World Rugby Board elections
-
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
I'd say Argentina helping Australia by withdrawing its bid is an outcome rather than intent. It was reported months ago that Australia was considered to have the strongest bid. The question will be will South Africa as current champions also bid considering Australia gets to host the Lions in 2025 (presuming no new virus....)
Not self-nominating for stuck record on this point either; but the unintended consequence of permitting players to put off playing for tier two nations in the hope of making a tier one team would be catastrophic.
Then I fall back on "why shouldn't a bloke born in Samoa, lived in NZ for 25yrs and played all his code there, be able to contribute back to his country of birth by relocating, playingbrugby, paying taxes, and being a part of the rugby fraternity?
Why is playing the only way for this player to contribute?
Of course it isn't, but why should world rugby have the ability restrict the ability of a man who has made his home in his home country, is a resident, who just wants to ply his profession and contribute?
We are all about personal liberties at the moment, why not in this case?
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
I'd say Argentina helping Australia by withdrawing its bid is an outcome rather than intent. It was reported months ago that Australia was considered to have the strongest bid. The question will be will South Africa as current champions also bid considering Australia gets to host the Lions in 2025 (presuming no new virus....)
Not self-nominating for stuck record on this point either; but the unintended consequence of permitting players to put off playing for tier two nations in the hope of making a tier one team would be catastrophic.
Then I fall back on "why shouldn't a bloke born in Samoa, lived in NZ for 25yrs and played all his code there, be able to contribute back to his country of birth by relocating, playingbrugby, paying taxes, and being a part of the rugby fraternity?
Why is playing the only way for this player to contribute?
Of course it isn't, but why should world rugby have the ability restrict the ability of a man who has made his home in his home country, is a resident, who just wants to ply his profession and contribute?
We are all about personal liberties at the moment, why not in this case?
Liberty to pursue a livelihood doesn't mean it should be available to you at the highest level because you want a scenery change.
Let's look at it a different way: What happens when certain professionals with a few years left in them, not quite making their original RWC squads, go "home" and bolster Fiji or Samoa and Home Nations get kicked out of the RWC?
Personally I'd find it hilarious, but the backlash would be brutal.
-
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
I'd say Argentina helping Australia by withdrawing its bid is an outcome rather than intent. It was reported months ago that Australia was considered to have the strongest bid. The question will be will South Africa as current champions also bid considering Australia gets to host the Lions in 2025 (presuming no new virus....)
Not self-nominating for stuck record on this point either; but the unintended consequence of permitting players to put off playing for tier two nations in the hope of making a tier one team would be catastrophic.
Then I fall back on "why shouldn't a bloke born in Samoa, lived in NZ for 25yrs and played all his code there, be able to contribute back to his country of birth by relocating, playingbrugby, paying taxes, and being a part of the rugby fraternity?
Why is playing the only way for this player to contribute?
Of course it isn't, but why should world rugby have the ability restrict the ability of a man who has made his home in his home country, is a resident, who just wants to ply his profession and contribute?
We are all about personal liberties at the moment, why not in this case?
Liberty to pursue a livelihood doesn't mean it should be available to you at the highest level because you want a scenery change.
Let's look at it a different way: What happens when certain professionals with a few years left in them, not quite making their original RWC squads, go "home" and bolster Fiji or Samoa and Home Nations get kicked out of the RWC?
Personally I'd find it hilarious, but the backlash would be brutal.
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
I'd say Argentina helping Australia by withdrawing its bid is an outcome rather than intent. It was reported months ago that Australia was considered to have the strongest bid. The question will be will South Africa as current champions also bid considering Australia gets to host the Lions in 2025 (presuming no new virus....)
Not self-nominating for stuck record on this point either; but the unintended consequence of permitting players to put off playing for tier two nations in the hope of making a tier one team would be catastrophic.
Then I fall back on "why shouldn't a bloke born in Samoa, lived in NZ for 25yrs and played all his code there, be able to contribute back to his country of birth by relocating, playingbrugby, paying taxes, and being a part of the rugby fraternity?
Why is playing the only way for this player to contribute?
Of course it isn't, but why should world rugby have the ability restrict the ability of a man who has made his home in his home country, is a resident, who just wants to ply his profession and contribute?
We are all about personal liberties at the moment, why not in this case?
Liberty to pursue a livelihood doesn't mean it should be available to you at the highest level because you want a scenery change.
Let's look at it a different way: What happens when certain professionals with a few years left in them, not quite making their original RWC squads, go "home" and bolster Fiji or Samoa and Home Nations get kicked out of the RWC?
