How will you feel if Matt Symons plays for NZ?

Apparently Matt Symons qualifies for NZ in May. He's probably a long shot to play for NZ. Essentially he's English, but may qualify for NZ via residency. He wasn't deemed solid enough to be picked up in the English system, so took up rowing. Came here on the advice of his brother who plays here. He's only 25 so still has potential. He captained the Chiefs last weekend. I know he's being sought by a number of English clubs. My personal feeling is I feel he's English. Philosophically, I'd rather he played for England than NZ.

Here's the link to the herald article (it's also been doing the rounds in various other papers, blogs etc) http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11404135

I don't think I could care much less. I care just enough to post that I don't care. He's emigrated to New Zealand, if they pick him and he's eligible then cool beans.

it's a nice story and he's right to be grateful of the platform NZ rugby gave him. that said do you realisticly think he has even a chance to make the ABs one day? there is plenty of high skilled locks above him I would have thought (Retallick, Whitelock, Romano, Tuipolotu, Fitzgerald, Broadhurst). Maybe he will be the next Martin Johnson on the othert hand...

whocares wrote:it's a nice story and he's right to be grateful of the platform NZ rugby gave him. that said do you realisticly think he has even a chance to make the ABs one day? there is plenty of high skilled locks above him I would have thought (Retallick, Whitelock, Romano, Tuipolotu, Fitzgerald, Broadhurst). Maybe he will be the next Martin Johnson on the othert hand...

Not sure. Haven't watched enough super 15 in the last year or so to be honest. I think Retallick and Whitelock are first choice. Romano, Thrush and Tuipolotu are competing for the reserve spot (NZ tends to send 3 specialist locks, and use a blindside (e.g. Luatua as an option). They've all been in the system and it's world cup year. On his side he's big (especially for a NZ lock), playing regularly for a good side and is well regarded. My guess is he's probably a good bet for next year, and could have a chance this year form and/or injuries permitting.

I say good luck to the bloke, I wouldn't blame him at all if he put 2 fingers up at England and threw in his lot with NZ.

I think he would mostly likely be 5th/6th choice if he came back here, arguably he could have a better chance of a NZ cap as if he hangs around some of the blokes ahead of him are bound to get nabbed by French or Japanese teams.

Its unfair of the article to say England rejects late bloomers who didnt come through the system, what about Burrell? By his own admission he wasnt much of a player, and hardly alone in not going on to represent his country after playing for the mighty Esher. Maybe we should blame the rowing chaps for not sticking with him, another potential gold medal in sitting down gone begging.
Theres plenty of examples of New Zealanders, Saffers and others whove come up here not good enough to nail down regular spots and bloomed into genuinely good players ( and a few of them gone on to represent England *cough*)

The competition on academy spots is very hard, especially with low pay levels and no guarantees of a decent job at the end of it. Some clubs have been much better at converting early talent than others; its been a long moan from tigers fans that their once great academy side which produced a number of the current England squad is now struggling to produce players trusted with club shirts. The 70% qualified figure is heartening but how many of those guys are actually getting first 15 rugby vs the second string Italians/Fijians/Argentinians etc.
The question always is should they be spending time with a scatter gun approach giving every lanky streak whoi fancies handling balls professional level training and spread the coaching and facilities thin or focus in on the few elite and try and bring them up to a level thats actually genuinely competitive? This is the way things are going with the academies and "cradle to grave" England system under Lancaster, it does mean some late bloomers will slip through the net, but should ensure those who are in it get the best chance to reach their potential.

Good.

Indifferent

He'll probably take up a lucrative club contract in France or England as a NZ trained rugby player.

For me, it would depend how good he turned out to be if he put on an All Black shirt. That shouldn't be the criterion, but I remember feeling great regret that we hadn't kept John Gallagher here. (Mind you, he ended up in an Irish representative team toward the end of his career, so there's no guarantee he would have answered a call from England).

In general, though, if New Zealand is happy to make Symons an All Black then good luck to him. You don't just earn a living overseas, you put down roots, make friends and develop new priorities. I don't know if this applies to Symons, but moving home might mean making sacrifices he'd rather not consider at this point in his life. Martin Johnson came close to staying in NZ after he met his wife but an injury gave him time to mull things over, and he chose differently.

