The residency rule might be scrapped ?

First topic message reminder :

Agustin Pichot, the new vice chairman of world rugby has spoken up about the residency rule, and thank god that he has, lets be honest, it is a massive joke that makes a mockery out of international rugby union. here are some of his quotes on it:-

"Somebody will kill me, but we need to change it," 

"it is very important to keep the identity of your national team; it's very important."


Apparently it is on the agenda to be looked at over the next six months.

At last World Rugby are actually realising how ridiculous a rule it is, I welcome this news and I hope they act on it. There are plenty of media types covering it so I will just give this link:-

https://www.google.co.uk/?ion=1&espv=2#q=Agustin+Pichot+residency+rules

I hope this will put the whole project player debacle to bed as well.

GeordieFalcon wrote:LIW
Even I think Roko can be forgiven...if you are prepared to face bullets for a country I think we can make an exception in rugby

Isnt Armand a 3 year player?
I think Ewers has both English or 1 English parent hasn't he.
What about Harrison? 3 year player? I don't know his parents nationality
What about Lees??

I believe Armand is a 3 yr player but won't get above Saxon level (very unlikely anyway). There is also the Zimbabwe thing
I believe Ewers does have English parentage but not certain. I am pretty sure he's been in the UK since early teens anyway so all his 'rugby development' has been here so worse case he's in the same boat as the Vunipolas, the Faletaus and Manu

Harrison has an English parent

Lees apparently has 2 English grandparents.

Never heard that about T'eo wanting to play for Australia - interesting)

So it looks like he's been playing a game of Global musical chairs, and finally found one.

Another little point.  It's clear (and obvious) that Unions pick up most of the 'hate' that goes along with this topic.  They are accused of thieving and being underhand and being opportunistic vultures etc etc.  And I'm not saying any of that isn't accurate.

But the players themselves sometimes get too easy of a journey in this debate - often painted as the little lost kids looking for a home and someone to love them because their dad left them when they were only four and they lost their first rabbit pet under the wheels of a juggernaut - call it the X Factor Tear Show, if you will.

They are often ruthless, non-emotional, greedy mercenaries, prepared to sleep in any bed to get their personal dream of personal International glory.

It's business.  They're not Evil....but they aren't saints either.  

Balance forces me to say so.

Lots would be sorted very quickly if the following were brought in.

1) Scrap Grandparents rule
2) Raise 3 years to 5
3) If you have represented 1 nation in league or union you play for the same in the other.

Then you can tackle the other ones that fall under the "grey" zones.

SecretFly wrote:Another little point.  It's clear (and obvious) that Unions pick up most of the 'hate' that goes along with this topic.  They are accused of thieving and being underhand and being opportunistic vultures etc etc.  And I'm not saying any of that isn't accurate.

But the players themselves sometimes get too easy of a journey in this debate - often painted as the little lost kids looking for a home and someone to love them because their dad left them when they were only four and they lost their first rabbit pet under the wheels of a juggernaut - call it the X Factor Tear Show, if you will.

They are often ruthless, non-emotional, greedy mercenaries, prepared to sleep in any bed to get their personal dream of personal International glory.

It's business.  They're not Evil....but they aren't saints either.  

Balance forces me to say so.

Exactly. I'm with GF on this, that the current system makes it too easy to 'shop' for a top international side, either if you are a good PI player or a NZ player on the fringes of the ABs. International teams are not the same as clubs, and should be restricted to players with a strong affinity for that country - 3 years residence or one grandparent being born there is insufficient in my view.

I can understand the motivation for someone like Hughes - playing for Fiji can't pay much, and under the current rules he becomes eligible for an England cap in a few weeks having spent 3 years making a good living at Wasps. Now, as an England player, especially if he turns out to be a good one, there is excellent money both in match fees and in endorsements that simply wouldn't be available to a Fiji international. It's an unfortunate inequality in the system, and something that World Rugby need to look at.