I'm totally fine with that!!! Why on earth wouldn't you be???
The proviso, as always, is that you meet the eligibility criteria, which I've previously advocated should be residency and a stand-down period. If someone genuinely moves to a country and makes it their home, I have zero issue with them leading their parliament, their top 10 companies, or playing for their national rugby team.
-
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
I'd say Argentina helping Australia by withdrawing its bid is an outcome rather than intent. It was reported months ago that Australia was considered to have the strongest bid. The question will be will South Africa as current champions also bid considering Australia gets to host the Lions in 2025 (presuming no new virus....)
Not self-nominating for stuck record on this point either; but the unintended consequence of permitting players to put off playing for tier two nations in the hope of making a tier one team would be catastrophic.
Then I fall back on "why shouldn't a bloke born in Samoa, lived in NZ for 25yrs and played all his code there, be able to contribute back to his country of birth by relocating, playingbrugby, paying taxes, and being a part of the rugby fraternity?
Why is playing the only way for this player to contribute?
Of course it isn't, but why should world rugby have the ability restrict the ability of a man who has made his home in his home country, is a resident, who just wants to ply his profession and contribute?
We are all about personal liberties at the moment, why not in this case?
Liberty to pursue a livelihood doesn't mean it should be available to you at the highest level because you want a scenery change.
Let's look at it a different way: What happens when certain professionals with a few years left in them, not quite making their original RWC squads, go "home" and bolster Fiji or Samoa and Home Nations get kicked out of the RWC?
I'm totally fine with that!!! Why on earth wouldn't you be???
The proviso, as always, is that you meet the eligibility criteria, which I've previously advocated should be residency and a stand-down period. If someone genuinely moves to a country and makes it their home, I have zero issue with them leading their parliament, their top 10 companies, or playing for their national rugby team.
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
I'd say Argentina helping Australia by withdrawing its bid is an outcome rather than intent. It was reported months ago that Australia was considered to have the strongest bid. The question will be will South Africa as current champions also bid considering Australia gets to host the Lions in 2025 (presuming no new virus....)
Not self-nominating for stuck record on this point either; but the unintended consequence of permitting players to put off playing for tier two nations in the hope of making a tier one team would be catastrophic.
Then I fall back on "why shouldn't a bloke born in Samoa, lived in NZ for 25yrs and played all his code there, be able to contribute back to his country of birth by relocating, playingbrugby, paying taxes, and being a part of the rugby fraternity?
Why is playing the only way for this player to contribute?
Of course it isn't, but why should world rugby have the ability restrict the ability of a man who has made his home in his home country, is a resident, who just wants to ply his profession and contribute?
We are all about personal liberties at the moment, why not in this case?
Liberty to pursue a livelihood doesn't mean it should be available to you at the highest level because you want a scenery change.
Let's look at it a different way: What happens when certain professionals with a few years left in them, not quite making their original RWC squads, go "home" and bolster Fiji or Samoa and Home Nations get kicked out of the RWC?
I'm totally fine with that!!! Why on earth wouldn't you be???
As I said in my edit which you probably missed while you were responding, I'd find it hilarious but the fallout would be huge.
The proviso, as always, is that you meet the eligibility criteria, which I've previously advocated should be residency and a stand-down period. If someone genuinely moves to a country and makes it their home, I have zero issue with them leading their parliament, their top 10 companies, or playing for their national rugby team.
I'd be happy with that, but any reasonable stand down period would make it unlikely anyway. The issue is the mix of the tier one to tier two swap combined with the grandparent rule.
-
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
I'd say Argentina helping Australia by withdrawing its bid is an outcome rather than intent. It was reported months ago that Australia was considered to have the strongest bid. The question will be will South Africa as current champions also bid considering Australia gets to host the Lions in 2025 (presuming no new virus....)
Not self-nominating for stuck record on this point either; but the unintended consequence of permitting players to put off playing for tier two nations in the hope of making a tier one team would be catastrophic.
Then I fall back on "why shouldn't a bloke born in Samoa, lived in NZ for 25yrs and played all his code there, be able to contribute back to his country of birth by relocating, playingbrugby, paying taxes, and being a part of the rugby fraternity?
Why is playing the only way for this player to contribute?
Of course it isn't, but why should world rugby have the ability restrict the ability of a man who has made his home in his home country, is a resident, who just wants to ply his profession and contribute?
We are all about personal liberties at the moment, why not in this case?
Liberty to pursue a livelihood doesn't mean it should be available to you at the highest level because you want a scenery change.
