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.

This debate should really be about what is in the best interests of rugby and if the idea that one size fits all is appropriate?

For example a nation with lots of registered players like England could in theory seek to establish a single qualifying criterion of say ONE parent from the country AND the player himself having to be a current resident for at least the past five years.
That would give them a massive advantage over most other nations because the rule would reduce the playing pools of other nations so significantly as to make them uncompetitive. The point is that these rules affect small countries far more than the big rugby nations.

Scrapping the granny rule would be one less route for a small nation to find eligible players and so make them less competitive. Keeping the granny rule potentially adds to the big nations pool of eligible players but may only increase their competitiveness fractionally.

Changing these rules is all well and good but what really is in the best interests of the game?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well you just said you have issues with the England squad now. Which players did you mean?

From recent memory:-

Riki Flutey
Shanton Hape
Marland Yarde
Ben Te'o although I have been told differently. Even though he was Australian a few months ago.
Don Armand
Alec Hepburn



I know some of those are Saxons, but they are now tied to England.

The Great Aukster wrote:This debate should really be about what is in the best interests of rugby and if the idea that one size fits all is appropriate?

For example a nation with lots of registered players like England could in theory seek to establish a single qualifying criterion of say ONE parent from the country AND the player himself having to be a current resident for at least the past five years.
That would give them a massive advantage over most other nations because the rule would reduce the playing pools of other nations so significantly as to make them uncompetitive. The point is that these rules affect small countries far more than the big rugby nations.

Scrapping the granny rule would be one less route for a small nation to find eligible players and so make them less competitive. Keeping the granny rule potentially adds to the big nations pool of eligible players but may only increase their competitiveness fractionally.

Changing these rules is all well and good but what really is in the best interests of the game?

Yep. Too much 'down with that sort of thing' too little focus on the consequences (or even the actual influence of the current rules)

Bigger problems driving this include the relative wealth and quality of management of PI states.

No you said current LD. Look back a few posts from London Tiger. You raelly have a problem with Yarde?

Hepburn isn't residency either I don't think, T'eo isn't.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hepburn isn't residency either I don't think, T'eo isn't.

Alec Hepburn is an Australian.

Also, don't you have a Welshman in your U20's squad playing at outside half ?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hepburn isn't residency either I don't think, T'eo isn't.

Did Te'o realise he had an English mother before or after he wanted to play for Australia ?

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well you just said you have issues with the England squad now. Which players did you mean?

From recent memory:-

Riki Flutey
Shanton Hape
Marland Yarde
Ben Te'o although I have been told differently. Even though he was Australian a few months ago.
Don Armand
Alec Hepburn



I know some of those are Saxons, but they are now tied to England.

What issues with Yarde and Hepburn?]

If that is the case then you must have issues with Charteris?

LordDowlais wrote:Also, don't you have a Welshman in your U20's squad playing at outside half ?

Na we dropped him because he was sh1t and brought a proper Englishman in

Welly wrote:What issues with Yarde and Hepburn?

If people are going to use Ben Morgan as a stick to beat us with, then what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Honest question - how does Charteris qualify for Wales?

LordDowlais wrote:

Welly wrote:What issues with Yarde and Hepburn?

If people are going to use Ben Morgan as a stick to beat us with, then what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

So you have no actual argument, but continue to bluster

As usual

lostinwales wrote:Honest question -  how does Charteris qualify for Wales?

Residency.

Welly wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Honest question -  how does Charteris qualify for Wales?

Residency.

Yep, he moved to Wales with his parents at a very young age. Went to school here, spent ALL his childhood days here, and he came through the Welsh system.

LordDowlais wrote:

Welly wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Honest question -  how does Charteris qualify for Wales?

Residency.

Yep, he moved to Wales with his parents at a very young age. Went to school here, spent ALL his childhood days here, and he came through the Welsh system.

Like Yarde

OK, lets agree than, that Wales and England are not as bad as Scotland, Ireland, France and Italy. We can then put this debate to bed.

Bloody Scots and Irish.

If your going to be critical LD you need to be consistent on both sides im afraid.

There is a lot wrong with the system, but you have to identify that there are many individual cases.

