The World..oh sorry france 74 man extended squad (inculding Armitage)

France's 30-man squad: Mas, Slimani, Kayser, Szarzewski, Guirado, Domingo, Debaty, Flanquart, Maestri, Papé, Vahaamahina, Dusautoir, Burban, Le Roux, Nyanga, Ouedraogo, Chouly, Claassen, Picamoles, Machenaud, Parra, Michalak, Tales, Trinh-Duc, Médard, Huget, Bastareaud, Fofana, Lamerat, Dulin.


30 additional players: Ducalcon, Tolofua, Orioli, Ben Arous, Chiocci, Menini, Tichit, Le Devedec, Suta, R. Taofifenua, Bruni, Camara, Lapandry, Lauret, Galan, Ollivon, Doussain, Pélissié, Tillous-Borde, Lopez, Plisson, Fall, Guitoune, Thomas, Fickou, Fritz, Mermoz, Buttin, Germain, Palis.
 

The 10 potentially selectable foreigners: Uini Atonio (La Rochelle), François van der Merwe (Racing Métro), Steffon Armitage (Toulon), Alex Tulou (Montpellier), Rory Kockott (Castres), Brock James (Clermont), Blair Connor (Bordeaux Bègles), Noa Nakaitaci (Clermont), David Smith (Toulon), Scott Spedding (Brive).

http://www.planetrugby.co.uk/story/0,25883,16024_9466204,00.html


 Pretty disgusted by that.
 
 Could be a hell of a team though.

I think nations better starting tying their players in at U16 level so France can't poach them.

i thought Armitage cant currently play 15s for France as he has already played full senior 15s for England. Nothing to do with him having a passport or not.

and that the only way around that was via the Olympic 7s backdoor?

is that not correct?

The Saint wrote:I think nations better starting tying their players in at U16 level so France can't poach them.

u16 and u18 level dont actually tie them in.

in fact both armitages played u16 rugby for...France!

quinsforever wrote:

The Saint wrote:I think nations better starting tying their players in at U16 level so France can't poach them.

u16 and u18 level dont actually tie them in.

in fact both armitages played u16 rugby for...France!

I know that. I was suggesting that someone up there should alter the criteria. I know Wales and SA right now have their players earmarked by the U20s.

ah i see. good idea. but i suppose the negative is that cynical nations would try to play as many of their players at u16 level as possible to stop them playing for anyone else, even if they have parental or grandparental eligibility for other nations.

also, pretty sure that at u18 and u16 level any restrictions (on playing for other countries) would be contractually unenforceable given the age of the players.

TBh if playing for England senior squad doesn't stop Armitage from playing for someone else I don't know what else would.

Welly wrote:TBh if playing for England senior squad doesn't stop Armitage from playing for someone else I don't know what else would.

Well said.

I initially thought it was a kind of hoax but then I saw the same story elsewhere.

not sure what is the most shocking thing :
- a list of 74 (!) players to be supervised 1 year before the RWC
- 10 foreigners including average guys like Spedding and 3 guys that will need a french passport to be qualified (Steffon Armitage, Alex Tulou and Blair Connor)
- or the FFR president Pierre Camou saying ""Eventually they will declare their love for France. But I can tell you that the ten players are very much in love with France"

and wden I thought things could not get worst...

whocares wrote:


and wden I thought things could not get worst...

 But then whocares.

 

Welly wrote:

whocares wrote:


and wden I thought things could not get worst...

 Cut then whocares.

 

?

Good I'm delighted. Let them pick 15 foreigners and show what a joke the rules are. Its not only France either. Every country is doing the same. Only difference is they've more foreigners to choose from.

Problem found by players playing for France is that lots of other players in the team dont speak English.

How is France observing 10 foreign players any different to the project players of Ireland and Wales? Players who fill a slot that is defined by the fact they may gain residency qualification.

I'm guessing the passport stuff for Armitage relates to being selected for Olympic sevens (you need a passport for this) which would then make him eligible for France.

Either that or the author doesn't have a clue.

HammerofThunor wrote:How is France observing 10 foreign players any different to the project players of Ireland and Wales? Players who fill a slot that is defined by the fact they may gain residency qualification.

