International eligibility: this week’s storm
By Rob9, 29 Oct 2012 Rob9 is a Roar Pro
121 Have your say
All Blacks coach Steve Hansen. (Image: AFP)
Related coverage
An international eligibility storm has been hammering away at the rugby world for the past seven days and this messy and thunderous front is beginning to take its toll on the credibility of the international game.
I can’t remember a week where different issues that involve these controversial eligibility rules have made their way into the headlines more consistently over a seven day period.
Allegations of ‘poaching’ along with a couple of interesting selections and player movements have got the gods that watch over the game they play in heaven talking.
This article and two articles to come will take a closer look at this violent storm cell, inspect the damage that it has left in its wake and then provide a plan to rebuild respectively.
It all kicked off last Saturday night when Steve Hansen made some (now infamous) comments about the Australian Rugby Union ‘pinching’ New Zealand rugby talent.
He went on to suggest in no uncertain terms that the Australian system is broken and the powers that be at ARU HQ should devote their ‘time and energy’ into developing their own rugby talent.
This came after one of Hansen’s fellow citizens kicked a swag of penalties, each of which he lined up while wearing a gold jersey, while those from his native land stood 10 metres away dressed head to toe in black (plus a bit of white scribble in the lower chest area).
Hansen’s parting shot suggesting that the ARU should ‘get its house in order’ was too spicy for outgoing CEO, John O’Neill not to glove up and get involved. O’Neill responded by referencing New Zealand’s own questionable history of selecting players born from outside their own borders, in particular those who have come from the Pacific Islands.
I’ll leave the eye of the storm there, as the Hansen comments and the Hansen versus O’Neill story that has developed has been well documented and discussed at length here on The Roar.
Since O’Neill bit back, tensions between the ARU and New Zealand Rugby Union had been left to simmer for the week. That was until the last day or so, when O’Neill’s New Zealand Rugby Union equivalent, Steve Tew, jumped to Hansen’s defence and stood firmly behind the coach’s controversial remarks.
While this particular storm has continued to rage on over the Tasman Sea, a number of other eligibility related storm fronts have developed around this Gilbert shaped globe of ours.
On Tuesday, news broke that 24 year old Crusaders wing Sean Maitland had signed with Scottish Pro12 side, the Glasgow Warriors. What made this more significant than the regular (and quite common) ‘kiwi player heading north’ story is that Maitland has Scottish grandparents and he intends to exercise the heritage laws to represent Scotland.
After representing the New Zealand under 19 and under 20 teams, four years as a key member of the Crusaders squad and six years in the Canterbury setup, Maitland is turning his back on New Zealand rugby in pursuit of international caps.
Throughout the week, numerous team squads were announced in preparation for the annual ritual of the south invading the north. Eyebrows were also sent north with the announcement of the Irish squad, which included yet another South African born and bred player who qualifies to represent a northern hemisphere nation on the grounds of residency.
26 year old and 2005 South Africa under 19 representative hooker, Richardt Strauss, comes into an Irish squad looking to add some depth to their hooking stocks, following the retirement of veteran Jerry Flannery.
Later in the week, England were due to name a replacement for injured prop (ironically American born), Alex Corbisiero. They went with the 21 year old, New Zealand born, man mountain Mako Vunipola. Vunipola is the son of Tongan international Fe’ao Vunipola and qualifies for England again on the grounds of residency.
Now it could be just coincidental, but I believe this selection led to the latest lightning bolts in the eligibility storm, which was yet another outburst by an international coach on the topic of ‘poaching’.
Fijian coach Inoke Male has labelled Australia, New Zealand and England as vultures. He is quoted as saying that scouts from all three countries have been present at Fiji’s annual secondary schools championships to look for talent to take to their own systems.
Male was particularly frustrated that he is being knocked back by young European based talent who had switched allegiances to their adopted homelands. He’s suggested that the money on offer by potentially aligning with one of the big fish is leading these boys to turn their backs on caps for Fiji for pounds, euros or dollars.
Male finished by pleading with the IRB to step in and do something about this farcical situation to ensure that countries like Fiji, Samoa and Tonga have a healthy list of professional rugby players to choose from, so these proud rugby nations can continue to present some sort of challenge to the top tier nations and not be wiped off the international rugby radar.
