Taqele Naiyaravoro

So is he going to Glasgow then, or is he looking for a way out?

Its an oddity,

From what I know he's a Fijian, who just got a call for the Australian national team, despite signing a contract with Glasgow?

It looked like he signed after giving up on international honours, however now he has this shot at international rugby and superstardom (He would lose his residency if he moves to Glasgow?) he's going to take it with both hands and ditch the Glasgow contract.

If I have that right, I think it's a reverse of the issue I've brought up with Clubs strongarming players, it's a player chasing stardom and a huge contract by any means necesary?

He's signed a three year deal and Glasgow don't seem to want cancel the deal. I guess he's got his one big shot at the RWC and then he's off to NH rugby for three years.

Guys , this has been argued/discussed at length on the International board, most recently in the Scotland WC Warm Up thread.
basically, it seems that he is Fijian and it didn't look as if he and his family, kids born in Aus, would get residency status. (He refers in one recent interview to applying again.) So, it would appear that signing for Glasgow was a big move for him, in financial terms at least.
Then he gets called into the Aus squad which will make the residency problems disappear: and for some reason he doesn't seem that keen on Glasgow any more!

The question is: if he has signed a contract can Glasgow hold him to it or can they demand compensation from the ARU? (That is demand and receive, anyone can demand anything in this life...I often demand that Kylie Minogue makes me her kept man but so far....)

Judging by the planet rugby article Glasgow are digging their heels in over this. Don't think there is much love lost between our DOR and the ARU

Another problem is that Big T himself is saying it is probably better for his family if he stays - he doesn't sound overly keen about moving to Glasgow anymore.

"I am trying to create a good future. I’m not saying playing for Fiji is not, but I’m saying this is a career and for my kids, because they were born here [in Australia] and they’re going to be settling down here, it’s probably the best decision for them."

"I'll probably still have to sort that out [with Glasgow], there is still a lot to sort out with that, for now getting the selection is an indicator of me trying to settle in and try to chase the residency again [in Australia].

"I’ll probably settle here first, and look to overseas afterwards.

"When I had that deal offered to me from Scotland, I didn’t really see myself making the Wallabies team."

I doubt he'll be turning up in Glasgow. I think that contract, which covers the three-year residency period, was a stepping stone to test rugby for Scotland. That's the consolation prize because he didn't expect to get called up for Australia. Now he has gotten that call-up he doesn't need Glasgow any more.

No matter how iron-clad his contract with Glasgow is, there isn't much point in having a player who fundamentally does not want to be there. Hopefully they can get some compensation, but I don't see him lining out in the Pro12 anytime soon.

If I was Glasgow id cancel the deal but demand a big old compensation number.

I for one wouldn't want a player playing for us who is not interested in being there...Ala Keiron Brookes and Dom Barrow at Newcastle.

We had that with John Afoa in his last year at Ulster. He couldn't have been less committed on the pitch if he was using his smartphone to look up houses in Gloucester in between scrums.

Notch, back when Rush did the U-Turn on Ulster was there some financial deal from the Blues to Ulster?

The chap seems to have been badly advised throughout this deal in that he's come out of it looking like a shameless mercenary when I'm sure his decision has been for his family.

The Glasgow jersey means something and I'm sure we'd all rather not see it devalued by anyone, least of all a very green winger with the turning circle of a Rolls Royce. Glasgow and the SRU due some serious damages here.

Similar thing happenned last season when Scarlets signed Chris Halafuia. At the 11th hour he said he wasn't coming and staying elsewhre due to family reasons. This was in August and thus completely knackered the Scarlets number 8 recruitment for the entire season.

How much compensation did the Scarlets get? Not a penny.

Chunky Norwich wrote:Similar thing happenned last season when Scarlets signed Chris Halafuia. At the 11th hour he said he wasn't coming and staying elsewhre due to family reasons. This was in August and thus completely knackered the Scarlets number 8 recruitment for the entire season.