Let's look at it a different way: What happens when certain professionals with a few years left in them, not quite making their original RWC squads, go "home" and bolster Fiji or Samoa and Home Nations get kicked out of the RWC?
I'm totally fine with that!!! Why on earth wouldn't you be???
As I said in my edit which you probably missed while you were responding, I'd find it hilarious but the fallout would be huge.
The proviso, as always, is that you meet the eligibility criteria, which I've previously advocated should be residency and a stand-down period. If someone genuinely moves to a country and makes it their home, I have zero issue with them leading their parliament, their top 10 companies, or playing for their national rugby team.
I'd be happy with that, but any reasonable stand down period would make it unlikely anyway. The issue is the mix of the tier one to tier two swap combined with the grandparent rule.
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@voodoo said in World Rugby chairman election:
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
I'd say Argentina helping Australia by withdrawing its bid is an outcome rather than intent. It was reported months ago that Australia was considered to have the strongest bid. The question will be will South Africa as current champions also bid considering Australia gets to host the Lions in 2025 (presuming no new virus....)
Not self-nominating for stuck record on this point either; but the unintended consequence of permitting players to put off playing for tier two nations in the hope of making a tier one team would be catastrophic.
Then I fall back on "why shouldn't a bloke born in Samoa, lived in NZ for 25yrs and played all his code there, be able to contribute back to his country of birth by relocating, playingbrugby, paying taxes, and being a part of the rugby fraternity?
Why is playing the only way for this player to contribute?
Of course it isn't, but why should world rugby have the ability restrict the ability of a man who has made his home in his home country, is a resident, who just wants to ply his profession and contribute?
We are all about personal liberties at the moment, why not in this case?
Liberty to pursue a livelihood doesn't mean it should be available to you at the highest level because you want a scenery change.
Let's look at it a different way: What happens when certain professionals with a few years left in them, not quite making their original RWC squads, go "home" and bolster Fiji or Samoa and Home Nations get kicked out of the RWC?
I'm totally fine with that!!! Why on earth wouldn't you be???
As I said in my edit which you probably missed while you were responding, I'd find it hilarious but the fallout would be huge.
The proviso, as always, is that you meet the eligibility criteria, which I've previously advocated should be residency and a stand-down period. If someone genuinely moves to a country and makes it their home, I have zero issue with them leading their parliament, their top 10 companies, or playing for their national rugby team.
I'd be happy with that, but any reasonable stand down period would make it unlikely anyway. The issue is the mix of the tier one to tier two swap combined with the grandparent rule.
Yeah missed the edit, sorry . But I typically just see a bunch of arguments from people saying it wouldn't work for the PI nations. Then a bunch more saying it would be bad for the home nations. And I just cant reconcile it.
I see the PI nations in particular losing a stack of guys to other nations through migration, scholarships, whatever, and I see no reason not to level the playing field, within reason/rules.
-
@Nepia said in World Rugby chairman election:
@Bovidae said in World Rugby chairman election:
It's about time we had a SH chairman so I hope Pichot gets over the line, however unlikely that is.
Pichot has come across pretty anti NZ so I don’t think we should rely on SH bonding.
That's reflective I think of his pet peeve; migration. Hence why they talk about countries that don't have "foreigners" playing for them.
There's no doubt NZ has benefited from PI migration from the 60s and 70s, and with the schooling scholarships whereas Argentina hasn't had any since Nazis moved in the 40s and 50s....
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@Nepia said in World Rugby chairman election:
@Bovidae said in World Rugby chairman election:
It's about time we had a SH chairman so I hope Pichot gets over the line, however unlikely that is.
Pichot has come across pretty anti NZ so I don’t think we should rely on SH bonding.
That's reflective I think of his pet peeve; migration. Hence why they talk about countries that don't have "foreigners" playing for them.
There's no doubt NZ has benefited from PI migration from the 60s and 70s, and with the schooling scholarships whereas Argentina hasn't had any since Nazis moved in the 40s and 50s....
Even if restrictions on "foreigners" are imposed - which I agree with, BTW - we will be fine because most of our "foreigners" are NZ born and / or raised
-
Beaumont, please.
Pichot is about as pro SH rugby as your average NH paid rugby scribe. He knows which side his bread is buttered on, and it ain't one which is good for NZ, or Oz rugby.
Under Pichot, you would have a tournament which included the 6N, SA, Japan & Argentina.
Beaumont maybe one of the Cucumber sandwich brigade, but he's a lot more trustworthy IMHO.
