Not Ready To Commit To Wales

First topic message reminder :

highly rated English based duo , Bristol fly half  callum sheedy and Gloucester back row Rory bartle, have pulled out in joining the Welsh under 20s obviously looking for a possible cap by England . personally if you Welsh I would want to play for my country. can't see why would they delay that unless they half Japanese and they would have  a pretty good chance getting capped there

Biltong, this conversation was not about poaching so why the need to bring that up. It is purely about people who have genuine dual nationality. As MrsP says happens a lot in Northern Ireland where you can easily feel British and Irish.

Also remember that officially the UK is a single country but contains 3 rugby countries and contributes to a 4th.

In some places nationality may be a simple matter, but applying simplistic views to other countries is one of the reasons the world is in such a mess.

How should they decide? With their hearts, not their wallets! But seriously, perhaps a discussion with loved ones, a bit of soul searching, a flip of the coin even. But I think what people have issue with is, for example, going with Joe Schmidt for an extra £10k, or choosing Gatland's side because of a free Mini Cooper thrown in, or choosing Scotland as they'll sort you out a house. That sort of thing then leads to players (and agents) trading nations off against each other and auctioning players to the highest bidder. We get that enough in clubs, and a lot of people bemoan the soccer-like way rugby has become since professionalism. We don't need it in the international game too (something which ironically you don't even see in soccer much).

I think it would be very intersting exercise/experiment if we were to scrap payment at international level and see what that did to the number of foreign born players in international teams. Not that I blame players for choosing the high cash option. If I was from a remote Island and poor background and was enticed over to a European club to be a time serving player, a move that would be literally life changing, where my kids to go to school, etc. then it would be a no brainer.

I get that people can have two equal options. People may have to decide whether to please mum or dad. But the decision shouldn't be made through extrinsic rewards; motivation to represent a nation should be intrinsic, IMO. Otherwise you become an employee, not a representative.

That is not the choice these young lads have Griff. They are not being offered a cap. They may never make pro level, yet alone international level. What they will do by accepting the offer to play for the U20s is limit their current opportunities to make rugby their career.

LondonTiger wrote:That is not the choice these young lads have Griff. They are not being offered a cap. They may never make pro level, yet alone international level. What they will do by accepting the offer to play for the U20s is limit their current opportunities to make rugby their career.

Yes, I guess I was talking about how players choose international rugby and allegiance in general.

But in terms off the OP, these lads will only be limited if they play against France. They could just sit out the France game, like these players have done. For others who are Welsh through and through and have no other options then maybe they're happy to commit.

MrsP, this may sound philisophical but how does one decide between the love for two women?

Biltong wrote:MrsP, this may sound philisophical but how does one decide between the love for two women?

Which ever gives it up the easiest?

I think I'll leave that question alone Biltong

Are we talking about situations where a young player feels a greater connection with the country his dad (say) was born in over and above the connection the player has with the country he himself was born and raised in? I'm struggling to comprehend how this could be the case. Not saying it doesn't happen, but it seems like an unlikely scenario that happens 'naturally'.

Biltong wrote:MrsP, this may sound philisophical but how does one decide between the love for two women?

If T.V. has taught me anything then most men try to juggle both until it all blows up in their face.

ebop wrote:I think I'll leave that question alone Biltong

Are we talking about situations where a young player feels a greater connection with the country his dad (say) was born in over and above the connection the player has with the country he himself was born and raised in?  I'm struggling to comprehend how this could be the case. Not saying it doesn't happen, but it seems like an unlikely scenario that happens 'naturally'.

Try telling someone born and raised in London, but with Scottish parents, that they are English not Scottish.  


An interesting case going forwards maybe Ross Moriarty. I have no idea what nationality he views himself with proud Welsh parentage but born and largely raised in England. It must have been strange for father Paul (21 caps for Wales) and Uncle Richard  (23 caps for Wales, 8 as captain) to see him win the JWC with England. Ross is now starting to feature quite prominently for Gloucester but as of yet he is not tied to England.