Obviously, extending the qualification period (I've previously suggested 7 years residence, with each year under 18 counting as 2) would reduce the motivation to look to qualify by residence, but perhaps WR also need to look at ways of balancing payments for internationals (some sort of set match fee, paid from a central fund paid into by the wealthier rugby nations), and for improving the commercial opportunities for players from the less high-profile countries.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So how are England taking the mick here? Because we have Rokoduguni on the outskirts?

amongst others yes.

Spell it out, who do you have a problem with LD.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Lots would be sorted very quickly if the following were brought in.

1) Scrap Grandparents rule
2) Raise 3 years to 5
3) If you have represented 1 nation in league or union you play for the same in the other.

Then you can tackle the other ones that fall under the "grey" zones.

I would not scrap that one completely - otherwise you could have someone with all four grandparents from one country, but whose parents were born in another, only able to qualify via residency. I would make it have to be two grandparents though (and as I said in an earlier post having the relevant passport)

Yes, but in this age of multiple passports, what moral truth exists in presenting one of them for a passport into an International side?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Spell it out, who do you have a problem with LD.

Hughes who will be capped in the AI most likely. Flutey, Barritt to name another few.

So someone who hasn't played, someone who doesn't play and someone who doesn't qualify on residency. May as well bring up the way Wales cheated years ago if you count those players as a mockery!

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Spell it out, who do you have a problem with LD.

Hughes who will be capped in the AI most likely. Flutey, Barritt to name another few.

I was actually agreeing with you , but im not sure these (bar Hughes) are the best examples to be fair.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Lots would be sorted very quickly if the following were brought in.

1) Scrap Grandparents rule
2) Raise 3 years to 5
3) If you have represented 1 nation in league or union you play for the same in the other.

Then you can tackle the other ones that fall under the "grey" zones.

4) Strictly No grey zone.


Yep. That about does it on clarity. Players can't then say they thought this or were promised that.

I'm not sure his point that Wales are whiter than white is a good point either. They've been trying their best but no one has signed up e.g. Morgan, Underhill on radar.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm not sure his point that Wales are whiter than white is a good point either. They've been trying their best but no one has signed up e.g. Morgan, Underhill on radar.

OOPS!


Seems like a case of double trouble for Lord there.....

Barritt qualified the same way as, say, Jake Ball.

Flutey was a residence player. Things are a little hazy but afterwards it seems that an English grandparent was discovered anyway. I believe a Welsh grandparent is the reason that the Yorkshireman Francis has got capped for Wales

Wales would have taken Ben Morgan if he had agreed. If Hughes had been playing for, say, the Scarlets, and he became available to pick for Wales I'd bet that you would not be quite so unhappy.

Hanno Dirksen won't get capped but he has been talked up in the past.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm not sure his point that Wales are whiter than white is a good point either. They've been trying their best but no one has signed up e.g. Morgan, Underhill on radar.

Glad you said that because I had been thinking something similar. In theory Roko could have gone to any of the home nations, but then Bath did offer him a job.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Lots would be sorted very quickly if the following were brought in.

1) Scrap Grandparents rule
2) Raise 3 years to 5
3) If you have represented 1 nation in league or union you play for the same in the other.

Then you can tackle the other ones that fall under the "grey" zones.

Don't agree - players should be able to represent their country of residence or where they have heritage. Current rules are fine.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm not sure his point that Wales are whiter than white is a good point either. They've been trying their best but no one has signed up e.g. Morgan, Underhill on radar.

Isn't Ben Morgans mother Welsh ? She is from Merthyr, the club that started him on the road to where he is now. Also, who should Underhill be capped by ? USA ? South Africa ? AN Other ?

Barring in mind these are two young kids you are talking about, both teenagers at there time in Wales, and both getting/gotten their development in Wales. 

It's not as if these were grown adults coming to the NH for a few bucks then getting capped after 3yrs.

