Eligibility back on the agenda
-
@semper Firstly, to be clear, I am not a fan of Fekitoa playing for the All Blacks either. I understand that people make life choices for whatever reason and I respect that - just like I respect Aki's decison.
But what you are talking about is not the same situation. I've seen early interviews with Fekitoa which I've not been comfortable with either - those a young man from Tonga stating clearly that he wants to play for the All Blacks, and also saying that he would only play for Tonga, if he could't make the All Blacks. I don't really like that either.
Now, can you honestly say that either of these things happened for Aki? He wanted to play for Ireland? Before bags of money were hung before him? No way. The situation is totally different, it's not even remotely the same.
I appreciate your frustration in that some of my original thoughts may have been inaccurate fallacies brought about by reading media from those who should know better, as we down here have suffered that same fate for many a year. But lets compare apples with apples.
EDIT: Also this - So one is about a kid being moved from their home place to a country where he has no familial ties and no previous relationship with and the other is about doing the same with an adult. All based purely on their skills with an oval ball.
Do you have any idea at all about the demographic of the NZ make up? Here's a heads up. Tonga has a population of 100,000. NZ has a Tongan population of around 75,000. No familial ties you say?
Do you have any idea at all about the demographic of the NZ make up? Here's a heads up. Tonga has a population of 100,000. NZ has a Tongan population of around 75,000. No familial ties you say?
There are something like 6m people in Great Britain with Irish passport entitlements. I have one family member living over there, and if I had a kid going over to Manchester that would be shag all us to them.
To the substantive point Aki will only play for Ireland because he is being paid to do so. He did that after failing to break through for NZ. That is fair enough.
Fekitoa has long held the ambition to play for NZ despite not being eligible to do so. That is presumably on the basis that they are the best team in the world and playing for them is a key to a lot of riches and fame. Maybe those latter motives are purer. Fair enough.
-
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
@mariner4life said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
A fair point, ye must be better at it than us....
-
Do you have any idea at all about the demographic of the NZ make up? Here's a heads up. Tonga has a population of 100,000. NZ has a Tongan population of around 75,000. No familial ties you say?
There are something like 6m people in Great Britain with Irish passport entitlements. I have one family member living over there, and if I had a kid going over to Manchester that would be shag all us to them.
To the substantive point Aki will only play for Ireland because he is being paid to do so. He did that after failing to break through for NZ. That is fair enough.
Fekitoa has long held the ambition to play for NZ despite not being eligible to do so. That is presumably on the basis that they are the best team in the world and playing for them is a key to a lot of riches and fame. Maybe those latter motives are purer. Fair enough.
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
Do you have any idea at all about the demographic of the NZ make up? Here's a heads up. Tonga has a population of 100,000. NZ has a Tongan population of around 75,000. No familial ties you say?
There are something like 6m people in Great Britain with Irish passport entitlements.
You do realise that Irish citizenship is one of the easiest in the world to be eligible for?
The bit you possibly fail to understand is the unusual dynamic between NZ and some Pacific Islands. A young player could be born second generation in NZ but still have a very strong identity with their pacific heritage. They could even be sent over to the islands in their pre-school years to be looked after by members of the extended family. Their rugby heroes and team affiliation can be to both their country of birth and that of family.
I imagine that as a kid Fekitoa grew up worshipping the likes of NZ born Tongan Jonah Lomu and would aspire to being like him.
If he was setting himself a goal in life it would be the highest achievable and knowing he could become NZ eligible while gaining experience that would be a valid target.
A longer eligibility period isn't going to help much in these cases. If a kid from Tonga wants to play professional rugby they still have to get experience somewhere. By the time their experience is at a level for possible further honours a lot of the time has already been served so their choice is to play immediately for their birth country or wait another year and have a better option. -
@mariner4life said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
A fair point, ye must be better at it than us....
@semper rugby? Indeed
-
@Nepia said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper Are you on the troll? Seriously? Because only a fool would equate a schoolboy moving to a country on a scholarship to a fully formed professional rugby player moving to another country with the intention of representing that country at international level.
No. Fekitoa's scholarship made no difference to his eligibility to play for NZ. He was ineligible. He only became eligible because he was given three years of professional work in NZ - he got a significant portion of that work from two Super Rugby teams.