Well, I guess he would be English given he was born there. And let's also assume the Scottish parents have settled and have decided to call England home as they've been there for at least 18 years. I'll also assume the kid has never lived in Scotland and never intended to, speaks like someone from Croydon, has an English girlfriend, hangs out with English mates, and has just made the wider Quins training squad. His dad really wants him to play for Scotland....mmmm, sorry dad.

As I said, try telling him he is English. Maybe book an appointment with your dentist first.

ebop wrote:..Let's also assume the Scottish parents have settled and have decided to call England home as they've been there for at least 18 years. I'll also assume the kid has never lived in Scotland and never intended to, speaks like someone from Croydon, has an English girlfriend, hangs out with English mates...

You have described a young Rod Stewart almost perfectly there, except his accent is Highgate rather than Croydon. Why do you think he shouldn't claim allegiance to Scotland?

ebop wrote:Well, I guess he would be English given he was born there. And let's also assume the Scottish parents have settled and have decided to call England home as they've been there for at least 18 years. I'll also assume the kid has never lived in Scotland and never intended to, speaks like someone from Croydon, has an English girlfriend, hangs out with English mates, and has just made the wider Quins training squad. His dad really wants him to play for Scotland....mmmm, sorry dad.

I have a cousin who fits your description except he's got Irish parents.However a large number of his English mates have Irish parents and a lot of them play for the same G.A.A. club,he's played Gaelic Football for London and made the training squad for the hurlers when he was younger.He visits Ireland every year at least once,usually far more often and his English girlfriend has such strong Irish roots that they are getting married in Mayo this summer as that's where her family is from.

At least maybe we can say that, when discussing nationality for some people, the phrase "it's complicated" is the best description.

ebop wrote:Well, I guess he would be English given he was born there. And let's also assume the Scottish parents have settled and have decided to call England home as they've been there for at least 18 years. I'll also assume the kid has never lived in Scotland and never intended to, speaks like someone from Croydon, has an English girlfriend, hangs out with English mates, and has just made the wider Quins training squad. His dad really wants him to play for Scotland....mmmm, sorry dad.

That is an incredible simplification. One issue being that Scotland and Wales have individual cultural aspects that England doesn't have so much any more, where the UK and England are synonymous  in the eyes of many. London is also full of second and third generation immigrants and has such a cosmopolitan, non nationalistic culture that frequently the nationalistic style social interactions will be far more significant from these people's parent countries than a sense of belonging to this one. It's a problem that has had political and even some global impact, never mind something as mundane as which rugby side these kids should choose. Simplifying nationality down for people in general is wrong IMO

I should add that the kids I was talking about are not rugby players. Rugby is one of the sports where NI players don't have a complicated identity.

Yeah sorry, my example was crap and Tiger picked England and Scotland on purpose. Ok, but if it's so unpalatable for a 1st generation English born Scot to call himself English, then a Scot he is for the purpose of selecting a rugby nation. And asoreleftshoulder's cousin would call himself Irish when choosing a rugby nation. These guys don't identity as Englishman so why would they entertain the thought even though they're eligible? I guess this is exactly my point. In the above examples a player would have nationality options, but one option sticks out as being the most logical choice for them. Anyways, it is complex and I will never know what it's like to have foreign born parents. My ham-fisted black and white solutions are probably not applicable, but hey, just trying to make the point that 'opportunity' is driving these decisions and maybe not what these players identify themselves with 'most' (key word).

wales is going to lose u20 talent if it keeps it's u20 side as ist "A" side. Its just human nature. People, and especially young people want to keep their options open. If they decline to pay for Wales u20s, they can still get picked for Wales. whereas if they play for anyone else's u20 that they are eligible to play for, they can also still get picked for Wales.

so its not disloyal at all.

its a stupid "A" side policy that sticks out like a sore thumb.