How much compensation did the Scarlets get? Not a penny.

Terrible stuff from Scarlets management, didn't Scarlets had to pay his wages for 3 or so months too?

You have to be careful when signing a big pacific islander and Glasgow should know better than anyone after what happened with Ma'afu.

VinceWLB wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:Similar thing happenned last season when Scarlets signed Chris Halafuia. At the 11th hour he said he wasn't coming and staying elsewhre due to family reasons. This was in August and thus completely knackered the Scarlets number 8 recruitment for the entire season.

How much compensation did the Scarlets get? Not a penny.

Terrible stuff from Scarlets management, didn't Scarlets had to pay his wages for 3 or so months too?

You have to be careful when signing a big pacific islander and Glasgow should know better than anyone after what happened with Ma'afu.

Was it not Glasgow's doing in the Ma'afy case though? As in they didn't want him any more (either because he wasn't fitting in or Strauss came along).

I seem to remember at the time Glasgow being the ones cutting things off.

VinceWLB wrote:
Terrible stuff from Scarlets management,

Why's that?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:
Terrible stuff from Scarlets management,

Why's that?

Why not let him go in early August and not pay his wages for 3 months then. The guy was clearly never going to play for you. Also least said about signing a 35 years old player with disciplinary problems the better.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Notch, back when Rush did the U-Turn on Ulster was there some financial deal from the Blues to Ulster?

I don't think so, no. Or if there was it was not declared publicly. But Ulster didn't pursue it because we were recommended a replacement in Pedrie Wannenburg and he jumped at the chance to join up- we were really very lucky that a multi-cap Springbok who was best mates with Johann Muller just so happened to be at a loose end that summer. So once we had sorted out a guy to take his place there was little point in pressing the matter. If Glasgow are unable to secure an adequate replacement at short notice, which seems likely, then it's a very different situation.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:Similar thing happenned last season when Scarlets signed Chris Halafuia. At the 11th hour he said he wasn't coming and staying elsewhre due to family reasons. This was in August and thus completely knackered the Scarlets number 8 recruitment for the entire season.

How much compensation did the Scarlets get? Not a penny.

Terrible stuff from Scarlets management, didn't Scarlets had to pay his wages for 3 or so months too?

You have to be careful when signing a big pacific islander and Glasgow should know better than anyone after what happened with Ma'afu.

Was it not Glasgow's doing in the Ma'afy case though? As in they didn't want him any more (either because he wasn't fitting in or Strauss came along).

I seem to remember at the time Glasgow being the ones cutting things off.

Not sure, i heard Ma'afu commitment early on wasn't what Glasgow expected from an international class 8. But clearly Glasgow jumped on the occasion when they saw that Strauss was available.

VinceWLB wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:
Terrible stuff from Scarlets management,

Why's that?

Why not let him go in early August and not pay his wages for 3 months then. The guy was clearly never going to play for you. Also least said about signing a 35 years old player with disciplinary problems the better.

I'm not aware of the 3 month thing.

If a player signs a contract, then fails to turn up at pre season training, I'm really quite unsure how that can be terrible management from the club.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:
Terrible stuff from Scarlets management,

Why's that?

Why not let him go in early August and not pay his wages for 3 months then. The guy was clearly never going to play for you. Also least said about signing a 35 years old player with disciplinary problems the better.

I'm not aware of the 3 month thing.

If a player signs a contract, then fails to turn up at pre season training, I'm really quite unsure how that can be terrible management from the club.

I was thinking that too...

If the player doesn't turn up on time I doubt his wages get paid. If you're a month late at the end of that month I can't see the club transferring the wages across.

You can't blame TN (can't spell his name) for wanting to play international rugby. When most condemn players for taking cash over international aspirations you can't then blame a guy for doing the opposite.

Remember Paul Warwick signing for LI from Munster in 2009, before changing his mind. Think that threatened to go legal for a while before it was resolved to the satisfaction of all parties. Not sure quite what LI got out of it in the end.

