England want to tackle poaching of their academy products

First topic message reminder :

Well this is interesting, England want world rugby to do something about the Celtic nations "poaching" their young talent. It's not as if England have not had it both ways though, with players like Ben Morgan and Sam Underhill being two that were forged in Wales before crossing back over the Severn:-

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/england-want-to-tackle-poaching-of-their-academy-products-cbvrbvj5h

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/england-ask-world-rugby-help-13796209

When I was reading this I had a lot of sympathy for England in this respect, but when I did a little digging I found some quite interesting articles, yes the RFU want to stop other countries taking players that they develop, but England are not as squeaky clean as they like to think they are:-

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/89379984/england-revealed-as-the-home-of-the-poacher

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/may/10/rugby-residency-rules-changed-pacific-island-exodus

After reading this, I have had a thought, that the fallout could be that a rugby player would have to declare their international intentions at a very young age.

Looking at one of those articles, Scotland would be at an instant disadvantage, I do not think this would be fair on any player, to have to nail his patriotism to the mast before you are at an age to make a responsible decision, yet that is a path we might have to go down if the RFU get their way.

LondonTiger wrote:With a much larger player base, and bigger (more professional?) development system - it is no surprise that Wales and Scotland would look to see what talent they can cherry pick. Equally it should be no surprise that a multi million pound business seeks to protect it's investment.

But as Geraint John has said, Wales are not scouring England to poach players, we are scouring England to get our players back, that have previously been poached by the English clubs.

So perhaps the RFU need to sort their own issues out first, and stop it's clubs from sending scouts across the border into Wales in the first place.

And England have just done the same with Underhill and Ben Morgan...taking our players back that wales were trying to poach.

Its a nothing story to me.

All teams have done and still do it.

Hell look back when Rupert Moon the Englishman played for Wales and was playing against Dewi Morris the Welshman playing for England.

We're a small island...its going to happen.

PS Why did young Moriarty play for the England U20 set up when everyman and their dog knew he was Welsh and would play for Wales. That just took up the place of another England lad!

LordDowlais wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:With a much larger player base, and bigger (more professional?) development system - it is no surprise that Wales and Scotland would look to see what talent they can cherry pick. Equally it should be no surprise that a multi million pound business seeks to protect it's investment.

But as Geraint John has said, Wales are not scouring England to poach players, we are scouring England to get our players back, that have previously been poached by the English clubs.

So perhaps the RFU need to sort their own issues out first, and stop it's clubs from sending scouts across the border into Wales in the first place.

That will be why the training camps invited 14-16 year old kids?

I am willing to accept we need to put our house in order, no point debating with you if you truly believe your guys are innocents.

LordDowlais wrote:

cascough wrote:It's interesting how this thread has degenerated into a parochial Eng vs Wales debate. I just don't see it like that. It's a business trying to protect their investment (from all comers), which is just common sense.

If that's the case then, English clubs should stop sending their scouts to Wales to pick up players. The RFU need to stop that, then they will not be in this position.

Perhaps the RFU do not need to go crying to World Rugby, perhaps they should get their own house in order first.

Getting "their own house in order" will do nothing to protect their investment. It will only serve to appease those who want to play tit for tat. As I said, this isn't about parochialism, it's about protecting an investment, and I'd encourage any other Unions to do the same.

GeordieFalcon, I agree 100%.

But the RFU need to realise this before they go crying to World Rugby.

Also, some of your fellow countrymen need to stop trying to convince people that a whole stand full of English scouts came to Wales to watch all our under 18's players just to see how we do things on this side of the Severn, oh, and because they might have fancied watching a bit of rugby.

cascough wrote:Getting "their own house in order" will do nothing to protect their investment. It will only serve to appease those who want to play tit for tat. As I said, this isn't about parochialism, it's about protecting an investment, and I'd encourage any other Unions to do the same.

There is an easy way to protect your investment with this. Just stop investing in other countries players.

Is it me or is £5k per year of academy peanuts? Considering the failure rate that must be a huge loss.