-
A cautious vote to re-elect Sir Bill Beaumont from me. He is one of the cucumber sandwich/flat warm beer brigade but he loves the game and its traditions. He's more effective than Vernon Pugh or Syd Miller were, but not as dynamic as Bernard Lapasset.
Commercially the Rugby World Cup in Japan was a great success. Lions tours are superb entertianment. The 6 Nations (besides the farcical games against Italy) remains a commerical and media hit. The Rugby Championship is okay but gets overshadowed in a RWC year. Before the virus hit the game was making progress in Japan and the US.
Four issues need World Rugby's action:
-
Make June and November internationals more meaningful. Move towards a global season.
-
Unions in Europe need to have more control over their clubs who frequently act in their own short-term interest rather than the good of the game.
-
A better financial deal for Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific teams. Unions that produce talent should be rewarded for it.
-
Set up a committee to simplify and shorten the law book.
-
-
As soon as Pichot announced his nomination, Beaumont came out with his 'World Rugby Review' manifesto. I think he was expecting an uncontested stroll to the position, either way at least there is competition and he now has to fight for it.
He maybe an annoying little hipster, but WR needs a shake up, so I'd be voting for him too. Sad that there is only one VC nomination, him of the really stupid 'World Club Champs' to make the richest clubs richer, squeezed somewhere into a calendar that is a total mess already
@Machpants Shame SANZAR couldn't find someone to put up against Bernard Laporte, not an honourable man and will be keen to help the likes of Toulon and Stade Francaise.
-
@Machpants said in World Rugby chairman election:
Ugh nothing like a bit of corruption and nepotism to really help stink the place up
is there any role Cliff Curtis can't play?
@mariner4life said in World Rugby chairman election:
@Machpants said in World Rugby chairman election:
Ugh nothing like a bit of corruption and nepotism to really help stink the place up
is there any role Cliff Curtis can't play?
My very first thought on seeing that come up... "Uncle Bully!", and very next post - see I'm 22 hours too late to the party.
-
@mariner4life said in World Rugby chairman election:
@Machpants said in World Rugby chairman election:
Ugh nothing like a bit of corruption and nepotism to really help stink the place up
is there any role Cliff Curtis can't play?
My very first thought on seeing that come up... "Uncle Bully!", and very next post - see I'm 22 hours too late to the party.
-
@nzzp I hadnt even seen it first time around, @mariner4life probably hasnt seen this either
-
Hopefully a fatal blow to NH Beau and his dodgy French deal with the convicted killer. Doubt it, but one can only hope.
-
Hopefully a fatal blow to NH Beau and his dodgy French deal with the convicted killer. Doubt it, but one can only hope.
@Machpants The Guardian seems more upset he used homophobic language than kicked a man to death at a wedding reception.
-
The ever trustworthy Herald suggests Fiji will have the deciding vote, and haven't decided how to cast it.
This election probably has more potential to affect the global game than most other stuff at the moment - I don't know enough to be well informed, but the media seem to be telling me that I should be supporting the greasy argie, rather than the gin swilling pom (see Guardian- racist offensive language!)
Also, still chortling about the Cliff Curtis line from above
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12326528
-
@Machpants The Guardian seems more upset he used homophobic language than kicked a man to death at a wedding reception.
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@Machpants The Guardian seems more upset he used homophobic language than kicked a man to death at a wedding reception.
you're not wrong.
Francis Kean, the chairman of the Fiji Rugby Union and a key supporter of Bill Beaumont’s bid for re-election as World Rugby’s chairman, has stood down from the global governing body’s council amid allegations of homophobia and discrimination.
oh yeah, and he also killed someone onceThis represents the modern
worldmedia in a nutshell. Racism, homophobia and sexism is worse optics than killing someone.Edit: changed 'world' to 'media'. Real world doesn't always have the same values.
-
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
@Machpants The Guardian seems more upset he used homophobic language than kicked a man to death at a wedding reception.
you're not wrong.
Francis Kean, the chairman of the Fiji Rugby Union and a key supporter of Bill Beaumont’s bid for re-election as World Rugby’s chairman, has stood down from the global governing body’s council amid allegations of homophobia and discrimination.
oh yeah, and he also killed someone onceThis represents the modern
worldmedia in a nutshell. Racism, homophobia and sexism is worse optics than killing someone.Edit: changed 'world' to 'media'. Real world doesn't always have the same values.
-
Imagine the righteousness when they find out he also has unpaid parking fines.
@antipodean said in World Rugby chairman election:
Imagine the righteousness when they find out he also has unpaid parking fines.
I'm sure when he explains his difficult childhood in which he was occasionally given a smack on the backside, all will be forgiven...