My problems aren't with Yarde, Hartley, Manu etc...they've been here most of their lives.

My issue is the ones who haven't...like Nathan Hughes, Teo (in this case I don't value the fact that his mother is English) Armand (I appreciate Zimbabwe is not an ideal place) etc etc

Being slightly serious I don't have a problem with Scotland and Italy because they have such a small pool of players to start with. Ireland I don't have an opinion on.

I only really have a problem with France, because they should have a big enough pool of players not to need imports instead French clubs seem to have shipped in a lot of PI talent into their academies, and on to the national team

GeordieFalcon wrote:My problems aren't with Yarde, Hartley, Manu etc...they've been here most of their lives. 

TBH, Geordie, I have no issues with those cases either, it's not as if they have come over to get caps they cannot get in their own countries, and in most cases, if their country of birth could turn back time they would fight tooth and nail to keep them.

lostinwales wrote:French clubs seem to have shipped in a lot of PI talent into their academies, and on to the national team

It is a lot more sinister than that. Have you read this:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/fiji/11854929/Rugby-uncovered-Despicable-abuse-of-young-Pacific-talent-is-huge-stain-on-game.html

It is quite disturbing.

lostinwales wrote:Being slightly serious I don't have a problem with Scotland and Italy because they have such a small pool of players to start with. Ireland I don't have an opinion on.

I only really have a problem with France, because they should have a big enough pool of players not to need imports instead French clubs seem to have shipped in a lot of PI talent into their academies, and on to the national team

The crazy thing is the French are renowned for being protectionist... in their language, their business, their industry etc yet when it comes to their rugby they're probably the worst.

Slightly off-topic, but hearing the news about Gareth Delve the other day had me wondering whether there are any part-Asian players in the Home Unions teams these days (Delve had a Chinese grandmother).

England once had three, with Brian Moore and the Underwood brothers, but I'm drawing a blank on the current squad.

François Trinh-Duc is probably the most prominent European.

Anyone know any such players associated with their own team?

It could be worse. Imagine if a nation wilfully capped utterly ineligible players on a wholesale basis. That would/should surely deserve a long ban from international rugby for that nation. I would also advocate a climb down from high horses and soap boxes.

Rugby Fan wrote:Slightly off-topic, but hearing the news about Gareth Delve the other day had me wondering whether there are any part-Asian players in the Home Unions teams these days (Delve had a Chinese grandmother).

England once had three, with Brian Moore and the Underwood brothers, but I'm drawing a blank on the current squad.

François Trinh-Duc is probably the most prominent European.

Anyone know any such players associated with their own team?

I think it was the times.

However it sparked a memory, around the mid 90s when England played Paul Hull at 15 for a brief season. I believe they had 7 ethnic minorities in the side at the time. Just checked and it was vs. Romania in 1994 (when they played full test teams for all games too).

Brian Moore
Victor Ubogu
Steve Ojomoh
Jeremy Guscott
Rory Underwood
Tony Underwood
Paul Hull

and that was 22 years ago.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hepburn isn't residency either I don't think, T'eo isn't.

Did Te'o realise he had an English mother before or after he wanted to play for Australia ?

Don't want T'eo capped yet personally but he's not part of your incorrectly perceived issue.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hepburn isn't residency either I don't think, T'eo isn't.

Did Te'o realise he had an English mother before or after he wanted to play for Australia ?

Don't want T'eo capped yet personally but he's not part of your incorrectly perceived issue.

Lets be honest... no Kiwi, Saffa, Aussie grows up thinking.... "stuff a world cups winners medal, I want a triple crown".

I can think of 1, that AUS kid Jason something and he was seen as nothing more as potential rather than one who was an obvious test match player. Mike Catt would have got caps for SA easily but he left early and was part of the amateur era really in terms of how he got capped,  wouldn't have made the 95 team... maybe the 99 team and then who knows whether or not he would have got a winners medal.

Anscombe might have got a cap but he never kicked on and I think he looked at the players in front of him and said... I've got no chance.

England will be there or there abouts wc time but not the point.

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Hepburn isn't residency either I don't think, T'eo isn't.