Gooseberry wrote:Its unfair of the article to say England rejects late bloomers who didnt come through the system, what about Burrell? By his own admission he wasnt much of a player, and hardly alone in not going on to represent his country after playing for the mighty Esher. Maybe we should blame the rowing chaps for not sticking with him, another potential gold medal in sitting down gone begging.
Theres plenty of examples of New Zealanders, Saffers and others whove come up here not good enough to nail down regular spots and bloomed into genuinely good players ( and a few of them gone on to represent England *cough*)
The competition on academy spots is very hard, especially with low pay levels and no guarantees of a decent job at the end of it. Some clubs have been much better at converting early talent than others; its been a long moan from tigers fans that their once great academy side which produced a number of the current England squad is now struggling to produce players trusted with club shirts. The 70% qualified figure is heartening but how many of those guys are actually getting first 15 rugby vs the second string Italians/Fijians/Argentinians etc.
The question always is should they be spending time with a scatter gun approach giving every lanky streak whoi fancies handling balls professional level training and spread the coaching and facilities thin or focus in on the few elite and try and bring them up to a level thats actually genuinely competitive? This is the way things are going with the academies and "cradle to grave" England system under Lancaster, it does mean some late bloomers will slip through the net, but should ensure those who are in it get the best chance to reach their potential.

None of those nationalities, Manu Samoa is the one that seems to have made the most of the training here. Amature in the States, seen by Saints, in his early 20s, brought back, given a couple of years of their training and wisdom, now one of the best players in hos postion in te hworld. A shoein for England  if he hadn't got capped by the Eagles.

Like many posters here i'm indifferent. 

I can understand that he feels some sort of duty to repay the country that gave him the chance of playing professional rugby. If he wanted to do that by representing them, so be it.

He's an English sleeper agent.  RFU parachuted him in under cover of darkness.  His orders to be a much better player than the well crafted English propaganda suggested he was.  Force himself onto the NZ side, play like a demon..................................until........................... that fateful meet up of England and the All Blacks in the 2015 final.
Then of course, his mission is to fall to pieces defensively

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Its unfair of the article to say England rejects late bloomers who didnt come through the system, what about Burrell? By his own admission he wasnt much of a player, and hardly alone in not going on to represent his country after playing for the mighty Esher. Maybe we should blame the rowing chaps for not sticking with him, another potential gold medal in sitting down gone begging.
Theres plenty of examples of New Zealanders, Saffers and others whove come up here not good enough to nail down regular spots and bloomed into genuinely good players ( and a few of them gone on to represent England *cough*)
The competition on academy spots is very hard, especially with low pay levels and no guarantees of a decent job at the end of it. Some clubs have been much better at converting early talent than others; its been a long moan from tigers fans that their once great academy side which produced a number of the current England squad is now struggling to produce players trusted with club shirts. The 70% qualified figure is heartening but how many of those guys are actually getting first 15 rugby vs the second string Italians/Fijians/Argentinians etc.
The question always is should they be spending time with a scatter gun approach giving every lanky streak whoi fancies handling balls professional level training and spread the coaching and facilities thin or focus in on the few elite and try and bring them up to a level thats actually genuinely competitive? This is the way things are going with the academies and "cradle to grave" England system under Lancaster, it does mean some late bloomers will slip through the net, but should ensure those who are in it get the best chance to reach their potential.

None of those nationalities, Manu Samoa is the one that seems to have made the most of the training here. Amature in the States, seen by Saints, in his early 20s, brought back, given a couple of years of their training and wisdom, now one of the best players in hos postion in te hworld. A shoein for England  if he hadn't got capped by the Eagles.

Do mean Samu Manoa? I don't think he's the best example. He's from a quality union/American football background (Grandfather captained Tonga, uncle was an Australian/world rugby legend, his father, uncles all play). Hit the ground running and made the premiership dream team in his first season. The point being he's got a long background in union. He was an obvious talent, rather than a late bloomer.

For me I think he should play for NZ unless he goes back to England. The reasons are, he never played top flight rugby in England and went through the ranks in NZ.
NZ shouldn't get on their high horse either about only selecting kiwi's as they've selected chaps like Sivivatu with no problems. If he feels passionately enough about NZ then give him a go if he's good enough.

He didn't go to NZ for money, he went for the right reasons, to play rugby and have a jolly. If he chooses to stay and extend contract etc then I would say judge him on his playing merits alone.

Can't blame a guy who didn't make the grade back in his homeland i.e. Mauritz Botha.

Rugby Fan wrote:For me, it would depend how good he turned out to be if he put on an All Black shirt. That shouldn't be the criterion, but I remember feeling great regret that we hadn't kept John Gallagher here. (Mind you, he ended up in an Irish representative team toward the end of his career, so there's no guarantee he would have answered a call from England).

In general, though, if New Zealand is happy to make Symons an All Black then good luck to him. You don't just earn a living overseas, you put down roots, make friends and develop new priorities. I don't know if this applies to Symons, but moving home might mean making sacrifices he'd rather not consider at this point in his life. Martin Johnson came close to staying in NZ after he met his wife but an injury gave him time to mull things over, and he chose differently.

What Irish team?

Edit: Just saw this article. He lined out for Ireland A v England in 1996 when in his 30s but never made it in the full team.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/rugby/irishman-who-shook-the-world-170538.html

Both parents from Ireland.