do any other tier 1 or 2 sides have their u20s as their "A" side?

my son has the right to 4 different passports. if he turns out to be the next Messi (i hear 2 left feet are better than one), who he plays football for would be entirely up to him and would depend on many things including where he was born, grew up, which teams his parents supported, which grandparents he admired, where he developed his sport, etc, etc. In rugby the world is a lot smaller.

much as i know he would love rugby, as a parent i really worry about the concussion aspect of the game now vs 30 years ago. i played from 11-18 school and club first team 1983-1989, roughly 25 matches per season, and never saw a single concussion. people tackled around the legs or hips, and the offload wasnt so effective because the defensive line didnt move up so fast and flat.

ebop wrote:...Ok, but if it's so unpalatable for a 1st generation English born Scot to call himself English, then a Scot he is for the purpose of selecting a rugby nation....

You're making the same mistake. The reason to give you the previous examples it to show how someone with that background might wish to see themselves as Scottish, not that all people in a similar situation would, or even have a clear allegiance to one side at all.

I get the impression that those here who are clear about their own national identity, are under the impression that anyone who isn't must be trying to perpetrate a fraud. "Yes, I know they have different parents, and moved around the world a lot, but I bet in their hearts they know which nationality they are really". That isn't the case.

Also, when Griff says above that he finds it distasteful someone might finally choose an allegiance based on the opportunities available to them, I can only say that the practical route is sometimes the only satisfactory one when you are being asked to takes sides.

quinsforever wrote:wales is going to lose u20 talent if it keeps it's u20 side as ist "A" side. Its just human nature. People, and especially young people want to keep their options open. If they decline to pay for Wales u20s, they can still get picked for Wales. whereas if they play for anyone else's u20 that they are eligible to play for, they can also still get picked for Wales.

so its not disloyal at all.

its a stupid "A" side policy that sticks out like a sore thumb.

do any other tier 1 or 2 sides have their u20s as their "A" side?

Yeah France, thats why they pulled out before the france game.

It is a stupid rule get A Side back

quinsforever wrote:wales is going to lose u20 talent if it keeps it's u20 side as ist "A" side. Its just human nature. People, and especially young people want to keep their options open. If they decline to pay for Wales u20s, they can still get picked for Wales. whereas if they play for anyone else's u20 that they are eligible to play for, they can also still get picked for Wales.

so its not disloyal at all.

its a stupid "A" side policy that sticks out like a sore thumb.

do any other tier 1 or 2 sides have their u20s as their "A" side?

Only ties them if they play against France U20s, not if they play for wales in any other U20 game. Still, I don't agree with it. But they're not automatically tied just by representing the U20s. I think that needs to be made clear.

bedfordwelsh wrote:It is a stupid rule get A Side back.

On what planet is that a practical option ? The regions are already losing players to the national side and the u20's and you want an A side as well taking more players, look at the Ospreys, they have been decimated with injuries, they have had to let players go with team Wales, their academy players go with the U20's and now you want an A side as well that will take players that they are using for cover during the international period, we do not have the resources for an A side, that is why we use the U20's as our "capping" team as we do not have another side to do it with.

Griff wrote:

quinsforever wrote:wales is going to lose u20 talent if it keeps it's u20 side as ist "A" side. Its just human nature. People, and especially young people want to keep their options open. If they decline to pay for Wales u20s, they can still get picked for Wales. whereas if they play for anyone else's u20 that they are eligible to play for, they can also still get picked for Wales.

so its not disloyal at all.

its a stupid "A" side policy that sticks out like a sore thumb.

do any other tier 1 or 2 sides have their u20s as their "A" side?

Only ties them if they play against France U20s, not if they play for wales in any other U20 game. Still, I don't agree with it. But they're not automatically tied just by representing the U20s. I think that needs to be made clear.

thanks, had missed that bit reading the thread a bit too fast.

LordDowlais wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:It is a stupid rule get A Side back.