Did Te'o realise he had an English mother before or after he wanted to play for Australia ?

Don't want T'eo capped yet personally but he's not part of your incorrectly perceived issue.

Lets be honest... no Kiwi, Saffa, Aussie grows up thinking.... "stuff a world cups winners medal, I want a triple crown".

I can think of 1, that AUS kid Jason something and he was seen as nothing more as potential rather than one who was an obvious test match player. Mike Catt would have got caps for SA easily but he left early and was part of the amateur era really in terms of how he got capped,  wouldn't have made the 95 team... maybe the 99 team and then who knows whether or not he would have got a winners medal.

Anscombe might have got a cap but he never kicked on and I think he looked at the players in front of him and said... I've got no chance.

Jason Jones-Hughes

GeordieFalcon wrote:If your going to be critical LD you need to be consistent on both sides im afraid.

There is a lot wrong with the system, but you have to identify that there are many individual cases.

My problems aren't with Yarde, Hartley, Manu etc...they've been here most of their lives.

My issue is the ones who haven't...like Nathan Hughes, Teo (in this case I don't value the fact that his mother is English) Armand (I appreciate Zimbabwe is not an ideal place) etc etc

What is it about Teo's mother's Englishness that is less real than say George North's mother's Welshness?

I would like to see the rules changed to get rid of qualification by grandparents and short term adult residence. However under any likely qualification system Teo would qualify for England.

LordDowlais wrote:

lostinwales wrote:French clubs seem to have shipped in a lot of PI talent into their academies, and on to the national team

It is a lot more sinister than that. Have you read this:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/fiji/11854929/Rugby-uncovered-Despicable-abuse-of-young-Pacific-talent-is-huge-stain-on-game.html

It is quite disturbing.

Thanks for sharing - this is atrocious. Agents manipulating and ripping off young talent (any sport really) is an old story. But clubs complicit as well is much, much worse. The names of the agents should be made public, the clubs punished.

Exiledinborders wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:If your going to be critical LD you need to be consistent on both sides im afraid.

There is a lot wrong with the system, but you have to identify that there are many individual cases.

My problems aren't with Yarde, Hartley, Manu etc...they've been here most of their lives.

My issue is the ones who haven't...like Nathan Hughes, Teo (in this case I don't value the fact that his mother is English) Armand (I appreciate Zimbabwe is not an ideal place) etc etc

What is it about Teo's mother's Englishness that is less real than say George North's mother's Welshness?

I would like to see the rules changed to get rid of qualification by grandparents and short term adult residence. However under any likely qualification system Teo would qualify for England.

Despite having never barely set foot in the country, being born in NZ, living in Aus all his life and representing Samoa in league!!

I'd say his mothers English birth shouldn't be taken into account in this case. Its farcical.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Despite having never barely set foot in the country, being born in NZ, living in Aus all his life and representing Samoa in league!!

Plus being an Irish project Player.... surely he knew his Mother was English and that England was the other island not the one he first set down on???

GeordieFalcon wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:If your going to be critical LD you need to be consistent on both sides im afraid.

There is a lot wrong with the system, but you have to identify that there are many individual cases.

My problems aren't with Yarde, Hartley, Manu etc...they've been here most of their lives.

My issue is the ones who haven't...like Nathan Hughes, Teo (in this case I don't value the fact that his mother is English) Armand (I appreciate Zimbabwe is not an ideal place) etc etc

What is it about Teo's mother's Englishness that is less real than say George North's mother's Welshness?

I would like to see the rules changed to get rid of qualification by grandparents and short term adult residence. However under any likely qualification system Teo would qualify for England.

Despite having never barely set foot in the country, being born in NZ, living in Aus all his life and representing Samoa in league!!

I'd say his mothers English birth shouldn't be taken into account in this case. Its farcical.

So you would take into account parentage in some cases but not others. How does that work?

If you have a parentage rule then any player can use it. You cannot have a rule and then have some sort of committee deciding it doesn't apply to certain players.

Personally I would not be that unhappy to see the parentage rule scrapped. It would probably help England with all those Wales players born in England but whatever rules we have they have to be applied based on facts and not on gut instinct and prejudice.