LordDowlais wrote:

cascough wrote:Getting "their own house in order" will do nothing to protect their investment. It will only serve to appease those who want to play tit for tat. As I said, this isn't about parochialism, it's about protecting an investment, and I'd encourage any other Unions to do the same.

There is an easy way to protect your investment with this. Just stop investing in other countries players.

Nationality isn't that black and white. It's not investing in another countries players. It's investing in a person, who may have a choice over who he decides to represent.

LordDowlais wrote:

cascough wrote:Getting "their own house in order" will do nothing to protect their investment. It will only serve to appease those who want to play tit for tat. As I said, this isn't about parochialism, it's about protecting an investment, and I'd encourage any other Unions to do the same.

There is an easy way to protect your investment with this. Just stop investing in other countries players.

Again, that will do nothing to stop another Union coming along and looking at English players in an English academy that may also qualify for another country. All that would do, is actually help the other Unions protect their own investments, but that isn't what the RFU are discussing. Like I say, this isn't the parochial issue you're determined to make it.

What you're really saying is, I feel Wales are being wronged, England should do something about that. That's crazy.

England feel they're being wronged, so they are doing something about it.

If Wales feel they're being wronged, then they should do something about it. It's not up to England to do that for them.

LondonTiger wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:With a much larger player base, and bigger (more professional?) development system - it is no surprise that Wales and Scotland would look to see what talent they can cherry pick. Equally it should be no surprise that a multi million pound business seeks to protect it's investment.

But as Geraint John has said, Wales are not scouring England to poach players, we are scouring England to get our players back, that have previously been poached by the English clubs.

So perhaps the RFU need to sort their own issues out first, and stop it's clubs from sending scouts across the border into Wales in the first place.

That will be why the training camps invited 14-16 year old kids?

I am willing to accept we need to put our house in order, no point debating with you if you truly believe your guys are innocents.

Wales have been scouring England since the early 90's for players who have ancestral links.  It is done systematically through the Exile's program.  The idea that this is a one way or they are simply 'trying to get their players back' is absurd.  There are plenty of Welsh scouts in England. There is even a section dedicated to it on the WRU website:

http://www.wru.co.uk/eng/development/ministomillennium/player/exiles/index.php

cascough wrote:What you're really saying is, I feel Wales are being wronged, England should do something about that. That's crazy.

Nope, I am not feeling Wales are being wronged, far from it.

cascough wrote:England feel they're being wronged, so they are doing something about it.

Why do you feel England are being wronged ?

cascough wrote:If Wales feel they're being wronged, then they should do something about it. It's not up to England to do that for them.

You are getting the wrong end of the stick here, in spectacular fashion.

Wales send scouts to England to keep tabs on Welsh players who have gone there through scholarships and the what not, as Geraint John has stated, we wan them to remember they are still wanted by us, that they still have a part to play in Welsh rugby.

If the English clubs did not tempt our players away at such a young age in the first place, then we would not be capping as many players who have been put through the English academies, and the RFU would not be spending thousands developing players for Wales, as they put it.

LondonTiger wrote:That will be why the training camps invited 14-16 year old kids?

I am willing to accept we need to put our house in order, no point debating with you if you truly believe your guys are innocents.

Sorry LT, I am only now noticing this.

Not for one minute do I believe Wales are innocent in all this, not by any stretch of the imagination, but what I do think is beggars belief, is the RFU to be moaning from the rooftops about this when they are not innocent either.

I don't think you're interested in a debate LD.

I see it as a business protecting their investment, nothing more.

LondonTiger wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:With a much larger player base, and bigger (more professional?) development system - it is no surprise that Wales and Scotland would look to see what talent they can cherry pick. Equally it should be no surprise that a multi million pound business seeks to protect it's investment.

But as Geraint John has said, Wales are not scouring England to poach players, we are scouring England to get our players back, that have previously been poached by the English clubs.

So perhaps the RFU need to sort their own issues out first, and stop it's clubs from sending scouts across the border into Wales in the first place.