I'm guessing the passport stuff for Armitage relates to being selected for Olympic sevens (you need a passport for this) which would then make him eligible for France.

Either that or the author doesn't have a clue.

Nobody ever said the 'project player' guff in Ireland and Wales (and England and Scotland) was okay by comparison. It all stinks.

I swear the rugby world is shedding sanity by the week nowadays.

Knowsit17 wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:How is France observing 10 foreign players any different to the project players of Ireland and Wales? Players who fill a slot that is defined by the fact they may gain residency qualification.

I'm guessing the passport stuff for Armitage relates to being selected for Olympic sevens (you need a passport for this) which would then make him eligible for France.

Either that or the author doesn't have a clue.

Nobody ever said the 'project player' guff in Ireland and Wales (and England and Scotland) was okay by comparison. It all stinks.

I swear the rugby world is shedding sanity by the week nowadays.

And yet you rarely hear the moral outrage about it do you?

assuming Armitage was ok being on this list, I hope it stops all the calls for him to play for England.

I hear it plenty, just because you choose not to doesn't mean others can't.

Other than you and the odd couple of others I have come across nobody so pro-mercenary. The vast majority on the threads I have sampled on the topic seem rather alarmed by the utter joke rugby is swiftly being reduced to.

In what way have I said I'm pro mercenary? And living in Hull where no-one gives a Poopie about rugby the only chance I have to 'hear' it is on here. When was there an article dedicated to it? When has there ever been much more than a "I don't like it really" and then move on? Perhaps you and your mates rant and rage over it in real life but I can't hear that can I? I do see repeated posts when it concerns any hint of the French playing someone not 'French'.

Perhaps predictably the one I am really frustrated by is Armitage. I've largely held off commenting about it because I didn't actually think it would happen. Now though, I just can't understand (loophole or not) how somebody could commit to one nation and be allowed to play for another, the Olympics' loophole is plain wrong (in relation to rugby at least).

Some players have and are taking the mick with qualifying. I wouldn t want the Faletaus of this world ever stopped from playing for Wales which means the length of qualifying needs to be hicked up. Its getting more blatent and will start to hurt internationals and interest if allowed to go on.

HammerofThunor wrote:In what way have I said I'm pro mercenary? And living in Hull where no-one gives a Poopie about rugby the only chance I have to 'hear' it is on here. When was there an article dedicated to it? When has there ever been much more than a "I don't like it really" and then move on? Perhaps you and your mates rant and rage over it in real life but I can't hear that can I? I do see repeated posts when it concerns any hint of the French playing someone not 'French'.

You said you don't hear outrage on the matter. I don't know whether you were referring to where you live or just in general. I assumed the latter and disagreed as a) this is hardly the first thread on the topic and b) as I said the vast majority on other threads I've visited have been disgusted by the increasing exploitation and opportunism by sides on the international circuit.

If France, with the ridiculous encouragement of the IRB, are so keen to open their metaphorical borders then eventually others will take a similar stance and when that happens you might as well ditch international rugby as it'll essentially be a glorified club circuit.

Armitage is a peculiar case. Both Armitages played for France at U16 before having ever played rugby in England at all.

their parents and they moved to England and they both ended up winning full senior caps. Steffon Armitage, according to a recent article i read with interviews with Ritchie (RFU) made it clear he will never be selected for England while playing in France. In all honesty, can we be surprised that he (speaking fluent french and having played 80% of his rugby in France) might be inclined to try to play for France if St Andre expressed interest?

we reap what we sow.

doesnt mean i disagree with the RFU 65% rule for AP and no foreign based players, but we cant be surprised if other nations look to take advantage.

If he felt French its fine. But then did he play for England for the money? Players swapping countries normally through different sports make a mockery of internationals. We dont yet know if Steffon is trying to do this.

no-one plays for england for the money. you might only get 1 match. thats not a financial jackpot.

they play for french clubs for the money.

Both the Armitages started playing in England before they went to France, but they were pretty young.

Their adoptive father is English and they moved here with him when young. They then moved to France due to his work. They then moved back to England when Delon was about 16 I think (possible 18, wasn't there something about him not being selected for U18?).