On what planet is that a practical option ? The regions are already losing players to the national side and the u20's and you want an A side as well taking more players, look at the Ospreys, they have been decimated with injuries, they have had to let players go with team Wales, their academy players go with the U20's and now you want an A side as well that will take players that they are using for cover during the international period, we do not have the resources for an A side, that is why we use the U20's as our "capping" team as we do not have another side to do it with.

Of course we have resources for an A Side, you have to look at the Wales we would all like to see in the Welsh set up but aren't currently included. I agree it wouldn't work at the moment not without restructure and that's something we would all like to see but the resources are there and I just think its stupid using the U20s as a capping system.

Bedford, we do not have enough players of sufficient standard to have an a Senior squad, an A Squad and an U20 squad. That would put too much of a drain on our regions and their acadamies, unless you are thinking of using semi-pro players from the Welsh Prem.

ebop wrote:Yeah sorry, my example was crap and Tiger picked England and Scotland on purpose. Ok, but if it's so unpalatable for a 1st generation English born Scot to call himself English, then a Scot he is for the purpose of selecting a rugby nation. And asoreleftshoulder's cousin would call himself Irish when choosing a rugby nation. These guys don't identity as Englishman so why would they entertain the thought even though they're eligible? I guess this is exactly my point. In the above examples a player would have nationality options, but one option sticks out as being the most logical choice for them. Anyways, it is complex and I will never know what it's like to have foreign born parents. My ham-fisted black and white solutions are probably not applicable, but hey, just trying to make the point that 'opportunity' is driving these decisions and maybe not what these players identify themselves with 'most' (key word).

Actually the point of my example (which I obviously should have put in the post) is that I don't know that he would.We had a conversation about it years ago and he felt slightly more English than Irish back then,either way whichever nation he chose he wouldn't feel anyway close to 100% Irish or English.He identifies with both nations and would be proud to represent either.

LordDowlais wrote:Bedford, we do not have enough players of sufficient standard to have an a Senior squad, an A Squad and an U20 squad. That would put too much of a drain on our regions and their acadamies, unless you are thinking of using semi-pro players from the Welsh Prem.

You could certainly use semi pro players for the U20s after all a lot of them get used by the Regions in the LV cup. I understand what your saying Saint and with current format agree it wouldn't work but still think there is enough for a Senior and A Side.

I just think using the U20s as the 'capping' level is just stupid and we will see more players pull out in the future like the two have done of late.

Bedford, we don't use it as the capping level, the IRB do.  All nations have to indicate their 1st and 2nd representative sides.  We don't have an A team so designate our U20s as the 2nd rep side - therefore the IRB use it as a capping side. Under the right conditions (e.g. vs France), players can earn caps.  We have no choice in this as such (apart from getting an A team).  The IRB stipulates it.

Griff wrote:Bedford, we don't use it as the capping level, the IRB do.  All nations have to indicate their 1st and 2nd representative sides.  We don't have an A team so designate our U20s as the 2nd rep side - therefore the IRB use it as a capping side.  Under the right conditions (e.g. vs France), players can earn caps.  We have no choice in this as such (apart from getting an A team).  The IRB stipulates it.

If we had an A Side though then we could choose which one was used but by limiting our options as you say we have no option.

I personally don't think that bringing back an A team just so we had that as our 2nd representative team over the U20s is a strong enough reason. I haven't seen strong enough arguments for bringing back an A team at all. When we had 10/12 teams in the Welsh league then there was an argument as the Welsh club players were a) not playing against anyone from outside their country so lacked that experience if they were to step up to international level, and b) they were spread so thinly across the teams that there was little experience of playing with each other, so a lack of familiarity if they were to step up to international level.

Now though with the regions lots of the players have come through academies and possibly been in the U20 system so have that experience of each other. The regional players play teams from other countries week in week out so have experience of coming up against international quality players and of travelling, being in foreign training camps, etc. Also, with only 4 regions the players tend to all have good knowledge of a number of other players because as many as 10 from each region (bar the Dragons) are called up regularly for the Wales squad.