That will be why the training camps invited 14-16 year old kids?

I am willing to accept we need to put our house in order, no point debating with you if you truly believe your guys are innocents.

Who said the WRU are innocent?

This thread was created because of the hypocrisy of the RFU running to World Rugby to complain that the Celtic nations are poaching players when associations affiliated with the RFU have been poaching from those said nations.

As has been proven. Yeah the WRU have an exiles team set up and why shouldn’t they? People relocate but it’s not the WRU running to World Rugby

cascough wrote:I don't think you're interested in a debate LD.

Why ? Because I do not agree with you ?

Look, if the RFU want to protect their investments, then invest it in players who can only qualify for their own country, do not come over the border looking for other assets, unless it is a risk they are willing to take.

Then it's the old saying, you win some, you lose some. It's not worth crying over.

I go back to thinking everyone really agrees with the overall point but the problem is who is delivering it.

LordDowlais wrote:

cascough wrote:I don't think you're interested in a debate LD.

Why ? Because I do not agree with you ?

Look, if the RFU want to protect their investments, then invest it in players who can only qualify for their own country, do not come over the border looking for other assets, unless it is a risk they are willing to take.

Then it's the old saying, you win some, you lose some. It's not worth crying over.

Absolutely not. Because you won't engage with what someone actually says to you.

What you are saying here is that the RFU shouldn't protect their investment, in fact they should invest differently so it doesn't need protecting.

Firstly, why should they invest differently? Why can they not invest how they do currently and then seek to protect it?

Secondly, as I've pointed out to you a few times now, even if they did change the way they invest (ie stop scouting in Wales, and again, why you've made this about Wales is baffling to me) that still will not stop other Unions poaching players from English academies that are qualified to play for other countries (either by family or eventual residency). So as such, ceasing to send scouts to Wales does not protect the RFU's investment in it's academies. That last part, is the sole thing they are complaining about, but you are trying to make it about more.

LordDowlais wrote:

cascough wrote:I don't think you're interested in a debate LD.

Why ? Because I do not agree with you ?

Look, if the RFU want to protect their investments, then invest it in players who can only qualify for their own country, do not come over the border looking for other assets, unless it is a risk they are willing to take.

Then it's the old saying, you win some, you lose some. It's not worth crying over.

Wow. The narrow-mindedness is getting worse by the day!

So the RFU/English clubs can't give a pro contract to an up and coming 18 year old kid who was born and raised in England by English parents but his gran is Welsh!

"sorry lad, we can't give you a contract and let you play rugby at a professional level in our league as you have wlesh ancestry"

Good luck dealing with all the discrimination cases that will come flooding in as a result!

Whats next, DNA tests for all players to determine how "native" they are before they can play? Sticking a pencil the a kids hair to detrmine what "race" they are?

It's this kind of thinking that resulted in women being drowned as suspected witches

cascough wrote:Absolutely not. Because you won't engage with what someone actually says to you.

I am engaging, it's you who keeps being abrasive.

cascough wrote:What you are saying here is that the RFU shouldn't protect their investment, in fact they should invest differently so it doesn't need protecting.

Yes. Otherwise, do not moan about it.

cascough wrote:Firstly, why should they invest differently? Why can they not invest how they do currently and then seek to protect it?

Because you cannot invest in a Welsh person, then expect them to turn their allegience from the country of their birth, then complain about it.

cascough wrote:Secondly, as I've pointed out to you a few times now, even if they did change the way they invest (ie stop scouting in Wales, and again, why you've made this about Wales is baffling to me) that still will not stop other Unions poaching players from English academies that are qualified to play for other countries. So as such, ceasing to send scouts to Wales does not protect the RFU's investment in it's academies. That last part, is the sole thing they are complaining about, but you are trying to make it about more.

I promise, and I mean this sincerely, I am not trying to turn this into a Wales V England "thing".

It seems it is you who is trying to convince yourself and others that I am, to try and justify your point of view. I am not trying to make it about anything more, and that is the last I am saying regarding that accusation.