Steffon lived in England from at least 8 and lived in France from 11 to 16. He then lived in England until 26. Then he's lived the last 3 years in France. Even if we ignore the rugby he played before moving to France the first time he's played more in England...but only just.

But I have no problem with him playing for France (as I've sad before). If he gains French citizenship, and then plays for France in the sevens and then gets selected for France for the 15s then I wish him well. And I would look forward to seeing him play at international level again.

Looks like the IRB will decide whether players can jump through the loophole. Could get messy.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11323696

Now that Samoa have as many as nine players ready to switch their allegiance, the IRB are talking tough. Players whose eligibility has been captured will have to gain the IRB's approval to play for another country. "There is a regulations committee that will look at all applications for transfer and they will look to see if it's for bona fide Sevens reasons," said IRB chief executive Brett Gosper.

"There is a safety net and any transfer will have to be passed by the committee. They will act according to the spirit of the law. For example, if we have huge props applying for a career in Sevens, then we'll smell a rat. That's an obvious example and there will be some cases that are in a grey area, but we want to ensure the integrity of the regulation and the spirit behind it is upheld".

The RFU and Lancaster have said several times that the "exceptional circumstances" clause would have to be very exceptional. We can only guess, but you'd think one such circumstance might be if two of our leading back row options, say Robshaw and Billy V, suffered season-ending injuries.

If Armitage is genuinely considering the French option, then I suspect he'll have to be the one to make a decision on availability. France would want him around the squad sooner than any potential "exceptional circumstance" would crop up on the England side, so the ball will be in his court.

I'd prefer it that way. I'm uncomfortable with anyone suggesting that he should be ignored just because he's applying for another passport. Certainly, it has obvious implications, but it doesn't make him ineligible for England.

ebop wrote:Looks like the IRB will decide whether players can jump through the loophole. Could get messy.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11323696

Now that Samoa have as many as nine players ready to switch their allegiance, the IRB are talking tough. Players whose eligibility has been captured will have to gain the IRB's approval to play for another country.  "There is a regulations committee that will look at all applications for transfer and they will look to see if it's for bona fide Sevens reasons," said IRB chief executive Brett Gosper.

"There is a safety net and any transfer will have to be passed by the committee. They will act according to the spirit of the law. For example, if we have huge props applying for a career in Sevens, then we'll smell a rat. That's an obvious example and there will be some cases that are in a grey area, but we want to ensure the integrity of the regulation and the spirit behind it is upheld".

Actually Ebop I wouldnt have any problem with that, If John Afoa said to himself that he would like to play for his Island of heritage, Samoa, via an illustrious career as a sevens player then fair enough, not only would it be quite funny but also such a Samoan thing to do.

Come on Laurie, you know how fast Afoa is, for a prop. He'd be good for a minute or so in sevens. Worth a punt. If the IRB put the kybosh on Afoa playing sevens it'd be typical wouldn't it.

All he has to do is last for 30 seconds in sevens, then he can play fifteens. Good for Samoa, Good for Afoa, good for International Rugby.

Terrible for international rugby.

Maybe that's why the IRB changed its name to World Rugby as they seem content to allow international teams to make that title appropriate.

Surely its for 7's so the Irb should make the transfer role ONLY for 7's.

Ie If Stefon wants to play 7's for France in the Olympics then fine, but not be allowed to play 15's. Its almost like a different code like League.

I absolutely hate all these possible transfers etc....its just making a complete mockery of rugby,

HammerofThunor wrote:

Knowsit17 wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:How is France observing 10 foreign players any different to the project players of Ireland and Wales? Players who fill a slot that is defined by the fact they may gain residency qualification.

I'm guessing the passport stuff for Armitage relates to being selected for Olympic sevens (you need a passport for this) which would then make him eligible for France.

Either that or the author doesn't have a clue.

Nobody ever said the 'project player' guff in Ireland and Wales (and England and Scotland) was okay by comparison. It all stinks.

I swear the rugby world is shedding sanity by the week nowadays.

And yet you rarely hear the moral outrage about it do you?

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/scrap-joke-residency-qualification-former-7756528

Yeah, no one ever says anything ever

I genuinely don't care if Armitage gets selected for France at 7s. He likes France, he lived there when young, he lives there now, he plays there, he speaks the lingo. Yes, he has played for England at 15s but he turned his back on the EPS by going to France chasing the money. I don't expect he'll be selected by France for 15s as he'd be ineligible under the current rules.