So for me the regions do a lot of what a Wales A team can do. The A team should be a bridging team between club and international, but I feel the regions do a good enough job of bridging that gap. I therefore do not see the need. Ireland, if I'm right, fund the A team over a 7s team (is that right?). I'd prefer us to continue funding 7s at the expense of the A team.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:Actually the point of my example (which I obviously should have put in the post) is that I don't know that he would.We had a conversation about it years ago and he felt slightly more English than Irish back then,either way whichever nation he chose he wouldn't feel anyway close to 100% Irish or English.He identifies with both nations and would be proud to represent either.

You guys seriously don't think that I understand that a person can feel an association to multiple countries and cultures. Yes, of course he would be proud to represent England or Ireland, blah blah blah. But 'the point is' (and maybe I should put this in the post) is that if England and Ireland offered your cousin a simultaneous offer with the only difference being 'vastly more cash' to play for England. What country do you think he'll all of a sudden feel closer to? I bet he chooses England 9 times out of 10. My point again, is that the poorer nations lose out to the richer nations when such decisions are needed. Have you heard of the Pacific Islands?

Maybe these young guys just don't want to play for Wales.

I seem to recall Rhys Ruddock getting a senior cap with Ireland when he was still under 20 to stop the speculation as to who he was going to play for. (He didn't get capped again for another 2 or 3 years).

There is also the situation of where players are going to school/college. There is a capped England prop who played Ireland underage because he went to university in Ireland.

ebop - I'd say all nations are similarly wealthy in the EU that play rugby.

Yeah Sin é, you're no doubt right. All along, I've had Pacific Islanders in the back of my mind and how dual eligible players in NZ pick playing for the ABs over their parents' PI homeland if they're good enough (many don't mind you and decide early and that's great). They may still feel Samoan for example even though they were born and raised in NZ. It's a philosophical debate more than anything. I like the Ruddock example, guys like that should be saluted.

Anyways, I am way more comfortable with the situation where a player has these options rather than those players that become eligible through 3 years of residency (we have some ourselves). I guess it just comes down to the best future opportunity, I'm actually ok with that, as long as teams don't lose 'all' their prospective talent. Which is not happening anyway I guess.

The PI example isn't the best because although they are very proud of where they come from they will nearly always try and earn as much money as they can as many of them will have entire families to feed.

This is why it would be nice if the PI teams where able to play players that have been capped by other nations after a certain length of time.

Sin é wrote:Maybe these young guys just don't want to play for Wales.

I seem to recall Rhys Ruddock getting a senior cap with Ireland when he was still under 20 to stop the speculation as to who he was going to play for. (He didn't get capped again for another 2 or 3 years).

There is also the situation of where players are going to school/college. There is a capped England prop who played Ireland underage because he went to university in Ireland.

ebop - I'd say all nations are similarly wealthy in the EU that play rugby.

Sin, there is a good reason Rhys picked Ireland over Wales, as has been highlighted this week, firstly his father was Welsh and his mother Irish and most of his formative years was spent in Wales, all the conjecture about why his father left the Welsh Coaching job has been blown out of the water, by the explanation he's given in the Sunday Times, it was because of the lack of reinforcement of his position by the WRU it had NOTHING to do with Player Power, so why would his son play for the organisation or Country that basically wouldn't support his Father.

And Rhys Ruddock was born in Ireland. So was Irish anyway. Seems like a no brainer to me.

ebop wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:Actually the point of my example (which I obviously should have put in the post) is that I don't know that he would.We had a conversation about it years ago and he felt slightly more English than Irish back then,either way whichever nation he chose he wouldn't feel anyway close to 100% Irish or English.He identifies with both nations and would be proud to represent either.