Aki will only become qualified to play for Ireland when he completes three years residency. The reason he will be able to complete that residency is because he is on a contract from a province (not the IRFU but a structure operating within the IRFU's control).
The fact the Fekitoa was on an educational scholarship would make not a job of difference to his ability to apply for a NZ passport. It makes not a jot of difference to his ability to demonstrate residnecy to the IRB in satisfaction of rule 8. The only thing that makes him a runner for either is the fact that he is a legal permanent resident that is only enabled by him having a professional rugby contract.
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
No. Fekitoa's scholarship made no difference to his eligibility to play for NZ. He was ineligible. He only became eligible because he was given three years of professional work in NZ - he got a significant portion of that work from two Super Rugby teams.
The NZR actually provides professional pathways for PI eligible players.
-
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
Do you have any idea at all about the demographic of the NZ make up? Here's a heads up. Tonga has a population of 100,000. NZ has a Tongan population of around 75,000. No familial ties you say?
There are something like 6m people in Great Britain with Irish passport entitlements.
You do realise that Irish citizenship is one of the easiest in the world to be eligible for?
The bit you possibly fail to understand is the unusual dynamic between NZ and some Pacific Islands. A young player could be born second generation in NZ but still have a very strong identity with their pacific heritage. They could even be sent over to the islands in their pre-school years to be looked after by members of the extended family. Their rugby heroes and team affiliation can be to both their country of birth and that of family.
I imagine that as a kid Fekitoa grew up worshipping the likes of NZ born Tongan Jonah Lomu and would aspire to being like him.
If he was setting himself a goal in life it would be the highest achievable and knowing he could become NZ eligible while gaining experience that would be a valid target.
A longer eligibility period isn't going to help much in these cases. If a kid from Tonga wants to play professional rugby they still have to get experience somewhere. By the time their experience is at a level for possible further honours a lot of the time has already been served so their choice is to play immediately for their birth country or wait another year and have a better option.@Crucial said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
Do you have any idea at all about the demographic of the NZ make up? Here's a heads up. Tonga has a population of 100,000. NZ has a Tongan population of around 75,000. No familial ties you say?
There are something like 6m people in Great Britain with Irish passport entitlements.
You do realise that Irish citizenship is one of the easiest in the world to be eligible for?
The bit you possibly fail to understand is the unusual dynamic between NZ and some Pacific Islands. A young player could be born second generation in NZ but still have a very strong identity with their pacific heritage. They could even be sent over to the islands in their pre-school years to be looked after by members of the extended family. Their rugby heroes and team affiliation can be to both their country of birth and that of family.
I imagine that as a kid Fekitoa grew up worshipping the likes of NZ born Tongan Jonah Lomu and would aspire to being like him.
If he was setting himself a goal in life it would be the highest achievable and knowing he could become NZ eligible while gaining experience that would be a valid target.
A longer eligibility period isn't going to help much in these cases. If a kid from Tonga wants to play professional rugby they still have to get experience somewhere. By the time their experience is at a level for possible further honours a lot of the time has already been served so their choice is to play immediately for their birth country or wait another year and have a better option.I get the logic entirely. Irish cricketers go through this a lot, if they want to make it big, declare for England. The one difference I suppose is that Irish cricketers can not play Test cricket.
Irish citizenship isn't even one of the easiest to get in the EU never mind the world.
-
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
No. Fekitoa's scholarship made no difference to his eligibility to play for NZ. He was ineligible. He only became eligible because he was given three years of professional work in NZ - he got a significant portion of that work from two Super Rugby teams.
The NZR actually provides professional pathways for PI eligible players.
@antipodean said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
No. Fekitoa's scholarship made no difference to his eligibility to play for NZ. He was ineligible. He only became eligible because he was given three years of professional work in NZ - he got a significant portion of that work from two Super Rugby teams.
The NZR actually provides professional pathways for PI eligible players.
Ah. My apologies. If Fekitoa had played for Tonga in 2013 it would have made no odds to his future in New Zealand rugby.
-
@Pot-Hale Thanks - good response.
Yes, I am aware of what pundit arena is, but I thought that article was as good as anything else out there & it's certainly not devoid of fact. Remember this is a quote from Aki himself - ""That's a big part of my decision to move. Hopefully when the time is right and if I'm playing good footy, hopefully I can play for the Ireland international team."
Lam seems to be hugely popular up north. Which I do fine quite odd, as he struggled here.
