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.

Also, the rule about compensation should be trickled down through to club level as well, to stop the richer clubs circling like vultures around the poorer clubs and taking the young academy products that they are producing.

Players like Leigh Halfpenny and Jonathan Davies went to the richer French clubs at very young ages, and the regions who produced them, spent money on them, and then got nowt when they moved after the contracts were up.

If a player who is say below 23yrs old, and has come through the system at a club, and is coming to the end of his contract, then gets snapped up by a bigger club for ££££'s, then some sort of compensation should get payed.

marty2086 wrote:Then unions target the younger age groups, it's what the French are doing in the Pacific Islands to get around the new residency rules though how Laportes directives will affect it remains to be seen

It is disgusting what the French are doing, and to a point, quite disturbing.

They went at 25 and 26 years old.

marty2086 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:"10 is what the RFU is trying to stop, and I have some sympathy for them. Moriarty was clearly never interested in playing for England, from what he's said since, but made the most of the English age grade system. I don't think that's particularly fair, but it's hard to stop, so some form of compensation system seems reasonable.'

Simple solution......make the U20 England's 2nd team, get rid of the Saxons. Ties players in and it's not like the Saxons have much use anyway.

Then unions target the younger age groups, it's what the French are doing in the Pacific Islands to get around the new residency rules though how Laportes directives will affect it remains to be seen

The French and the PI are a different story, so out of order.

Short term solution for us is to follow the Welsh lead and get rid of the Saxons.

Why are "A" teams necessary anyway ? Unless you just play young players to gain experience, but couldn't you do that with your U20's ?

LordDowlais wrote:I have just come across this as well, Scotland are really taking the p!ss:-

http://hautahi.com/rugbywanderers

LD talking nonsense as usual!  Why the Mods haven't banned you for constant wummery is beyond me!

Look at your own source (in its entirety) before you go off half-cocked. You'll see that your source shows that Wales rely heavily on "foreign" players to score your points and play your games!

Points per "Native" player
Scotland 27
Wales 29.7

Points per "Foreign" player
Scotland 15.4
Wales 21.4

As you can see, the proportion of "native" vs "foreign" points scorers shows Wales need their "foreign" players to score them more points than Scotland does

Now points can be skewed as teams score different numbers of points but teams tend to play roughly the same number of matches as each other. Again though, Wales tend to play their "Foreigners" in more matches than Scotland

Matches per "Native" player
Scotland 26.7
Wales 23.3

Matches per "Foreign" player
Scotland 18.9
Wales 24.2

Either your source is making things up (in which case you shouldn't use it) or you should learn to not throw stones inside glass houses.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Marty what rule could.possibly be brought in to cover the burgess situation? The only thing which could be applied would be for the ruling body in league to insist on some of the money paid going back to Bradford. It's nowt t do with anyone outside of that sport.

I never said anything could be done about it, I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the RFU is all

Like I said, all unions are happy to do it but not happy when they lose players. The IRFU have their Exiles program, England poached Declan Danaher from it and Ireland poached Ed O'Donoghue who played rugby for Australia schools

England probably suffer more than most nations because of the sheer number of players they produce but everyone is at it

LordDowlais wrote:Why are "A" teams necessary anyway ? Unless you just play young players to gain experience, but couldn't you do that with your U20's ?

There used to be more games. We had the Churchill cup with the US and Wolfhounds, plus an annual couple of games with the latter. It was a decent interim step and quite handy when you have a huge pool of players.

Recently though, as you suggest...It has little point, bar a recent SA tour.

Danaher worked out well.......

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:"10 is what the RFU is trying to stop, and I have some sympathy for them. Moriarty was clearly never interested in playing for England, from what he's said since, but made the most of the English age grade system. I don't think that's particularly fair, but it's hard to stop, so some form of compensation system seems reasonable.'

Simple solution......make the U20 England's 2nd team, get rid of the Saxons. Ties players in and it's not like the Saxons have much use anyway.

Then unions target the younger age groups, it's what the French are doing in the Pacific Islands to get around the new residency rules though how Laportes directives will affect it remains to be seen

The French and the PI are a different story, so out of order.

Short term solution for us is to follow the Welsh lead and get rid of the Saxons.