You guys seriously don't think that I understand that a person can feel an association to multiple countries and cultures. Yes, of course he would be proud to represent England or Ireland, blah blah blah. But 'the point is' (and maybe I should put this in the post) is that if England and Ireland offered your cousin a simultaneous offer with the only difference being 'vastly more cash' to play for England. What country do you think he'll all of a sudden feel closer to? I bet he chooses England 9 times out of 10. My point again, is that the poorer nations lose out to the richer nations when such decisions are needed. Have you heard of the Pacific Islands?

When we poach Pacific Islanders (which we have all been known to do) this is certainly an issue. I'm not sure that the economy or the money for rugby in any of the countries being discussed now differs enough to make that a huge factor here though. 3/4 of the home nations have exactly the same economy anyway, as they have the same government. The issue here might be whether they are more likely to get caps or more caps for one rather than the other but I would be astounded if pay check size for a cap had any bearing on these guys' decisions.

wayne wrote:

Sin é wrote:Maybe these young guys just don't want to play for Wales.

I seem to recall Rhys Ruddock getting a senior cap with Ireland when he was still under 20 to stop the speculation as to who he was going to play for. (He didn't get capped again for another 2 or 3 years).

There is also the situation of where players are going to school/college. There is a capped England prop who played Ireland underage because he went to university in Ireland.

ebop - I'd say all nations are similarly wealthy in the EU that play rugby.

Sin, there is a good reason Rhys picked Ireland over Wales, as has been highlighted this week, firstly his father was Welsh and his mother Irish and most of his formative years was spent in Wales, all the conjecture about why his father left the Welsh Coaching job has been blown out of the water, by the explanation he's given in the Sunday Times, it was because of the lack of reinforcement of his position by the WRU it had NOTHING to do with Player Power, so why would his son play for the organisation or Country that basically wouldn't support his Father.

I wasn't going into why he choose Ireland over Wales, just that it can be awkward for lads living in one country and intending to play for another. Shane Geraghty played underage for Ireland, but decided to play for England. If he was half Welsh, he would have had to stick with Wales.

Just had a look at Callum Sheedy's twitter account - I'd say its Ireland he has his heart set on playing for - he has a infamous phrase in Irish in his description on his account!

Do you know if he is rated at all Sin? Could be brought in as the backup 10 to Byrne for the JWC.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:Do you know if he is rated at all Sin? Could be brought in as the backup 10 to Byrne for the JWC.

Seems to be very highly rated - lots of stuff on the web about him. Seems he was the 'heartbeat' of a very successful Millfield team. A bit of a profile of him here. He played U19s 7s for Ireland and says it was 'a dream come true'. He is definately on IRFU radar.

http://www.talkingrugbyunion.co.uk/callum-sheedy-from-millfield-to-the-mem-/11177.htm

Sin é wrote:

wayne wrote:

Sin é wrote:Maybe these young guys just don't want to play for Wales.

I seem to recall Rhys Ruddock getting a senior cap with Ireland when he was still under 20 to stop the speculation as to who he was going to play for. (He didn't get capped again for another 2 or 3 years).

There is also the situation of where players are going to school/college. There is a capped England prop who played Ireland underage because he went to university in Ireland.

ebop - I'd say all nations are similarly wealthy in the EU that play rugby.

Sin, there is a good reason Rhys picked Ireland over Wales, as has been highlighted this week, firstly his father was Welsh and his mother Irish and most of his formative years was spent in Wales, all the conjecture about why his father left the Welsh Coaching job has been blown out of the water, by the explanation he's given in the Sunday Times, it was because of the lack of reinforcement of his position by the WRU it had NOTHING to do with Player Power, so why would his son play for the organisation or Country that basically wouldn't support his Father.

I wasn't going into why he choose Ireland over Wales, just that it can be awkward for lads living in one country and intending to play for another. Shane Geraghty played underage for Ireland, but decided to play for England. If he was half Welsh, he would have had to stick with Wales.

Only if he'd played against France.  How many times does this have to be said?!  If Geraghty played Wales U20 against any other 6N side he would not be tied.