It's no different to Shantayne Hape & Lesley Vainikolo; both played RL for different countries but as soon as they were eligible they were fast-tracked into the England side. 7s is not 15-a-side rugby - the basics are the same but it is not the same sport. Armitage will play for France if he wants to and nobody else can make that assumption but him. I am intrigued to see how it pans out PROVIDED he doesn't get picked for 15s. That would make a mockery of the rulebook.

Mr Bounce wrote:I genuinely don't care if Armitage gets selected for France at 7s. He likes France, he lived there when young, he lives there now, he plays there, he speaks the lingo. Yes, he has played for England at 15s but he turned his back on the EPS by going to France chasing the money. I don't expect he'll be selected by France for 15s as he'd be ineligible under the current rules.

It's no different to Shantayne Hape & Lesley Vainikolo; both played RL for different countries but as soon as they were eligible they were fast-tracked into the England side. 7s is not 15-a-side rugby - the basics are the same but it is not the same sport. Armitage will play for France if he wants to and nobody else can make that assumption but him. I am intrigued to see how it pans out PROVIDED he doesn't get picked for 15s. That would make a mockery of the rulebook.

Under new regulations brought in to allow 7s into the Olympics he would be eligible hence the debate

The question is who will England be looking at under this rule??

Nick Evans?
Cant think of many others..who have been here a long time but not represented their country...

Steffon left for France because the England management at the time didn't select him. he didn't turn his back on the EPS He wanted to play for England, but without any encouragement or incentive he left for France as he is a professional player and obviously needs to earn the best living he can get from what is a short time. The rules over 7's came in after he has settled there, as did the rules about playing in England to get selected for England except in the exceptional circumstances.

Lancaster should manufacture a way of getting him to play for England a prevent the French from twisting the current residency rules...a traditional English (well British) gesture to the French - 2 fingers

Slow and Sedate wrote:Steffon left for France because the England management at the time didn't select him.  he didn't turn his back on the EPS  He wanted to play for England, but without any encouragement or incentive...

That's not really true, and I don't understand why anyone needs to overstate his hardships. I'll repost my comment from an earlier thread:

There may be a good case for Steffon Armitage but it isn't helped by revising history. He wasn't a tragic victim of harsh treatment by the England set-up. We certainly have plenty of those to measure him by, and he ranks precisely nowhere on the scale of grave injustices.

No-one was really nailing down the number 7 shirt under Johnson. Tom Rees kept getting injured and Armitage, Fourie and Robshaw were all named in the squad for the 2010 tour. Borthwick's injury meant Moody stepped up as captain and so the starting jersey was taken.

Fourie came out of the tour better than the other back-up contenders but even he didn't make Johnson's original World Cup squad. Moody, Croft, Haskell, Easter and Tom Wood were his back row selections.

Armitage was very likely upset not to feature in England's plans for 2010/11 but he was hardly hounded out of the English game. He should have had high hopes of being picked next year - Moody was frequently playing on one leg, Fourie was already 32 in 2011 and Rees was still regularly crocked.

I think Armitage fancied a change of scene and probably thought, if he played well enough, he'd still be considered for England. However, he overestimated the willingness of England to be flexible on selection. He was better informed when he decided to renew with Toulon so he made his choice with eyes wide open. I genuinely think he enjoys his rugby there and feels he is a better player for the experience, so I don't hold it against him.

Armitage wasn't crudely dumped, he gave up challenging for a squad place to try something else. England don't owe him a chance because he was treated unfairly.

World Rugby make it not so easy
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/sep/19/world-rugby-nationality-rules-irb

At last a bit of common sense.

This should stop any thoughts of someone changing nationalilty willy nilly.

Now lets look at residency rules etc so players like Steenkamp cant play for Wales after three years...or Nathan Hughes playing for England.

Hughes should be playing for Samoa or Fiji for whom he is eligable. Only then will these sides get better.