If you wanted to have a go at Wales, our last one, I think, was Brent Cockbain, or Hal Luscumbe about 10 years ago.

No she isn't. Morgan was about to become available and then choose England before that point. Sorry LD but just because you haven't had anyone jump ship quite yet you're not above it. Seems more jealousy from your end.

Quite true lost. We can disagree on the rules as they are but anyone pretending their country is above playing to the rules is being silly.

lostinwales wrote:Barritt qualified the same way as, say, Jake Ball.

What he had a Welsh mother ?

lostinwales wrote:Wales would have taken Ben Morgan if he had agreed. If Hughes had been playing for, say, the Scarlets, and he became available to pick for Wales I'd bet that you would not be quite so unhappy.

Ben Morgan was a kid when he started in Wales and learned his trade through the Welsh system, slightly different. You are right, I would not be happy if that situation arose with Hughes.

lostinwales wrote:Hanno Dirksen won't get capped but he has been talked up in the past.

We have lots of players like that at the regions, it's mainly to get around the NWQ rules, although it would take a catastrophe for any of them to get picked.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Seems more jealousy from your end.

Morgan wasn't a kid. Sorry Wales are the same as the rest of us.

Sorry it does seem that way LD.

LordDowlais wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Barritt qualified the same way as, say, Jake Ball.

What he had a Welsh mother ?

lostinwales wrote:Wales would have taken Ben Morgan if he had agreed. If Hughes had been playing for, say, the Scarlets, and he became available to pick for Wales I'd bet that you would not be quite so unhappy.

Ben Morgan was a kid when he started in Wales and learned his trade through the Welsh system, slightly different. You are right, I would not be happy if that situation arose with Hughes.

lostinwales wrote:Hanno Dirksen won't get capped but he has been talked up in the past.

We have lots of players like that at the regions, it's mainly to get around the NWQ rules, although it would take a catastrophe for any of them to get picked.

Balls father is Welsh....

rodders wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Lots would be sorted very quickly if the following were brought in.

1) Scrap Grandparents rule
2) Raise 3 years to 5
3) If you have represented 1 nation in league or union you play for the same in the other.

Then you can tackle the other ones that fall under the "grey" zones.

Don't agree - players should be able to represent their country of residence or where they have heritage. Current rules are fine.

Is that because you have Stander and numerous other project players on the go...

No 7&1/2 wrote:Morgan wasn't a kid. Sorry Wales are the same as the rest of us.

I'd counter that with the RFU are the richest union in the world with the largest player base to choose from. They shouldn't need to really need to cap mercenaries like T'eo.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Morgan wasn't a kid. Sorry Wales are the same as the rest of us.

He was a teenager, sorry.


And NO, Wales are not in the same boat. Show me evidence of the current Welsh squad qualifying on a three year residency.

Hey I don't mind that view at all munkian. I've said I don't like someone coming in and not even playing a game in the country before being capped. The other discussion is about the pretence that Wales wouldn't be playing Morgan and others if given the chance.

Apology accepted LD, at least we can both acknowledge now that Wales would have had him if they had the chance and he hadn't have chosen England.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hey I don't mind that view at all munkian. I've said I don't like someone coming in and not even playing a game in the country before being capped. The other discussion is about the pretence that Wales wouldn't be playing Morgan and others if given the chance.

I think Morgan went downhill after leaving the Turks but that's a different debate. He wouldn't get a look in with Faletau firmly in place (and rightly so) but I disagree that he wouldn't have been capped at some point.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Apology accepted LD, at least we can both acknowledge now that Wales would have had him if they had the chance and he hadn't have chosen England.

Yes but he would not have been a three year qualifying merc. He started his pro career in Wales, at my home town club. He was a youngster, who came through the Welsh system. That is totally different to a three year qualifying bollox rule.

And its a stretch claiming Underhill as a product of the Welsh system given he was in the Gloucester academy until he started at Cardiff Uni.