I was merely using the example to highlight that when you bring in new regulations, unions will adjust their approach to achieve the same result

It's much harder to spot talent at U18 level rather than U20 though.

Well as we've already agreed the rfu didn't poach burgess bath paid for his services. But also its up to league to decide how that money from.Bath was used. They could have said that part needs to go to Bradford but as they don't have that rule in place even within transfers for their own sport it s a bit of silly point.

In general I think pretty much everyone says it's a touch unfair at present and the rfu are correct to mention it?

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's much harder to spot talent at U18 level rather than U20 though.

Given your comment re Danaher and now this it seems you are ok with poaching unless they are a quality player who makes it to the test team?

Setting up a system that almost mines players like the Exiles or the French in the Islands increases the chances of getting players that can make it to the highest level

marty2086 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's much harder to spot talent at U18 level rather than U20 though.

Given your comment re Danaher and now this it seems you are ok with poaching unless they are a quality player who makes it to the test team?

Setting up a system that almost mines players like the Exiles or the French in the Islands increases the chances of getting players that can make it to the highest level

I'm not happy with it at all, the Danaher comment was tongue in cheek obviously. I'd be more than happy if countries could keep the players they've developed and to be honest, England are on the lower of the scale when you look at the PI's.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:It's much harder to spot talent at U18 level rather than U20 though.

Given your comment re Danaher and now this it seems you are ok with poaching unless they are a quality player who makes it to the test team?

Setting up a system that almost mines players like the Exiles or the French in the Islands increases the chances of getting players that can make it to the highest level

I'm not happy with it at all, the Danaher comment was tongue in cheek obviously. I'd be more than happy if countries could keep the players they've developed and to be honest, England are on the lower of the scale when you look at the PI's.

The number of players the Celtic nations have who were born in England is probably fairly high compared to most, not necessarily that have gone through the RFUs pathway or playing at a high level

Where do you draw the line though, if someone has played rugby from a young age until their mid teens is that considered being developed by a certain country? Should playing representative schoolboy rugby?

There are probably ways to discourage or compensate but ultimately its a fact of professional sport and unions have to accept it

tigertattie wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:I have just come across this as well, Scotland are really taking the p!ss:-

http://hautahi.com/rugbywanderers

LD talking nonsense as usual!  Why the Mods haven't banned you for constant wummery is beyond me!

Look at your own source (in its entirety) before you go off half-cocked. You'll see that your source shows that Wales rely heavily on "foreign" players to score your points and play your games!

Points per "Native" player
Scotland 27
Wales 29.7

Points per "Foreign" player
Scotland 15.4
Wales 21.4

As you can see, the proportion of "native" vs "foreign" points scorers shows Wales need their "foreign" players to score them more points than Scotland does

Now points can be skewed as teams score different numbers of points but teams tend to play roughly the same number of matches as each other. Again though, Wales tend to play their "Foreigners" in more matches than Scotland

Matches per "Native" player
Scotland 26.7
Wales 23.3

Matches per "Foreign" player
Scotland 18.9
Wales 24.2

Either your source is making things up (in which case you shouldn't use it) or you should learn to not throw stones inside glass houses.

Are you looking at this link ?

http://hautahi.com/rugbywanderers

It shows Scotland have relied on over 40% foreign born players. This paragraph in particular

The graph below shows that Scotland “poaches” the most. Since 1996, 43.2% of players making their debut were not born in Scotland. Next is Italy with 30.6%, Ireland with 24.3%, Australia with 24% and England with 20.7%. Argentina poaches the least with just 1.3% of its players born overseas, followed by South Africa with 4.5%, France with 9.3% and New Zealand with 14.9%. wrote:

So before you go recommending me for a ban, I suggest you engage your brain.

But that's not the only important number. They might play 10 debutants born elsewhere but Wales might have 5 50 cap players born elsewhere.

U20's seems like a reasonable line imo Marty.

Scottrf wrote:But that's not the only important number. They might play 10 debutants born elsewhere but Wales might have 5 50 cap players born elsewhere.

All the other figures prove, is that our foreign born players are better than Scotland's one's, and that ours score more points.

Scotland have capped more foreign born players than any other nation.