It just needs some common sense and principles applying. It would be hard to bring in a hard and fast rule which would be satisfying. A rule ruling out Hughes would probably end up ruling out a Faletau or Tuilagi. Rule out grandparents gets rid of Brad Barritt but someone like Anscombe can play for Wales.

I wouldnt class Hughes in the same boat as Faletau and Tuilagi though 7.5

Those two have been here for a long time due to their parents moving here and learned much of their rugby here. They have stronger arguements

Hughes would only qualify through the 3 year residency nothing more. Imagine what Samoa and Fiji could do with him...especially Samoa who are getting stronger.

However i agree we need some sensible principles and proceedures....

I would agree GF but they only qualify through residency as well. One rule qualifies them but I view the examples very differently.

Update. France have selected a group of 30 to prepare for the AIs (actually it seems to be a group for a sort of get-together rather than the actual group who'll be involved for the AI).

http://www.lequipe.fr/Rugby/Actualites/Kockott-et-atonio-dans-les-30/500712

Apologies, it's in French, haven't seen anything in the British media about it. Here's the group of 30:

Forwards: Chiocci (Toulon), Menini (Toulon), Guirado (Toulon), Kayser (Clermont), Atonio (La Rochelle), Mas (Montpellier), Slimani (Paris), Flanquart (Paris), Maestri (Toulouse), Papé (Paris), R. Taofifenua (Toulon), Dusautoir (Toulouse, cap.), Leroux (Racing-Métro), Nyanga (Toulouse), Chouly (Clermont), Ollivon (Bayonne).

Backs: Kockott (Castres), Tillous-Borde (Toulon), Lopez (Clermont), Talès (Castres), Trinh-Duc (Montpellier), Bastareaud (Toulon), Fofana (Clermont), Lamerat (Castres), Mermoz (Toulon), Guitoune (Bordeaux), Huget (Toulouse), Thomas (Racing-Métro), Fall (Montpellier), Dulin (Racing-Métro).

Out injured: Dimitiri Szarzewski (Racing-Métro), Louis Picamoles (Toulouse), Frédéric Michalak (Toulon), Hugo Bonneval (Paris).

Obviously the big talking point will be the inclusion of two "foreigners" in Atonio, the big La Rochelle Kiwi/Samoan prop, and Rory Kockott, the SA Castres SH. While I don't have too many problems with Atonio, who arrived in France at 21 having (to my knowledge) not played a huge amount (any?) professional rugby beforehand, I do feel more ambiguity about Kockott, who learned all his rugby in SA, played there until he was 25 and only switched to France because he wasn't in their selectors plans...

I guess this post isn't probably the place to re-hash the old residency debate, so onto the rest of the squad. Great news that Trinh-Duc is back in, clearly the best (French) FH in France over the last few seasons, and is now an excellent place-kicker too. Also delighted to see Lopez get another chance.

On the minus side, Parra is a shocking exclusion IMO, while not sure what Mr Average Talès has done to retain his place. Some other rather odd choices in there too, but that's only to be expected in a France squad. They still give off the impression of having absolutely no idea what their actual WC squad will look like (unlike the other top nations, who generally have a pretty good grasp with the odd question).

Im just glad that the IRB ....sorry World Rugby have put in place the rule that you must play in 4 Olympic 7's qualifiers.

This means to qualify you will have to miss quite a number of your clubs games which looks very unlikely

So the likes of Steffons chances with France have plummeted.

looking at this 30 men training squad, it seems quite obvious that, unless he gets injured in the next month or so, Kockott will be capped against Fiji. alhough I like his attitude, am not sure he really deserves that, it is not like there is lack of good 9s in France (most clubs T14 have 2 decent ones). the other bad news is that he will probably be paired with Talès...

this list generally lacks consistency : PSA leaves players such as Domingo who probably played too much last season ...fair enough ...but then still selects poor old Mas who should be mothballed till the WC... why? While Dusautoir is only here thanks to his name rather than recent performances, the other backrowers selected are not really better while Lapandry (france best tackler during the 6N) has been left out.

this new list also makes a mockery of the previous "30 protected players list" as 12 of them are out and clubs must be wondering what is the point of such list which prevents players to be overplayed if they are eventually not selected.


http://www.planetrugby.co.uk/story/0,25883,3559_9481969,00.html