So as discussed on this thread; Xavier Rush signed for Ulster, backed out, ultimately got out of his contract. Chris Hala'ufia signed for Scarlets, backed out, ultimately got out of his contract. Paul Warwick signed for London Irish, backed out, ultimately got out of his contract. Not very encouraging for Glasgow fans.

Waisake Naholo also getting out of a contract this summer.

Naholo is in the NZ preliminary squad. Can't see him going anywhere. Also Savea and Naholo on the wings is a scary thought especially when Milner-Scudder is next in line. That's some talent.

I'm sure Glasgow can find a PI winger from the sevens or similar to come in a cause chaos next season.

No, that's my point. Naholo signed for Clermont earlier this year but once it became clear he was going to get picked for NZ he managed to get out of his contract.

As I remember it Rush compensated Ulster to cancel his contract, there was never a figure, but it came from Rush and not Cardiff, so wasn't likely to be very much.

I recall that Ma'afu was released from his contract by mutual agreement - unofficial word from Camp Soapdodger was that he didn't shape up as was envisaged and did not cut the mustard in terms of his training performances. Press release said it was by mutual agreement for personal reasons and Ma'afu's people said nothing to dispute this. There was real disappointment at the time because he promised good things.

It's all been said above about Big Tacky. He could be held to his contract but practically that's an impossibility and a Glasgow squad that prides itself on unity and self improvement will not countenance someone who does not want to play for the shirt. Toonie would not have any of that nonsense.

Bombrys is a shrewd CEO and Glasgow's protestations that the big feller is theirs will be positioning for a suitable payout from the ARFU and/or the Tahs. Whether they can use that money for another big signing is an interesting one, particularly now that the Top 14 transfer window is now closed.

There are a number of players (we mentioned James O'Connor on the other thread - Nick Cummins was another but I see that he has just replaced Henry Speight in the Wallabies squad after Henry was released on compassionate leave) who will just have realised that they have been left out of national RWC training squads over the past couple of weeks and so may be shaping for a move - particularly if their respective Super Rugby franchises have not done well this year and/or been decimated by other stars departing.

Guys like Patrick Osborne at the Highlanders, Lachie Turner and JOC at the Reds, Dillyn Leyds at the Stormers and Luke Morahan at the Force fall into that category and I would be interested to see if they are available.

Patrick Osborne would be a great signing for somebody. Real quality, dependable player- just short of ABs class. Surprised Fiji haven't looked at him tbh.

I suppose it's the age old issue of players from the Pacific Islands effectively being scouted by international sides. Everyone's talking about this being a battle between Scotland and Australia when effectively the real loser is Fiji, they could now come up against a Fijian Player in a pool that is already ridiculously tough for a team like Fiji as it is. The problem is now that it's not just New Zealand doing the poaching, quite simply the Pacific Islands are some of the poorest countries in the World and they produce some of the best wingers and number 8s, so when their players are offered big money to play for three years abroad before receiving an international Jersey at the end of course they'd take it. The only country I can think of off the top of my head that doesn't have "poached players" is South Africa, and even they have had their fair share of players from Zimbabwe, although there is a lot of politics and history involved in that. It's time to change the ruling otherwise this will keep happening. World Rugby needs to change the residency rules, and set a protocol for contracts. It would be interesting to see what the ARU would have done had Fiji not been in their group and had he not be an Internet sensation at a a time of dwindling crowds in Australia heading abroad.

I still don't see why Rugby has a 3 year residency rule, it can't be for Legal reasons as football has it set at 5 years and this hasn't ever been challenged.

It's stupid than you can represent a Nation without being a national of it
remember this,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/20932047
England flanker Hendre Fourie is facing deportation to South Africa after being forced to retire because of a shoulder injury.

If football can rule it at 5 years, Rugby should be able to do it also.

Five years would be better. These three year "project" signings being made is not what we want to see.

I have yet to meet a fan who agrees with this 3 years residency rule.