LordDowlais wrote:

Scottrf wrote:But that's not the only important number. They might play 10 debutants born elsewhere but Wales might have 5 50 cap players born elsewhere.

All the other figures prove, is that our foreign born players are better than Scotland's one's, and that ours score more points.

Scotland have capped more foreign born players than any other nation.

Scottrf wrote:But that's not the only important number. They might play 10 debutants born elsewhere but Wales might have 5 50 cap players born elsewhere.

Not to mention being born elsewhere isn't the best barometer, an English family taking a day trip across the Severn or a Welsh one going the other way and the wife gives birth the child is born in a different country to their country

Jamie Heaslip was born in Israel while his father was working there for the UN, would anyone claim Ireland poached him of Israel, Luke McGrath in Canada and Jordi Murphy in Spain. Rhys Ruddock though was born in Ireland and grew up in Wales but you could say he was poached from Ospreys

marty2086 wrote:Not to mention being born elsewhere isn't the best barometer

It's one of those moments again, it must be cold in hell, I agree with marty.

But we all know that for the biggest part, that is not what is happening with Scotland.

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Marty what rule could.possibly be brought in to cover the burgess situation? The only thing which could be applied would be for the ruling body in league to insist on some of the money paid going back to Bradford. It's nowt t do with anyone outside of that sport.

I never said anything could be done about it, I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the RFU is all

Like I said, all unions are happy to do it but not happy when they lose players. The IRFU have their Exiles program, England poached Declan Danaher from it and Ireland poached Ed O'Donoghue who played rugby for Australia schools

England probably suffer more than most nations because of the sheer number of players they produce but everyone is at it

Hypocrisy?

Nathan Hughes and Denny Solomona were adult players who negotiated contracts to play with PRL teams and qualified through residency. The RFU then applied the residency rules as they were at the time and asked them if they would like to play for England, to which they said yes. Hughes was 25 on his England debut, Solomona 24. Not over the hill, but old enough to have seen out a full professional contract (which is usually what a club looks for in players it develops)

The key point is that the RFU were only involved after they'd put themselves in a position to play. Any question of who pays or paid for their development is between them and their clubs.

What the RFU is objecting to is young players being developed through the RFU pathway and then playing for countries other than England. The RFU has invested directly in these players' development, and they are moving at 19 or 20. Moriarty was 21 when he first played for Wales and put down his marker earlier than that - having played in a JRWC Final.

I agree with Sgt Pooly on this one. Absent a better World Rugby answer, making the U20s the designated second side (which in effect it is right now, given how U20s players are moving into the senior side) would be an effective answer. It's only what Wales already does, as Steven Shingler found to his cost (though to be honest that looks like it was a situation where Scotland tried to poach and Wales stopped it).

I read somewhere that Israel are fuming that Ireland stole their backup no8. Their recent 2N grudge match with Palestine was brought into disarray when first choice Moses Weinstein got injured and they couldn't call on Jamie.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I read somewhere that Israel are fuming that Ireland stole their backup no8. Their recent 2N grudge match with Palestine was brought into disarray when first choice Moses Weinstein got injured and they couldn't call on Jamie.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Not to mention being born elsewhere isn't the best barometer

It's one of those moments again, it must be cold in hell, I agree with marty.

But we all know that for the biggest part, that is not what is happening with Scotland.

Problem is that Scotland aren't as bad as the figures show, you have guys like Visser who qualify on residency grounds and Maitland through his grandparents but for those cases you have guys like Duncan Taylor and John Barclay

At least the Scots don't break the rules when they do it

marty2086 wrote:Problem is that Scotland aren't as bad as the figures show, you have guys like Visser who qualify on residency grounds and Maitland through his grandparents but for those cases you have guys like Duncan Taylor and John Barclay

Ah, Visser who wanted to play for England, but then chose Scotland, and Maitland who never even had been to Scotland before he was identified because his grandfather told him how Scottish he was.

marty2086 wrote:At least the Scots don't break the rules when they do it Whistle

Yes you are right. Just out of curiosity, who do break the rules ?

Poorfour wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Marty what rule could.possibly be brought in to cover the burgess situation? The only thing which could be applied would be for the ruling body in league to insist on some of the money paid going back to Bradford. It's nowt t do with anyone outside of that sport.