The point I am trying to make is, that the RFU are crying bloody murder over this, when they really should be looking close to home, they are being hypocritical. Now none of the home nations are innocent in any of this, but only one union is throwing their weight around and wanting things to change.

tigertattie wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

cascough wrote:I don't think you're interested in a debate LD.

Why ? Because I do not agree with you ?

Look, if the RFU want to protect their investments, then invest it in players who can only qualify for their own country, do not come over the border looking for other assets, unless it is a risk they are willing to take.

Then it's the old saying, you win some, you lose some. It's not worth crying over.

Wow. The narrow-mindedness is getting worse by the day!

So the RFU/English clubs can't give a pro contract to an up and coming 18 year old kid who was born and raised in England by English parents but his gran is Welsh!

"sorry lad, we can't give you a contract and let you play rugby at a professional level in our league as you have wlesh ancestry"

Good luck dealing with all the discrimination cases that will come flooding in as a result!

Whats next, DNA tests for all players to determine how "native" they are before they can play? Sticking a pencil the a kids hair to detrmine what "race" they are?

It's this kind of thinking that resulted in women being drowned as suspected witches

OMG.

Seriously, what is your problem ?

So what you are saying is then, if a person feels he is from another country, then no matter what their patriotism is, they MUST play for England because the RFU has invested in them ?

Is that what you are saying ? That the RFU should now decide the nationality of people ?

LordDowlais wrote:OMG.

Seriously, what is your problem ?

So what you are saying is then, if a person feels he is from another country, then no matter what their patriotism is, they MUST play for England because the RFU has invested in them ?

Is that what you are saying ? That the RFU should now decide the nationality of people ?

No he's almost saying the opposite. You're just blind.

You're the one trying to decide the nationality of people.

Scottrf wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:OMG.

Seriously, what is your problem ?

So what you are saying is then, if a person feels he is from another country, then no matter what their patriotism is, they MUST play for England because the RFU has invested in them ?

Is that what you are saying ? That the RFU should now decide the nationality of people ?

No he's almost saying the opposite. You're just blind.

You're the one trying to decide the nationality of people.

What ?

Nope, you are just trying to twist things. To suit your own agenda.

If a Welsh person has gone through the English academy, and the RFU has spent thousands on him, then if Wales want to cap him, then the RFU should not moan about it, that is what I am saying.

LordDowlais wrote:

cascough wrote:Absolutely not. Because you won't engage with what someone actually says to you.

I am engaging, it's you who keeps being abrasive.

cascough wrote:What you are saying here is that the RFU shouldn't protect their investment, in fact they should invest differently so it doesn't need protecting.

Yes. Otherwise, do not moan about it.

cascough wrote:Firstly, why should they invest differently? Why can they not invest how they do currently and then seek to protect it?

Because you cannot invest in a Welsh person, then expect them to turn their allegience from the country of their birth, then complain about it.

cascough wrote:Secondly, as I've pointed out to you a few times now, even if they did change the way they invest (ie stop scouting in Wales, and again, why you've made this about Wales is baffling to me) that still will not stop other Unions poaching players from English academies that are qualified to play for other countries. So as such, ceasing to send scouts to Wales does not protect the RFU's investment in it's academies. That last part, is the sole thing they are complaining about, but you are trying to make it about more.

I promise, and I mean this sincerely, I am not trying to turn this into a Wales V England "thing".

It seems it is you who is trying to convince yourself and others that I am, to try and justify your point of view. I am not trying to make it about anything more, and that is the last I am saying regarding that accusation.

The point I am trying to make is, that the RFU are crying bloody murder over this, when they really should be looking close to home, they are being hypocritical. Now none of the home nations are innocent in any of this, but only one union is throwing their weight around and wanting things to change.

Last post on this for me, so I'll just sum up.

Nationality is not straightforward and that's before you consider the residency rule, which would still circumvent all discriminatory measures taken to protect their investment.

The RFU want to protect their investment. To throw the sins of the RFU (which I have not disputed or defended) back in their faces as a reason to not seek to protect their investment is nonsensical. The sins of the RFU are a separate issue IMO.