Although Hansen may have had some valid points, Male speaking out has made the All Blacks coach look like a complete sook who’s having a whinge about a Kiwi (who nobody wanted) single handedly scoring all of the points required to bring New Zealand’s potential record breaking string of wins to an end.
Male is speaking from a perspective where ‘poaching’ really is an issue. His outburst brings an extraordinary week in world rugby to end and hopefully his words will be ringing loudly in the ears of some administrators in Dublin to enforce some future changes.
Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Have you seen the new Wallabies jersey? Want one of your own? We're giving away a brand new 2013 Wallabies jersey to one lucky Roarer, click here to go in the running to win.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Wallabies squad announced: Folau in, no Quade Cooper – yet (267)
- Deans: Should he stay or should he go? (245)
- SPIRO’s Lions Diary: Deans goes for experience, plus Folau (242)
- Wallabies 25-man Lions squad: analysis (214)
- Quade Cooper misses Wallaby squad selection (209)
- Quade shouldn’t be fly half against the Lions (184)
- What gives with Israel Folau? (184)
Recommend this story.



October 29th 2012 @ 7:27am
AussieKiwi said | October 29th 2012 @ 7:27am | Report comment
International Eligilbility Storm? In a teacup perhaps. Sensationalism is alive and well on the Roar.
October 29th 2012 @ 7:56am
Sailosi said | October 29th 2012 @ 7:56am | Report comment
I’m usually a defender of people should be able to play for whom ever they choose. But after seeing the Fiji squad announced last week for the European tour, it is a national embarrassment. I really worry when close to 60 European based players made themselves unavailable.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download it now [http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/the-roar/id327174726?mt=8].
October 29th 2012 @ 8:14am
rae1 said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:14am | Report comment
I agree,I do think the European clubs have way too much power when it comes to player availability.Club seems more important than international representation.
October 29th 2012 @ 8:14am
Darwin Stubbie said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:14am | Report comment
Is that down to trying to make eligibility requirements or is it an availability problem where the clubs are preventing them from being selected ?
There’s obviously a number of issues the IRB need to confront esp if its the latter … But I really don’t see why Hansen has becoming the face of this debate …. He was trying to highlight something complete different
October 29th 2012 @ 8:57am
Sailosi said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:57am | Report comment
With the senior players it is down to clubs “encouraging” their players to make themselves unavailable. However what is happening now and this is a fear i always had when i read about the FFR changes to their foreigner policy. In order to be considered a non foreign player in France a player must have spent at least 3 years in a clubs academy system. There are now close to 70 young Fijians either finishing their schooling in France or are under 20 and are in a clubs academy. So whilst they are still able to represent Fiji at u/20 level they are now being considered “French” players due to them spending their teenage years in academies. There is a young player at Clermont Noa NAKAITACI who has been in France since he was 17 and refused to be selected in the Fiji squad for the Euro tour because he wants to play for France. Now i don’t have a problem with this but it is going to have severe consequences in the future for Island rugby if this becomes the norm.
October 29th 2012 @ 12:14pm
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
i see no problem with that..clubs pay the players so they call the shots..if there is indeed 70 fijian student athletes in france, that’s excellent!..70 fijians will have pro careers and send money to feed their families back home..
..the samoan govt sports policy is to send as many young athletes to the pro ranks as possible..create income opportunities for themselves and their families in samoa..it’s a poverty alleviation measure..some will be doctors, some will be accountants others will excel at sports..
October 29th 2012 @ 1:37pm
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 1:37pm | Report comment
just thought i’d compile a list of samoan sevens players the last two years who have moved on to pro clubs..sevens is a great vehicle to land young samoan talent pro contracts..
Alafoti Fa’osiliva – formerly Toulon, now Bristol (Eng)
Fautua Otto – Bristol (Eng)
Paul Perez – Eastern Province Kings (SA)
Ofisa Treviranus – London Irish (Eng)
Ken Pisi – Northampton Saints (Eng)
Faatoina Autagavaia – Auckland Blues (NZ)
Uale Mai – Borneo Eagles (Malaysia)
Faatonu Fili – Borneo Eagles (Malaysia)
October 29th 2012 @ 4:11pm
Pogo said | October 29th 2012 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
I thought Autagavaia had only played for Northland so far? He’s a good player but I’d say his chance of getting a blues contract might not be great.