I never said anything could be done about it, I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the RFU is all

Like I said, all unions are happy to do it but not happy when they lose players. The IRFU have their Exiles program, England poached Declan Danaher from it and Ireland poached Ed O'Donoghue who played rugby for Australia schools

England probably suffer more than most nations because of the sheer number of players they produce but everyone is at it

Hypocrisy?

Nathan Hughes and Denny Solomona were adult players who negotiated contracts to play with PRL teams and qualified through residency. The RFU then applied the residency rules as they were at the time and asked them if they would like to play for England, to which they said yes. Hughes was 25 on his England debut, Solomona 24. Not over the hill, but old enough to have seen out a full professional contract (which is usually what a club looks for in players it develops)

The key point is that the RFU were only involved after they'd put themselves in a position to play. Any question of who pays or paid for their development is between them and their clubs.

What the RFU is objecting to is young players being developed through the RFU pathway and then playing for countries other than England. The RFU has invested directly in these players' development, and they are moving at 19 or 20. Moriarty was 21 when he first played for Wales and put down his marker earlier than that - having played in a JRWC Final.

I agree with Sgt Pooly on this one. Absent a better World Rugby answer, making the U20s the designated second side (which in effect it is right now, given how U20s players are moving into the senior side) would be an effective answer. It's only what Wales already does, as Steven Shingler found to his cost (though to be honest that looks like it was a situation where Scotland tried to poach and Wales stopped it).

Yes its hypocrisy, you can't sit back and say we didn't play a part in it then benefit from actions you criticise others for.

If the RFU were serious about then will they be introducing rules to make sure English clubs duly compensate others for the development of players?

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Problem is that Scotland aren't as bad as the figures show, you have guys like Visser who qualify on residency grounds and Maitland through his grandparents but for those cases you have guys like Duncan Taylor and John Barclay

Ah, Visser who wanted to play for England, but then chose Scotland, and Maitland who never even had been to Scotland before he was identified because his grandfather told him how Scottish he was.

marty2086 wrote:At least the Scots don't break the rules when they do it Whistle

Yes you are right. Just out of curiosity, who do break the rules ?

Pretty sure Visser claimed he would play for the Dutch team prior to getting capped for Scotland

I was joking about Grannygate, forgot though the Scots were implicated in it

marty2086 wrote:I was joking about Grannygate, forgot though the Scots were implicated in it

But grandparents are part of the rules. Look, I do not agree with it, and I hated it when Graham Henry was doing it with Wales, but we had just lost a generation or two to Rugby league, although I am not excusing it, we still did not break any rules.

Yes they did break the rules. I'd ld big serious? Does he not know about the scandal?

Marty do you believe the rfu are correct in asking wr to instigate some different rules for compensation ?

aaah poor England just have so few players to pick....that must be why they went after Sam Underhill.

marty2086 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:But that's not the only important number. They might play 10 debutants born elsewhere but Wales might have 5 50 cap players born elsewhere.

Not to mention being born elsewhere isn't the best barometer, an English family taking a day trip across the Severn or a Welsh one going the other way and the wife gives birth the child is born in a different country to their country

Jamie Heaslip was born in Israel while his father was working there for the UN, would anyone claim Ireland poached him of Israel, Luke McGrath in Canada and Jordi Murphy in Spain. Rhys Ruddock though was born in Ireland and grew up in Wales but you could say he was poached from Ospreys

Cough *Heathcote* cough

Gwlad wrote:aaah poor England just have so few players to pick....that must be why they went after Sam Underhill.

Apart from the fact that he's English, had played U18's for England and just happened to go over the border for University? My sons have just spent 7 years in Wales but they are not Welsh.

If there had been poaching in that case it would have been Wales trying to pick him on residency, which is a tricky area for a student.

Gwlad wrote:aaah poor England just have so few players to pick....that must be why they went after Sam Underhill.

Well it was actually Bath that went after him. He is also English and a previous captain of the U18 side.

Easiest just to correct the original I guess

Gwlad wrote:aaah poor England Wales just have so few players to pick....that must be why they went after Sam Underhill.