LordDowlais wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:OMG.

Seriously, what is your problem ?

So what you are saying is then, if a person feels he is from another country, then no matter what their patriotism is, they MUST play for England because the RFU has invested in them ?

Is that what you are saying ? That the RFU should now decide the nationality of people ?

No he's almost saying the opposite. You're just blind.

You're the one trying to decide the nationality of people.

What ?

Nope, you are just trying to twist things. To suit your own agenda.

If a Welsh person has gone through the English academy, and the RFU has spent thousands on him, then if Wales want to cap him, then the RFU should not moan about it, that is what I am saying.

But what you're saying is that the RFU shouldn't put this 'Welsh' person through the English academy, even though he may have been born and raised in England.

As I've said multiple times nationality isn't as black and white as you think.

Scottrf wrote:But what you're saying is that the RFU shouldn't put this 'Welsh' person through the English academy, even though he may have been born and raised in England.

They can do what ever they like, but they should not moan if that person decides to represent the country of his choice.

LordDowlais wrote:

Scottrf wrote:But what you're saying is that the RFU shouldn't put this 'Welsh' person through the English academy, even though he may have been born and raised in England.

They can do what ever they like, but they should not moan if that person decides to represent the country of his choice.

It's not moaning. It's compensation.

Scottrf wrote:It's not moaning. It's compensation.

They are getting that.

And going to world rugby complaining is moaning, however way you try and skew it.

LordDowlais wrote:

Scottrf wrote:It's not moaning. It's compensation.

They are getting that.

And going to world rugby complaining is moaning, however way you try and skew it.

Cool.

Thanks, LD. That's interesting context - though reading the wider context of the article I think when they say "scouts from England" they mean "scouts from English clubs" and "scouts from schools in England" - there's no explicit mention of RFU scouts. The RFU is only mentioned in the context of "they support the club academies that have links to the schools".

All of which suggests that what we have is a failure of incentives and co-ordination at different levels. The schools have interests in getting good players; the clubs have interests in getting potential professional players; the RFU has interest in investing in high quality EQPs.

You could argue that it's all down to the RFU to police that, but that's fraught with difficulty.

You could say that the RFU (and other unions) should only accept players into academies that are only qualified for the union in question. But how many people is that actually true for? What proportion of players were born in the same country that both parents and all four grandparents were born in? What proportion of these Welsh kids have an English parent or grandparent?

I view myself as English these days, but my father was born in Cardiff while my grandfather (a Scot) was working on a project there. If I'd been any good at rugby, I could have had three nations offering to take me on, and probably Ireland offering a "project player" deal for good measure.

How many players would be lost to the game altogether if we insisted on only players who were qualified for only one country when they joined an academy? That would rule out Moriarty, Warburton, North, Itoje, Faletau, both Vunipolae, Clifford, Underhill, Yarde and presumably many more.

For another thing, they don't control the schools or clubs; those are independent commercial entities, even if the club academy places are part funded by the RFU. The best the RFU can do is insist that they will only fund EQPs... but take a kid into a school at 11 and by the time they hit the RFU radar at 16 they are EQP on residency even under the new rules.

For me, the killer question is: Is it even legal to discriminate on grounds of international qualification? It's probably legal to only offer academy places to kids who are (or will be) qualified to play for you; but not offering a place on the grounds that they are qualified to play for someone else would not survive the first disgruntled family with a court case.

The best solution I can see is to have some sort of equitable framework that compensates unions for investment in players who then go to play for a different union within, say, their first professional contract.

That should reflect a realistic assessment of actual investment and opportunity cost - so that it's proportional to the "per player" cost and inversely proportional to the number of players in the system at that point. That way a union could be compensated for time spent in the mini and youth system - but it will reflect the fact that the investment in individuals at that stage is low and the player pool is large.

Poorfour.

Thank you, and I mean that.

That is one of the most complete replies I have ever read on here, and gives an unbiased honest opinion. Again, thanks.