But now that it's well in place i guess it's too late to remove it.

I really don't understand why it hasn't been increased.

Margin_Walker wrote:Remember Paul Warwick signing for LI from Munster in 2009, before changing his mind. Think that threatened to go legal for a while before it was resolved to the satisfaction of all parties. Not sure quite what LI got out of it in the end.

...Ryan Lamb...

Osborne recently signed a new contract to stay with the Highlanders. Rumours were that he also was a done deal to London Irish and managed to find a way out of it.

Do most contracts now not have clauses inserted in them that allow for them to be rescinded for exceptional circumstances or for a fee? Given the time between the time of some being signed and starting it would make sense for all parties involved

marty2086 wrote:Do most contracts now not have clauses inserted in them that allow for them to be rescinded for exceptional circumstances or for a fee? Given the time between the time of some being signed and starting it would make sense for all parties involved

Problem would be what you class as exceptional circumstances - that could lead to people just disregarding contracts if a better offer comes along.

Glasgow should dig their heels in and only release this player if the contract is bought out or a substantial sum is given as recompense.

This was not just any random squad man - this seems to have been Glasgow's marquee signing for the year - and there is a definite opportunity cost in passing up other possible wingers because they thought they had secured his services. I agree with the comments above that this is the brittle edge of professionalism - I'm all for player empowerment but they have to recognise that they cannot mess pro franchises about.

Bomrys should ask for whatever the cost difference is in securing a comparable replacement on whatever terms are necessary.

RDW_Scotland wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Do most contracts now not have clauses inserted in them that allow for them to be rescinded for exceptional circumstances or for a fee? Given the time between the time of some being signed and starting it would make sense for all parties involved

Problem would be what you class as exceptional circumstances - that could lead to people just disregarding contracts if a better offer comes along.

Its been known to happen but anybody writing up a contract would stipulate what these circumstances would entail.

Given that he was being signed as a potential Scottish international and looks set to represent the Wallabies wouldn't it curtail the plan they had for him in the first place?

marty2086 wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Do most contracts now not have clauses inserted in them that allow for them to be rescinded for exceptional circumstances or for a fee? Given the time between the time of some being signed and starting it would make sense for all parties involved

Problem would be what you class as exceptional circumstances - that could lead to people just disregarding contracts if a better offer comes along.

Its been known to happen but anybody writing up a contract would stipulate what these circumstances would entail.

Given that he was being signed as a potential Scottish international and looks set to represent the Wallabies wouldn't it curtail the plan they had for him in the first place?

I don't think it was ever feasible for a player who is potentially that good to not play international rugby for the next 3 years. Fiji would have staked a claim if the Wallabies hadn't. I don't think that he was ever signed by the SRU for that reason. And I'm positive that's not why Townsend signed him either.

marty2086 wrote:

RDW_Scotland wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Do most contracts now not have clauses inserted in them that allow for them to be rescinded for exceptional circumstances or for a fee? Given the time between the time of some being signed and starting it would make sense for all parties involved

Problem would be what you class as exceptional circumstances - that could lead to people just disregarding contracts if a better offer comes along.

Its been known to happen but anybody writing up a contract would stipulate what these circumstances would entail.

Given that he was being signed as a potential Scottish international and looks set to represent the Wallabies wouldn't it curtail the plan they had for him in the first place?

And there in lies why I increasingly worry about rugby. International rugby is more like flipping club rugby than club rugby is! And no better reason than to hike the residency rules up to 5/6/7/ hell even 8 years!

Very cynical Geordie.

Haven't you seen the McNaiyaravoro tartan? Lovely, it is:

A most apposite tartan, GC.

You'll notice that the flamingos are singing the Naiyaravoro family motto  "We haven't got a leg to stand on".

To the tune of , "Smile as you wave me goodbye" Obviously.

GeordieFalcon wrote:
And there in lies why I increasingly worry about rugby. International rugby is more like flipping club rugby than club rugby is! And no better reason than to hike the residency rules up to 5/6/7/ hell even 8 years!