[quote="lostinwales"]Easiest just to correct the original I guess

Gwlad wrote:aaah poor England Wales just have so few players to pick....that must be why they went after Sam Underhill.

Why people come on here and make statements without doing proper research is beyond me, why don't they actually see where Sam was BORN. On the first page it was mentioned money exchanged hands because Sam was part of the Ospreys academy, why oh why don't they find out the real reason the money was exchanged, it really isn't difficult to find.

England. Compensation or a transfer fee for being in contract.

No 7&1/2 wrote:England. Compensation or a transfer fee for being in contract.

First, wrong born elsewhere, not compensation so 50% right, 3year contract left after 2 years. Not hard was it.

Ha. USA eh? Well. There we have it then. Brilliant. Who said it was for being in the ospreys academy like?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ha. USA eh? Well. There we have it then. Brilliant. Who said it was for being in the ospreys academy like?

7&1/2 people put things on here and then think better of it and edit it out, it was mentioned on here this morning and now gone, a Dragon supporter on a different topic made a snide remark this morning about our coach Steve Tandy being up for the Welsh Coaches job because of our decent performance yesterday, very conveniently it disappeared within a few hours. Sam Underhill joined us on a 3 year contract which was bought out by Bath after 2 seasons, a lot more than the amount that has been quoted was paid for the transfer, and Sam went with our blessing, no attempt was ever made within the Ospreys organisation to make him Welsh qualified. Probably the only person that tried to get him to stay was myself in a lighthearted conversation when the news broke that he was leaving us. A top top bloke is Sam, he goes with all the best wishes within our fans and organisation, unless he's playing against Ospreys or Wales.

PoorFour....your problem of England developing players only for other countries to cap them is simple, stop English schools offering scholarships to Welsh lads and acadamies offering Welsh lads contracts. Apparently there are 19 welsh born players in Hartpury. The start of this season a prodigious under 16s flyhalf called Sam Costellow was poached by Leicester Tigers. Keep your recruitment out of Wales and then they won’t use the English system and get capped by a different country. Simple really

How exactly could you stop schools doing this though? I mean I assume that the Welsh lads who went to those schools had to apply to go there (that is what is happening with my neice anyway). I could be wrong, but I don't believe schools go out looking for students. The lads apply to the school and are offered a scholarship based on their financial background. These are great academic schools, would you deny the opportunity to young working class lads? Hard to believe but there are more important things than rugby? I doubt that these schools act as a recruiting arm of the RFU, that you appear to be describing.

Cumbrian wrote:How exactly could you stop schools doing this though? I mean I assume that the Welsh lads who went to those schools had to apply to go there (that is what is happening with my neice anyway). I could be wrong, but I don't believe schools go out looking for students.  The lads apply to the school and are offered a scholarship based on their financial background. These are great academic schools, would you deny the opportunity to young working class lads? Hard to believe but there are more important things than rugby? I doubt that these schools act as a recruiting arm of the RFU, that you appear to be describing.

No they are being offered scholarships due to being scouted by playing rugby in wales.

There’s an article by Simon Thomas who spoke to Geraint John about it. It’s on WOL, have a read of the article and you’ll see that Geraint John states that the schools are scouting Welsh rugby games to pick up talent

I agree it’s hard to turn down which is why they don’t turn them down and why the WRU keeps tabs on the players lost

Pretty much confirmation that the compensation system does need reviewing then.

Compensation for what? The RFU can’t dictate that everyone must choose to play for England at senior level.

With Mat Protheroe (I know his short career has tailed off) but he was picked for England under 18 and 20 despite having no ties to England (birth, parent or residency) if the RFU want to waste money developing him then that’s their fault and can’t want compensation if he ended up playing for Wales

As I said previously if he chose wales, England would get compensation currently. Wales would get none if the other way round. On the current rules. I think it should cover a greater age range and at a higher lever of compensation than currently set.

And compensation to cover time effort money of developing the player in question.

May 10 2017

The IRFU has announced two key appointments as the union seeks to restructure the current Exiles set-up and network. It will be known going forward as the IQ (Irish qualified) programme.