Well no LD, it's completely the 3 year residency of he wouldn't have qualified. Same as Underhill. You can try and pretend but you're only fooling yourself!

He's been unlucky with injuries munkian, but a quality player who was neck and neck with Billy Vunipola for a long time.

munkian wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hey I don't mind that view at all munkian. I've said I don't like someone coming in and not even playing a game in the country before being capped. The other discussion is about the pretence that Wales wouldn't be playing Morgan and others if given the chance.

I think Morgan went downhill after leaving the Turks but that's a different debate. He wouldn't get a look in with Faletau firmly in place (and rightly so) but I disagree that he wouldn't have been capped at some point.

In reality I'd say that Morgan has been on a bit of a roller coaster rather than going downhill. When he has been fully fit and fully switched on he's been very good, and his England performances right before his leg break were better than when he first started. Right now he's slipped right off the radar.

And a quick check on Ben Morgan shows he would have been at the very end of 19 and probably 20 when he went to Wales.

No 7&1/2 wrote:at least we can both acknowledge now that Wales would have had him if they had the chance and he hadn't have chosen England.

But we didn't. So you cannot accuse us of it. 

Please tell me, of the current Welsh squad, which players have qualified by only being here for three years.

Erm Gatland was itching to get him. I'm saying that given the chance you would have done as your coach stated. You can rightly say you only have one player in the team currently who qualified through residency but to pretend that is through choice is not correct.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:at least we can both acknowledge now that Wales would have had him if they had the chance and he hadn't have chosen England.

But we didn't. So you cannot accuse us of it. 

Please tell me, of the current Welsh squad, which players have qualified by only being here for three years.

We have told you whom of the current England squad have qualified after being here for 3 years (none - with maybe 2 in the wider squad).

You have brought up past players so have we.

We have also pointed out that the fact that Wales do not currently have 'short term' residence players is as much a trick of timing and personal choices as any noble Welsh crusade, and that the presence of a player like Francis stretches qualification credibility just as much as many of the other players we are talking about.

In fact Francis is in exactly the same boat as Te'o, just in his case its a granny and Te'o its his mother.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You can rightly say you only have one player in the team currently who qualified through residency but to pretend that is through choice is not correct.

Choice or not. The facts are that Wales are not doing it. Other nations are, and some are doing it more than others.

lostinwales wrote:In fact Francis is in exactly the same boat as Te'o, just in his case its a granny and Te'o its his mother.

I totally agree, it absurd. He should not be able to play for Wales in my eyes, but at least he did not come to another country for £££££'s then hope to qualify after three years.

Also, at least his name sounds Welsh.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:You can rightly say you only have one player in the team currently who qualified through residency but to pretend that is through choice is not correct.

Choice or not. The facts are that Wales are not doing it. Other nations are, and some are doing it more than others.

That's true, but like I said not for want of trying! Think England are doing it less than you think as well.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Think England are doing it less than you think as well.

Yep, they are the best of a bad bunch.

So if you got your wish of decent foreigners coming to play in Wales, like Morgan and Underhill, Gatland et al may have more chance to get their wishes granted!

Fortunate in a way the Welsh clubs aren't a big draw for players so can play it this way.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Fortunate in a way the Welsh clubs aren't a big draw for players so can play it this way.

Yeah its all down to underfunding from the WRU

So that's it then, you get proved wrong on things, so you start taking the p1ss and picking at other things in Welsh rugby ?

FFS, what has the appeal of the regions or the funding from the WRU got to do with capping mercenaries ? 

We have plenty of time servers at the regions, they use them to get around the NWQ agreement, we just CHOOSE not to cap them.

Sorry, what do you meant by being proved wrong? I've simply stated that your implication that Wales deliberately don't choose players qualifying on residency is wrong. Corrected a few of your mistakes like Brad Barritt as well. FFS WTF LOL