Ok maybe im being two faced etc but I do think some of the cases need to be looked at on an individual basis.

Hes never taken his mothers birth country in to consideration in all the previous years (he's 29 now) so how come suddenly because he cant try out for Australia he brings it in to play now!! Its shocking!

Personally I think everyone selected should have to live here before being selected. I'd say extend the residency period to 5 years, and have one of 3 years for anyone with a parent or 2 grandparents from here. However, that would make the PI suffer as many of their players have never lived there and are based on parentage. Also they can't work there as a pro player.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Ok maybe im being two faced etc but I do think some of the cases need to be looked at on an individual basis.

Hes never taken his mothers birth country in to consideration in all the previous years (he's 29 now) so how come suddenly because he cant try out for Australia he brings it in to play now!! Its shocking!

Fiki Flutey and Gareth Anscombe spring to mind...

Individual basis should be taken into account, you can't play and attempt to make it in one nation, then fall back on another nation once you have failed! Not within tier one nations anyway, there could be a case for tier 2 nations to benefit from these players, however I get the feeling these players wouldn't be interested in tier 2 international rugby.

Teo has played for Samoa in league so he should play for Samoa in union...its pretty straight forward to me!

I think playing ANY sport for one country should tie you to that country for ALL sports. By representing them in that sport you're pledging allegiance to them and all that goes with it. You shouldn't then be able to go against all of that just because you're kicking a different shaped ball or being officiated under a different rule book. That's a much bigger no-no for me than someone representing the country of their mother when they've barely set foot in the country.

Griff wrote:I think playing ANY sport for one country should tie you to that country for ALL sports.  By representing them in that sport you're pledging allegiance to them and all that goes with it.  You shouldn't then be able to go against all of that just because you're kicking a different shaped ball or being officiated under a different rule book.  That's a much bigger no-no for me than someone representing the country of their mother when they've barely set foot in the country.

That implies a connection between all sports and a grown up interpretation of how these things should work.

lostinwales wrote:

Griff wrote:I think playing ANY sport for one country should tie you to that country for ALL sports.  By representing them in that sport you're pledging allegiance to them and all that goes with it.  You shouldn't then be able to go against all of that just because you're kicking a different shaped ball or being officiated under a different rule book.  That's a much bigger no-no for me than someone representing the country of their mother when they've barely set foot in the country.

That implies a connection between all sports and a grown up interpretation of how these things should work.

Too much to ask for?!

Griff wrote:I think playing ANY sport for one country should tie you to that country for ALL sports.  By representing them in that sport you're pledging allegiance to them and all that goes with it.  You shouldn't then be able to go against all of that just because you're kicking a different shaped ball or being officiated under a different rule book.  That's a much bigger no-no for me than someone representing the country of their mother when they've barely set foot in the country.

Checkout the British no.2, Men's tennis player......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alja%C5%BE_Bedene

Cardiff Dave wrote:

Griff wrote:I think playing ANY sport for one country should tie you to that country for ALL sports.  By representing them in that sport you're pledging allegiance to them and all that goes with it.  You shouldn't then be able to go against all of that just because you're kicking a different shaped ball or being officiated under a different rule book.  That's a much bigger no-no for me than someone representing the country of their mother when they've barely set foot in the country.

Checkout the British no.2, Men's tennis player......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alja%C5%BE_Bedene

Thanks. Ridiculous isn't it?

Griff wrote:

Cardiff Dave wrote:

Griff wrote:I think playing ANY sport for one country should tie you to that country for ALL sports.  By representing them in that sport you're pledging allegiance to them and all that goes with it.  You shouldn't then be able to go against all of that just because you're kicking a different shaped ball or being officiated under a different rule book.  That's a much bigger no-no for me than someone representing the country of their mother when they've barely set foot in the country.

Checkout the British no.2, Men's tennis player......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alja%C5%BE_Bedene

Thanks. Ridiculous isn't it?

Aye and Yugoslavian in old money.

Griff wrote:

Thanks. Ridiculous isn't it?

Someone's tripping and I don't mean Zola Budd.