Would it not be worse then playing for Wales and pulling out of the games that would tie him to Wales. Seems to me the young man has done the right thing here and is not leading Wales on by taking the opportunity to enhance his cv by playing under 20s rugby for a country he is as yet uncommitted to.

Sin é wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:Do you know if he is rated at all Sin? Could be brought in as the backup 10 to Byrne for the JWC.

Seems to be very highly rated - lots of stuff on the web about him. Seems he was the 'heartbeat' of a very successful Millfield team. A bit of a profile of him here. He played U19s 7s for Ireland and says it was 'a dream come true'. He is definately on IRFU radar.

http://www.talkingrugbyunion.co.uk/callum-sheedy-from-millfield-to-the-mem-/11177.htm

I didn't realise he was a Corpus boy. Milfield is without a doubt a bettet place for him to develop than St. Davids (the Catholic Sixth form most Corpus leavers attend). The WRU has done good work with the college league but apart from Sir Gar, we're still miles behind the English schools.

Griff wrote:

Sin é wrote:

wayne wrote:

Sin é wrote:Maybe these young guys just don't want to play for Wales.

I seem to recall Rhys Ruddock getting a senior cap with Ireland when he was still under 20 to stop the speculation as to who he was going to play for. (He didn't get capped again for another 2 or 3 years).

There is also the situation of where players are going to school/college. There is a capped England prop who played Ireland underage because he went to university in Ireland.

ebop - I'd say all nations are similarly wealthy in the EU that play rugby.

Sin, there is a good reason Rhys picked Ireland over Wales, as has been highlighted this week, firstly his father was Welsh and his mother Irish and most of his formative years was spent in Wales, all the conjecture about why his father left the Welsh Coaching job has been blown out of the water, by the explanation he's given in the Sunday Times, it was because of the lack of reinforcement of his position by the WRU it had NOTHING to do with Player Power, so why would his son play for the organisation or Country that basically wouldn't support his Father.

I wasn't going into why he choose Ireland over Wales, just that it can be awkward for lads living in one country and intending to play for another. Shane Geraghty played underage for Ireland, but decided to play for England. If he was half Welsh, he would have had to stick with Wales.

Only if he'd played against France.  How many times does this have to be said?!  If Geraghty played Wales U20 against any other 6N side he would not be tied.

Italy have the same rule as well I think, as they use their U20 as the designated "capping" side as do South Africa as they do not have A sides.

LordDowlais wrote:
Italy have the same rule as well I think, as they use their U20 as the designated "capping" side

Do not tell the RFU that. We have a couple of 20 year old Italian props, been with us for 5/6 years and capped by Italy at U20. RFU still views them as EQP due to the 5 year residency.

LondonTiger wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:
Italy have the same rule as well I think, as they use their U20 as the designated "capping" side

Do not tell the RFU that. We have a couple of 20 year old Italian props, been with us for 5/6 years and capped by Italy at U20. RFU still views them as EQP due to the 5 year residency.

Have they played against a side that uses their U20's in the same way ? If they haven't then they should be fine.

A large part of the problem here is not about been tied to one country at international level, its about restricting a players ability to actually earn a living from the sport due to the restrictions on non national qualified players allowed within a squad, if a player ties himself to one particular nation at an age where they have not even fully broken into 1st class rugby they suddenly become far less attractive to clubs in the country they have opted out of. This for me is an even bigger reason for players to not want to commit to young as they will potentially damage their earning ability at club level by been tied to one countries teams.

That's a very good point 2nd, and perhpas the strongest reason for the IRB to change their rules regarding 2nd teams being age grade. I would say, however, that players are being capped younger and younger at international level now. And not just to tie a player to a country. George North, as I mentioned before, was calpped at 18 because he was in good form. This tied him at a very young age. Only his continual good form has made it a happy ending. If he'd then turned rubbish (happens to a lot of one season wonders) then he would fall into the category of unattractive, tied down player that you mention above.