Former Britain rugby league international Joe Lydon, who previously fulfilled similar to roles at the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) and the English RFU, will occupy the newly created position of the IRFU’s Head of International Talent ID and Development.

Kevin Maggs, who won 70-caps for Ireland from 1997-2005, has been appointed as the IQ Regional Talent Coach in Britain and also have responsibility with regard to the IQ Sevens programme. The 42-year-old former centre will leave his current position as head coach at Moseley.

The IRFU’s Performance Director David Nucifora offered an overview of the strategy to grow the player base for the provincial and national sides outside of Ireland and ultimately to bring them over where possible and practical to play their rugby here.

He explained that there is reasonable satisfaction with the development of the playing base in Ireland over the last three years with the players coming through at a younger age and in greater volumes. The depth and competition should drive up the general standards.

A desire to extend the talent pool saw the union look abroad and while the IQ programme is specifically geared towards the Exiles structure in Britain, the long-term outlook is to extend that to establishing and harvesting a global database.

“The Exiles programme has been there for many years but it’s always been run by a force of volunteers. Twelve months ago, we started to beef that up with Wayne Mitchell’s appointment from being an EPDO (Elite Player Development Officer) over here to putting him over there.

“We’re taking that to another level, where we’ve created the IQ programme, which is basically a performance arm that sits on top of the Exiles programme. It will complement what the Exiles already do, they’ll do exactly what they’ve always done and they’ve done a good job on that over the years.


“We’re putting a performance structure around it, hence Joe’s (Lydon) appointment to oversee that programme.

“What we’re looking to do is to be able to really focus on the higher-level talent that exists in the UK, both with helping the Exiles identify and develop those at a young age, but then also beyond school age really look to support and continue to develop the Irish boys that have gone over there and are already playing their rugby within the UK.

“Or it might be for the Irish-qualified boys that exist within the system within the UK that potentially could be playing their rugby in Ireland for Ireland. Joe’s (Lydon) background is he used to head up the talent pathways and player development areas for both the RFU and the WRU, so he’s very au fait with the systems that exist over there, which is tremendous.

“Our aim is not just to support the Irish-qualified talent that exists within the UK or just our players that are playing their rugby over there. We’ve also got an ambition to support our coaches that are working in the UK as well, so it’s all encompassing in that regard.”

A prime motivator is the prospective change to Regulation Eight, which governs player eligibility at international level. At the World Rugby meeting in Kyoto, Japan on Wednesday, the qualification period is likely to be extended from three years to five.

Nucifora admitted: “We’ve always been of the mindset that they are the rules that exist and we’ll use them the same way that everyone else has used them. I think we’re pretty confident to say that that’s going to change this week.

“We’ve put a fair bit of effort into designing this programme because we see that we’ve got a natural advantage in having Irish talent spread around the UK but also around the world, so we’ll be putting some focus onto some of those areas outside the UK down the track a little bit.”


The 53 year-old Lydon was an outstanding rugby league player with Britain and Wigan, the England rugby union backs’ coach from 2004-2006, and then got into elite player development, first with the WRU (2008-2013) and then the English RFU (2013-2016).

He officially started in his new role with the IRFU on February 7th this year. He admitted: “For me it is a job I enjoy and want to do. Developing talent ID and providing opportunities is fascinating because you get it wrong more than you get it right.

“As far as being Irish qualified (myself) that is a secondary thing. It wasn’t a problem for me to be here because as far as I am concerned it’s a profession. My grandparents are from Oughterard. That was home when we were reading letters in the kitchen in Wigan.”

The new programme will be funded from the coffers of the IRFU. Nucifora said: “We are just utilising funding that always existed. We have just repositioned it really.”

On the decision to appoint Maggs, Nucifora explained: “He’s been at Moseley for around seven years as a coach, so he’s got an unbelievable knowledge of that tier below the Premiership.

“He’s got great Irish connections throughout the UK, so there’s already a number of players he’s brought to our attention that we didn’t know about and are Irish-qualified.

”Having someone of Kevin’s profile involved is a really positive thing and a guy who wants to coach. He’s another Irish coach that we can bring into the system to help develop him personally. There are a number of positives there for us.

When England stop importing players from all over the world then they can start bleating but until then stfu.

Nah.