Good luck to him, if he's good enough to work his way into the All Blacks. Don't see that its particularly different to Malakai Fekitoa playing for New Zealand. Both qualify on residency, both owe their shots at professional rugby to the NZ system. Both developed into the players they are in New Zealand.

Playing of Kiwis going the other way to play international rugby. I would advocate that the residency period is too short, but since it is how it is- good luck to him.

Besides, he's already using words like 'stoked'. He's clearly gone native.

Rugby Fan wrote:For me, it would depend how good he turned out to be if he put on an All Black shirt. That shouldn't be the criterion, but I remember feeling great regret that we hadn't kept John Gallagher here. (Mind you, he ended up in an Irish representative team toward the end of his career, so there's no guarantee he would have answered a call from England).

In general, though, if New Zealand is happy to make Symons an All Black then good luck to him. You don't just earn a living overseas, you put down roots, make friends and develop new priorities. I don't know if this applies to Symons, but moving home might mean making sacrifices he'd rather not consider at this point in his life. Martin Johnson came close to staying in NZ after he met his wife but an injury gave him time to mull things over, and he chose differently.

We have Jay Johnson to thank for Martin's return. If she had been happy to stay at her parents farm then he would have been an AB. She wanted to travel and they ended up settling back in Leicestershire.

Symons has offers from both NZ and England for after the RWC. Can't say I'm fussed either way.

If hes an MI5 operative like Fly says, then I reckon we should shoot him now before he learns too much.

The question is...will he overtake:

Lawes
Launchbury
Slater (When fit)
Kruis
Kitchener

Then you have youngsters like
Itoje - Much talked about
Dom Barrow
Elliott Stooke - having second season syndrome but should come back to form

There is lots of competition, but he's learnt from the best so who knows.

So, if he comes to back to UK it will probably be with LI...However he could be very useful in bolstering up Quins at the moment.

Having splashed the cash on James Horwill - I guess they are unlikely to stump up for a second lock forward.

Pleased for him, we are swamped with quality tight 5 forwards over in England and when it comes to the front 5, being an all black doesn't make him better than the english incumbents who are more than a match for most packs these days.

Geordie...forgot Dave Attwood

Notch wrote:Good luck to him, if he's good enough to work his way into the All Blacks. Don't see that its particularly different to Malakai Fekitoa playing for New Zealand. Both qualify on residency, both owe their shots at professional rugby to the NZ system. Both developed into the players they are in New Zealand.

Playing of Kiwis going the other way to play international rugby. I would advocate that the residency period is too short, but since it is how it is- good luck to him.

Besides, he's already using words like 'stoked'. He's clearly gone native.

The bit in bold is the key for me. Same way as I have more sympathy for Botha or Fourie playing for England than I do (say) Brad Barritt or some of the RL converts (Hape, Paul, Vainikolo).

I cannot say i have haired of him. but if he is living in NZ and as been for amount of time that gets him reconized for the ABs. Then good luck to him.

Indifferent?

dummy_half wrote:

Notch wrote:Good luck to him, if he's good enough to work his way into the All Blacks. Don't see that its particularly different to Malakai Fekitoa playing for New Zealand. Both qualify on residency, both owe their shots at professional rugby to the NZ system. Both developed into the players they are in New Zealand.

Playing of Kiwis going the other way to play international rugby. I would advocate that the residency period is too short, but since it is how it is- good luck to him.

Besides, he's already using words like 'stoked'. He's clearly gone native.

The bit in bold is the key for me. Same way as I have more sympathy for Botha or Fourie playing for England than I do (say) Brad Barritt or some of the RL converts (Hape, Paul, Vainikolo).

Dummy half I think it's unfair to compare Brad Barritt to Hape,Paul and Vainikolo - Barritt has more English connections than all the players you mention including Fourie and Botha.

"Barritt's family has strong English roots, and many of his aunts and uncles live in England.[10] Barritt's grandparents were born in England,[12] and his grandfather played Rugby Union for English Universities."

From his wiki page.

majesticimperialman wrote:I cannot say i have haired of him. but if he is living in NZ and as been for amount of time that gets him reconized for the ABs. Then good luck to him.

The inventor of predictive text has died.
His funfair will be hello on Sundial.

Bit puzzled here....if Symons can't move from these islands to those southern ones and play for them, then should most of the current ABs play for Scotland and only the Maoris for NZ?

beshocked wrote:

dummy_half wrote:

Notch wrote:Good luck to him, if he's good enough to work his way into the All Blacks. Don't see that its particularly different to Malakai Fekitoa playing for New Zealand. Both qualify on residency, both owe their shots at professional rugby to the NZ system. Both developed into the players they are in New Zealand.