Yeah, it is. Of course it is equally mercenary for him to be playing for Australia now on exactly the same basis. His home nation isn't even involved in this tug of war! It's been about which of his potential adopted nations will get to him first. And whilst this may have the side effect of limiting the opportunities available to Pacific Islands players, its pretty poor that the criteria are so lax and we're not far off a situation where Fiji and Samoa are only playing the guys not good enough to make it for another test nation.

I don't think that was why he was signed though- but if the SRU were part funding it, thats what Glasgow will have said to incentivise them to open their wallets. Thats how you get your union to approve a marquee signing like this. Glasgow don't care if he plays for Scotland, they'd rather he played for nobody and was available all year.

Hes coming after all !

TFFT

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/rugby-union/33547714

Notch wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:
And there in lies why I increasingly worry about rugby. International rugby is more like flipping club rugby than club rugby is! And no better reason than to hike the residency rules up to 5/6/7/ hell even 8 years!

Yeah, it is. Of course it is equally mercenary for him to be playing for Australia now on exactly the same basis. His home nation isn't even involved in this tug of war! It's been about which of his potential adopted nations will get to him first. And whilst this may have the side effect of limiting the opportunities available to Pacific Islands players, its pretty poor that the criteria are so lax and we're not far off a situation where Fiji and Samoa are only playing the guys not good enough to make it for another test nation.

I don't think that was why he was signed though- but if the SRU were part funding it, thats what Glasgow will have said to incentivise them to open their wallets. Thats how you get your union to approve a marquee signing like this. Glasgow don't care if he plays for Scotland, they'd rather he played for nobody and was available all year.

Totally agree mate...

The thing I don't understand is why the rush NOT to play for Fiji, Samoa or Tonga. The all now have their big club salaries etc, sponsorship so why not represent your actual country. Imagine the teams those islands could put out if they had their pick of their actual players.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Notch wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:
And there in lies why I increasingly worry about rugby. International rugby is more like flipping club rugby than club rugby is! And no better reason than to hike the residency rules up to 5/6/7/ hell even 8 years!

Yeah, it is. Of course it is equally mercenary for him to be playing for Australia now on exactly the same basis. His home nation isn't even involved in this tug of war! It's been about which of his potential adopted nations will get to him first. And whilst this may have the side effect of limiting the opportunities available to Pacific Islands players, its pretty poor that the criteria are so lax and we're not far off a situation where Fiji and Samoa are only playing the guys not good enough to make it for another test nation.

I don't think that was why he was signed though- but if the SRU were part funding it, thats what Glasgow will have said to incentivise them to open their wallets. Thats how you get your union to approve a marquee signing like this. Glasgow don't care if he plays for Scotland, they'd rather he played for nobody and was available all year.

Totally agree mate...

The thing I don't understand is why the rush NOT to play for Fiji, Samoa or Tonga. The all now have their big club salaries etc, sponsorship so why not represent your actual country. Imagine the teams those islands could put out if they had their pick of their actual players.

All would be top 10 easy . At least one in the top 3-5.

Notch wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Notch, back when Rush did the U-Turn on Ulster was there some financial deal from the Blues to Ulster?

I don't think so, no. Or if there was it was not declared publicly. But Ulster didn't pursue it because we were recommended a replacement in Pedrie Wannenburg and he jumped at the chance to join up- we were really very lucky that a multi-cap Springbok who was best mates with Johann Muller just so happened to be at a loose end that summer. So once we had sorted out a guy to take his place there was little point in pressing the matter. If Glasgow are unable to secure an adequate replacement at short notice, which seems likely, then it's a very different situation.

Pretty sure Rush bought himself out of the contract.

On Rush

Guardian wrote:His change of mind is understood to have cost him a five-figure sum paid to Ulster in compensation

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2010/jun/16/xavier-rush-ulster-cardiff-blues