@MajorRage said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Pot-Hale Thanks - good response.
Yes, I am aware of what pundit arena is, but I thought that article was as good as anything else out there & it's certainly not devoid of fact. Remember this is a quote from Aki himself - ""That's a big part of my decision to move. Hopefully when the time is right and if I'm playing good footy, hopefully I can play for the Ireland international team."
Lam seems to be hugely popular up north. Which I do fine quite odd, as he struggled here.
Indeed. I find him to be a straight up, plain talking coach whose passion for the game and for the team he's coaching is highly admirable. To go to a development province in Ireland, on the outer in terms of financing, support and pedigree and turn it around to make them PRO12 champions is remarkable. He also found the time to learn some of the Irish language, always started every TV interview with a greeting in Irish, reached out to every county in the province, some of whom had little or knowledge of rugby, and get them all to buy in and along with Connacht CEO, Ruane, contributed to the club's development strategy Grassroots to Greenshirts. I have the utmost of respect for him and wish him only the best in his move to Bristol. His interview on the reasons for the move are another mark of the man - frank, honest and revealing in terms of his priorities for his own personal health, his family, and his own ambitions.
-
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
@mariner4life said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
State-sanctioned? The Irish government has nothing to do with how professional sport is run in the country.
-
@mariner4life said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
State-sanctioned? The Irish government has nothing to do with how professional sport is run in the country.
@Pot-Hale said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@mariner4life said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
State-sanctioned? The Irish government has nothing to do with how professional sport is run in the country.
They do have to issue the visas and work permits that make it possible though.
-
@Pot-Hale said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@mariner4life said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
State-sanctioned? The Irish government has nothing to do with how professional sport is run in the country.
They do have to issue the visas and work permits that make it possible though.
@Crucial said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Pot-Hale said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@mariner4life said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
State-sanctioned? The Irish government has nothing to do with how professional sport is run in the country.
They do have to issue the visas and work permits that make it possible though.
That's rubbish. If you are paid more than about 35k a year and your employer can string a sentence together about how you can't recruit some one locally with that skill set you'll get an Irish visa. For a rugby player that is not a hard bar to jump.
Would a work permit have been required in Fekitoa's case?
-
@semper Firstly, to be clear, I am not a fan of Fekitoa playing for the All Blacks either. I understand that people make life choices for whatever reason and I respect that - just like I respect Aki's decison.
But what you are talking about is not the same situation. I've seen early interviews with Fekitoa which I've not been comfortable with either - those a young man from Tonga stating clearly that he wants to play for the All Blacks, and also saying that he would only play for Tonga, if he could't make the All Blacks. I don't really like that either.
Now, can you honestly say that either of these things happened for Aki? He wanted to play for Ireland? Before bags of money were hung before him? No way. The situation is totally different, it's not even remotely the same.
I appreciate your frustration in that some of my original thoughts may have been inaccurate fallacies brought about by reading media from those who should know better, as we down here have suffered that same fate for many a year. But lets compare apples with apples.
EDIT: Also this - So one is about a kid being moved from their home place to a country where he has no familial ties and no previous relationship with and the other is about doing the same with an adult. All based purely on their skills with an oval ball.
Do you have any idea at all about the demographic of the NZ make up? Here's a heads up. Tonga has a population of 100,000. NZ has a Tongan population of around 75,000. No familial ties you say?
@MajorRage said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper Firstly, to be clear, I am not a fan of Fekitoa playing for the All Blacks either. I understand that people make life choices for whatever reason and I respect that - just like I respect Aki's decison.
But what you are talking about is not the same situation. I've seen early interviews with Fekitoa which I've not been comfortable with either - those a young man from Tonga stating clearly that he wants to play for the All Blacks, and also saying that he would only play for Tonga, if he could't make the All Blacks. I don't really like that either.
Are you comfortable with the ones that go the other way. Guys like Kahn Fotuali'i have interview where they talk about when they decided to give up on chasing the AB dream, TNW basically said during the 2015 Super season he was going to use the 7s loophole if he didn't make the ABs this year.
For every Fekitoa or Seta there are 10 Winston Stanleys and Paul Williams.
-
@MajorRage said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper Firstly, to be clear, I am not a fan of Fekitoa playing for the All Blacks either. I understand that people make life choices for whatever reason and I respect that - just like I respect Aki's decison.
