. We need tribalism, we need nationalism when it comes to sport. How else do you think you will fill stands and get the big TV deals?
5. Compare a reality show like BIg Brother or Masterchef etc with sport. It is not the same thing yet, because sport is a reality show where we have vested interest. We don't miss the games, we don't want to miss the games.
6. remember this, sport allows our inner juices to flow, it wakes our neanderthal or primitive side, we belt out loud when we socre a try, we get hyped up by winning a tough test match, we celebrate our wins with our mates, we feel like comrades in arms who have just won a battle. But only because there is passion.

Take that away, and we have a bunch of casual observers left.

rainbow-warrior wrote:

greytiger wrote:I've struggled through the yards of comment on this post and it's interesting.

My point would be that the whole issue is clouded by people filtering other peoples' values through their own viewpoint. Which is of course prejudicial.

As I read, I was listening to an ex-big-wig in the English catholic church describing the Pope's resignation as 'heroic'.

Not a description I would have used but like some describe globally returning combatants from Afghanistan, 9-11 bombers, etc as heroes. Not appropriate in my view, but dependent on the commentator's prejudiced personal perspective.

So it is with this national pride guff. There is no objective measure. Only a subjective view of another's subjective view. Personally I'd side with Biltong that there must be a lack of national pride, but clearly others are untroubled by it.

So you are not proud of whatever nationality you are? Good job you don't play Union at international level you'd be off to the highest bidder.

That is not what I said rainbow. I said that in my view that others' differing ones cannot be measured in absolute terms. I feel that I would have struggled to square commitment to my country with playing for another. But that's just my opinion.

When I say this national pride guff, I mean that my opinion holds no sway in the grand scheme of things. And probably in an ideal world nor should it.

But there's no ideal world - maybe in another part of the multiverse there is an Earth where countries don't exist and the matter wouldn't arise, but in this version it's not a matter to get engorged about.