I could not agree more with what you have said.

LordDowlais wrote:Poorfour.

Thank you, and I mean that.

That is one of the most complete replies I have ever read on here, and gives an unbiased honest opinion. Again, thanks.

I could not agree more with what you have said.

Except he's agreed with the RFU re compensation who you disagree with. Bizarre.

Poorfour put it better than everyone and he's managed to change ld s opinion! Never thought I'd see it.

Scottrf wrote:Except he's agreed with the RFU re compensation who you disagree with. Bizarre.

Please, point out where I have said that I disagree about any compensation, please, and I will keep asking until either you show me or apologise.

Last paragraph suggests that the current compensation isn't enough in some cases adequate in others ie requiring a review of the whole thing and changing what we have.

LordDowlais wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Except he's agreed with the RFU re compensation who you disagree with. Bizarre.

Please, point out where I have said that I disagree about any compensation, please, and I will keep asking until either you show me or apologise.

Scottrf's wifi has strangely stopped working I see.

LordDowlais wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Except he's agreed with the RFU re compensation who you disagree with. Bizarre.

Please, point out where I have said that I disagree about any compensation, please, and I will keep asking until either you show me or apologise.

What's your point then? I have a wired connection btw.

Scottrf wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Except he's agreed with the RFU re compensation who you disagree with. Bizarre.

Please, point out where I have said that I disagree about any compensation, please, and I will keep asking until either you show me or apologise.

What's your point then? I have a wired connection btw.

Well you have tried to change things because you have been found out.

You have accused me of disagreeing about compensation. I have not. I would like an apology, please.

Also, my point is, and always has been, which I have stated on this debate numerous times, that the RFU are being hypocrites.

You used morgan and underhill to demensotrate that point and they were shot down quickly.

LordDowlais wrote:Also, my point is, and always has been, which I have stated on this debate numerous times, that the RFU are being hypocrites.

In what way? Which players of recent times have played for an Int U20 side and then crossed to play for England? I honestly can't think of any.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Also, my point is, and always has been, which I have stated on this debate numerous times, that the RFU are being hypocrites.

In what way? Which players of recent times have played for an Int U20 side and then crossed to play for England? I honestly can't think of any.

No they are hypocrites because they are moaning about players being poached by unions from their academies, whilst the English clubs and schools are sending scouts over to Wales trying to pick up young Welsh talent that end up in said academies. Nobody is doing anything wrong here, might I add, but only one union is whinging.

Approaching for a solution =/= whinging.

Not really hypocritical if they are talking about time and money spent on academies when you're talking about prior to this.

And to be fair they're quite right to raise it.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Also, my point is, and always has been, which I have stated on this debate numerous times, that the RFU are being hypocrites.

In what way? Which players of recent times have played for an Int U20 side and then crossed to play for England? I honestly can't think of any.

:cough: BRAD BARRITT :cough:

26 year old barritt was poached by england. You're really scraping the barrell for an example.

Scottrf wrote:Approaching for a solution =/= whinging.

I am still waiting for you to either show me where I am disagreeing with the compensation, or apologise.

Come on man up.

No 7&1/2 wrote:26 year old barritt was poached by england. You're really scraping the barrell for an example.

Reading and writing not strong points for you it seems, no one said he was poached

Pooly said he couldn't think of anyone who had played for an u20 side then been capped by England, Barritt was capped at u21 level by South Africa

As an example of this topic marty. Yes do try to keep up.

LordDowlais wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Approaching for a solution =/= whinging.

I am still waiting for you to either show me where I am disagreeing with the compensation, or apologise.

Come on man up.

Fair play. You didn't say it. I was giving you credit for making a point. Seems you didn't.

Scottrf wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Approaching for a solution =/= whinging.

I am still waiting for you to either show me where I am disagreeing with the compensation, or apologise.

Come on man up.

Fair play. You didn't say it. I was giving you credit for making a point. Seems you didn't.

Ah so you were giving me credit, ah OK......

Anyway, at least you have admitted you are wrong.