But what you are talking about is not the same situation. I've seen early interviews with Fekitoa which I've not been comfortable with either - those a young man from Tonga stating clearly that he wants to play for the All Blacks, and also saying that he would only play for Tonga, if he could't make the All Blacks. I don't really like that either.
Are you comfortable with the ones that go the other way. Guys like Kahn Fotuali'i have interview where they talk about when they decided to give up on chasing the AB dream, TNW basically said during the 2015 Super season he was going to use the 7s loophole if he didn't make the ABs this year.
For every Fekitoa or Seta there are 10 Winston Stanleys and Paul Williams.
@rotated said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@MajorRage said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper Firstly, to be clear, I am not a fan of Fekitoa playing for the All Blacks either. I understand that people make life choices for whatever reason and I respect that - just like I respect Aki's decison.
But what you are talking about is not the same situation. I've seen early interviews with Fekitoa which I've not been comfortable with either - those a young man from Tonga stating clearly that he wants to play for the All Blacks, and also saying that he would only play for Tonga, if he could't make the All Blacks. I don't really like that either.
Are you comfortable with the ones that go the other way. Guys like Kahn Fotuali'i have interview where they talk about when they decided to give up on chasing the AB dream, TNW basically said during the 2015 Super season he was going to use the 7s loophole if he didn't make the ABs this year.
For every Fekitoa or Seta there are 10 Winston Stanleys and Paul Williams.
I've no problem with it. Improves the competitiveness of world rugby and rights a wrong of globalisation and colonialism.
-
@MajorRage said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Pot-Hale Really? So are you telling me the IRFU at no point had Aki playing for Ireland in their agenda at any point in time? Same as Jared Payne??
http://www.punditarena.com/rugby/mcassidy/irfu-special-player-project-waste-time-money/
You do realise that quoting Pundit Arena as a source is the equivalent of 'I met a bloke last week who said he met another fella....'
Of course, the IRFU were aware that an uncapped player who remains in the country after 3 years becomes qualified. That's what the PSS was about - reducing quotas on foreign capped imports and (after uproar by provinces) allowing 1 player in who might qualify to play for Ireland through residency. Connacht wanting to bring in Aki would have been subject to similar scrutiny as Borlase, van den Heever, etc for Munster. (Not a lot). It was Lam who persuaded him to come and buy into the vision he had for the province. That's what motivated a lot of the players that he's brought in since he arrived. My point was that the provinces identify the players, not the IRFU. Who knows whether they'll work out or not during their contract period. It's a bit of a lottery. Some contracts are only one year, others two, some three. Some might want to leave after less than a year. Some might be perma injured all the time. Some might not simply be good enough. Some might get homesick. Some might choose to move on to another team/country. Some might be loaned to another province. All of these scenarios have occurred with so-called project players.
Aki is not a happy camper about Lam's departure. Aki's contract was up in June 2017. But he wouldn't have been qualified at that point. He had offers to go elsewhere. And as he said himself, he could potentially play for 2-3 countries - Samoa, NZ or Ireland if he stayed. But he was persuaded to sign a new three-year contract with Connacht with business support to augment his salary for the period, presumably based on their PRO12 success, and a chance to qualify and play in Champions Cup, and if he's playing well, to be selected for test rugby. I suspect that with Lam leaving, he may think their continuing chances of success won't be as good. And that might affect his chances of selection.
If he's selected by Schmidt and capped, then at some point, he might be given a central contract which would alleviate Connacht's wage bill somewhat.
Oh and in case it's not clear, I sincerely hope he gets fed up and leaves. Henshaw, Ringrose, Marshall, Olding, Scannell, McCloskey will do me just fine in the green shirt.
@Pot-Hale said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
My point was that the provinces identify the players, not the IRFU.Even if that is the case, which I highly doubt it is, why that is even relevant.
Whether or not the IRFU are specifically saying to the Connacht go after that Counties centre or to Leinster go get JGP is irrelevant. They set a criteria for a certain type of player, and acting in their best interests the clubs are going to fill that slot with the best player available to them. Win/win.
In interviews with Gibson-Park after he left he made his signing seem like an initiative from the IRFU as much as Lienster.
We know the IRFU were knees deep in the Aki resigning with Schmidt and Nucifora on record as having been involved in the negotiations. So it's not too much of a stretch to think those at HQ have been involved in new signings too.