Playing of Kiwis going the other way to play international rugby. I would advocate that the residency period is too short, but since it is how it is- good luck to him.

Besides, he's already using words like 'stoked'. He's clearly gone native.

The bit in bold is the key for me. Same way as I have more sympathy for Botha or Fourie playing for England than I do (say) Brad Barritt or some of the RL converts (Hape, Paul, Vainikolo).

Dummy half I think it's unfair to compare Brad Barritt to Hape,Paul and Vainikolo - Barritt has more English connections than all the players you mention including Fourie and Botha.

"Barritt's family has strong English roots, and many of his aunts and uncles live in England.[10] Barritt's grandparents were born in England,[12] and his grandfather played Rugby Union for English Universities."

From his wiki page.

There is a big difference between English South Africans and Boere. English South Africans are in general some of the most patriotic Brits you will ever find even those who have never set foot in the country. There are many places in SA which due to the large number of English persons, its nicknamed... "the last outpost of the British Empire" etc etc.

Brad Barritt is English South African. Yes had he had the chance he probably would have played for SA (i even think he would have got capped had he stayed longer given he was outstanding in 2006-08) but I would imagine he's no more torn than a chap like George North or Sam Warburton who have English-Welsh upbringings/lineage etc.

Kevin Pieterson is different. He was Afrikaans speaking, his dad is a boere. He's South African even if his mum was English South African. Any drop of boere in you tends to push you towards that grouping.. or at least it did in the past. And then you have chaps like Botha, Fourie, Hape etc.

fa0019 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

dummy_half wrote:

Notch wrote:Good luck to him, if he's good enough to work his way into the All Blacks. Don't see that its particularly different to Malakai Fekitoa playing for New Zealand. Both qualify on residency, both owe their shots at professional rugby to the NZ system. Both developed into the players they are in New Zealand.

Playing of Kiwis going the other way to play international rugby. I would advocate that the residency period is too short, but since it is how it is- good luck to him.

Besides, he's already using words like 'stoked'. He's clearly gone native.

The bit in bold is the key for me. Same way as I have more sympathy for Botha or Fourie playing for England than I do (say) Brad Barritt or some of the RL converts (Hape, Paul, Vainikolo).

Dummy half I think it's unfair to compare Brad Barritt to Hape,Paul and Vainikolo - Barritt has more English connections than all the players you mention including Fourie and Botha.

"Barritt's family has strong English roots, and many of his aunts and uncles live in England.[10] Barritt's grandparents were born in England,[12] and his grandfather played Rugby Union for English Universities."

From his wiki page.

There is a big difference between English South Africans and Boere. English South Africans are in general some of the most patriotic Brits you will ever find even those who have never set foot in the country. There are many places in SA which due to the large number of English persons, its nicknamed... "the last outpost of the British Empire" etc etc.

Brad Barritt is English South African. Yes had he had the chance he probably would have played for SA (i even think he would have got capped had he stayed longer given he was outstanding in 2006-08) but I would imagine he's no more torn than a chap like George North or Sam Warburton who have English-Welsh upbringings/lineage etc.

Kevin Pieterson is different. He was Afrikaans speaking, his dad is a boere. He's South African even if his mum was English South African. Any drop of boere in you tends to push you towards that grouping.. or at least it did in the past. And then you have chaps like Botha, Fourie, Hape etc.

KP does have a lot more English parents and British passports than most orange blooded Boers would admit to.



For the sake of balance can we bring up the grannygate players and Shingler? The Welsh will be complaining of English media balance otherwise.

Cowshot wrote:Bit puzzled here....if Symons can't move from these islands to those southern ones and play for them, then should most of the current ABs play for Scotland and only the Maoris for NZ?

Nah that theory cant work, theres a Maori playing for scotland.

Just let anyone play for anywhere, wherever you can get into a team.

To me this situation with Matt Symons reminds me of the Ben Morgan situation. Ben Morgan is an Englishman but it was Scarlets and Wales who helped him become the rugby player he has become.

Of course Morgan picked England in the end but easily could have picked Wales.

I guess sometimes it comes to the amount of competition in the squad.

At the moment there are numerous options at lock for England whereas at no 8 there are a lot less. Morgan picked England probably because he saw the opportunity to become the no 1 choice and afterall he is English too.

Wales probably wish they had another quality no 8 in addition to Toby.

Look at the Tom Heathcote situation - he embraced his Scottish heritage when Ford Jr become the no 1 fly half at Bath.

It's a little easier to get the Scottish 10 shirt than the England 10 shirt.

If someone like Steffon Armitage played for France though I would be annoyed though - he was overlooked for England for some time but he has had plenty of opportunities to come back to England since and fight Robshaw for the 7 shirt.

Some poor Pacific islander misses out again.