The IRFU are hardly at an arms length on this as you seem to be suggesting.
I'll be curious to see how far the Irish push it if Pichot's reforms fail wouldn't put it past them to try and sneak Saili through the 7s loophole if/when the time comes.
-
@Crucial said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Pot-Hale said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@mariner4life said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
State-sanctioned? The Irish government has nothing to do with how professional sport is run in the country.
They do have to issue the visas and work permits that make it possible though.
That's rubbish. If you are paid more than about 35k a year and your employer can string a sentence together about how you can't recruit some one locally with that skill set you'll get an Irish visa. For a rugby player that is not a hard bar to jump.
Would a work permit have been required in Fekitoa's case?
@semper said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Crucial said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Pot-Hale said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@mariner4life said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@Nepia of course he is. The Irish are remarkably sensitive about their state-sanctioned poaching agenda.
Probably because most of their poaches are decidedly average
State-sanctioned? The Irish government has nothing to do with how professional sport is run in the country.
They do have to issue the visas and work permits that make it possible though.
That's rubbish. If you are paid more than about 35k a year and your employer can string a sentence together about how you can't recruit some one locally with that skill set you'll get an Irish visa. For a rugby player that is not a hard bar to jump.
Would a work permit have been required in Fekitoa's case?
It isn't rubbish at all, I was merely stating a fact. The state agrees to the import of a rugby player by issuing a visa.
I never said they ONLY do it for project players or even implied that there is anything different here than how others are treated.
By the way, a quick glance at the Irish Immigration website tells me that a simple work permit wouldn't do the trick. There is a special sports and arts category, the initial visa only lasts for 2 years (but can be extended).
So it seems that a certain category of person IS actually offered a different deal to the average worker.
NZ has a very similar programme however Fekitoa would also have been possibly granted residence under the the Pacific Access immigration programme which has no relationship to sports. -
@taniwharugby said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper Aki was already a professional rugby player, unattached to any nation when he went to Ireland, Fekitoa was a school boy when he came to NZ, at which time he was a good 4+years off being eligible...that is a substantial difference I'd of thought?
@taniwharugby said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper Aki was already a professional rugby player, unattached to any nation when he went to Ireland, Fekitoa was a school boy when he came to NZ, at which time he was a good 4+years off being ...that is a substantial difference I'd of thought?
Fekitoa was not offered a scholarship on strength of his academic work. It was a rugby scholarship, with the benefits of it based on his rugby skills and naught else.
So one is about a kid being moved from their home place to a country where he has no familial ties and no previous relationship with and the other is about doing the same with an adult. All based purely on their skills with an oval ball.
I don't stand over Irish project players. I would happily only play residnecy qualified players for Ireland if they hold an Irish or UK passport. I am just asking for consistency from those who criticise what Ireland does.
@semper you asked if there was a substantive difference, I provided it, you then changed tact.
-
Gus Pichot looking to tighten some loop holes:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11764603
I see the difference as
(a)
to deliberately look overseas for players ,(B) And to pick players in your backyard that are already there ,
While (b) still needs looking at with guys that are questionable , to poach from another country is on another level ,
-
@semper you asked if there was a substantive difference, I provided it, you then changed tact.
@taniwharugby said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper you asked if there was a substantive difference, I provided it, you then changed tact.
I don't see that as being a substantive, meaningful difference.
-
@taniwharugby said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
@semper you asked if there was a substantive difference, I provided it, you then changed tact.
I don't see that as being a substantive, meaningful difference.
-
I see the difference as
(a)
to deliberately look overseas for players ,(B) And to pick players in your backyard that are already there ,
While (b) still needs looking at with guys that are questionable , to poach from another country is on another level ,
@kiwiinmelb said in Eligibility back on the agenda:
I see the difference as
(a)
to deliberately look overseas for players ,(B) And to pick players in your backyard that are already there ,
While (b) still needs looking at with guys that are questionable , to poach from another country is on another level ,
In the case of (a) it is a flow of players who can't play with better rugby countries to weaker rugby countries and in the case of (b) it is a flow of players from weaker rugby countries to better rugby countries.
One is intentional and the other apparently is not, although I suspect the NZRFU were as knees deep in Fekitoa's contract with Highlanders as anything the IRFU have done.