Also they’re not the Auckland Blues anymore. Just the Blues.
October 29th 2012 @ 4:14pm
Ra said | October 29th 2012 @ 4:14pm | Report comment
Malo Teri bro, I agree that is a good thing to take advantage of those opportunities, but at the same time we are seeing the rape and pillage of your peoples’ raw sporting talent – and that worries all of us.
The problem is not at club level, it’s a management problem and it needs to be sorted at the highest political and operational level in the world – the IRB.
The IRB needs to instruct player managers to ensure that claws are put into contracts for players to be released for international duties with their home countries at U20 level up and for women’s teams including 7s.
clubs may not want that to happen because players could demand more or become more marketable by performing well at another level.
the big thing for international rugby, is that we will see the island teams at full strength and challenging the more senior countries in the world
October 29th 2012 @ 9:48pm
Nigel Imrie said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:48pm | Report comment
Listen brother, sometimes these professional players don’t want to play for a particular coach, that is all that is happening here, plenty of boys didn’t want to play for Domoni either!
October 29th 2012 @ 8:09am
rae1 said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:09am | Report comment
The Pasifika players in the ABs are either born and bred in NZ or have gone through the rugby system and developed their skills,starting at schoolboy level.Male implies that a group of scouts go over to the islands,grab some talent and leave.Maybe he needs to tell the parents and grandparents who are wanting a better life for their families to stop moving to NZ and Oz because that would be the only way to stop what he calls poaching.Most pasifika people living in NZ are now second or third generation.They identify as NZ polynesian and proud of both cultures.Stopping players from improving their lifestyle will only have an adverse effect.Bottom line is if a player chooses to play for another country and that player is eligible and financially secure they will go.Sad but true
October 29th 2012 @ 9:57pm
Nigel Imrie said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:57pm | Report comment
Have to agree with you on that one, the pathway to greater representative honours is something to be admired in NZ, the multiculturalism is a credit to NZ, Australia across the channel is a different kettle of fish even though they are begining to be dominated by Pacific Islanders, it is great to see, what we have to change however is this, once a player eg of Tongan heritage ius no longer required by NZ, Aust etc they should immediately be allowewd if required by their home nation to represent.
October 29th 2012 @ 11:20pm
IronAwe said | October 29th 2012 @ 11:20pm | Report comment
I disagree with this. Having players switch teams/country’s will turn the world cup into a farce. You will have retired old boys who are well passed it, playing for a second tier nation for one last hurrah and at the same time preventing some young buck who fought his whole life to make the squad, from playing in his team. Do you really think giving a team like Fiji 1 or 2 retired all blacks will make them a more competitive team? Absolutely not.
I’m also not sure the problem is as bad as people are making out. Are we seriously saying that teams like Fiji and Samoa and Tonga are struggling because all their players are overseas? Has it got nothing to do with lack of funds and poor facilities and poor support from the IRB? Are we forgetting that Samoa beat the Wallabies last year?
October 30th 2012 @ 9:49am
Vhavnal said | October 30th 2012 @ 9:49am | Report comment
and tonga beat france. ignore fiji, they were kind poop last season.
October 29th 2012 @ 8:21am
nickoldschool said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:21am | Report comment
It is such a complex issue that it’s too easy to make simplistic comments/remarks. Take the case of Vunipola outlined in the article: he is the son of Tongan parents, was born in NZ but moved to England as a young teen. Its fair to say that he developped as a rugby player in England and represented his adoptive country at U18-20 level.
So whats the issue in having him be selected at this level? is he ‘more’ Tongan or ‘more’ kiwi than he is English? Choosing to play for a nation or another is an individual choice, full stop. We are in a world in which ppl migrate; why wouldnt it be the same for sportsmen? the day rugby became professional we knew ‘poaching’ would happen, like it happebs in any business. Its sad but its the reality. Big nations ‘shop’ in tier 2-3 nations and it wont change. French prop Vincent Dubaty was born and raised in Belgium. Fair to say he would have never played against the likes of NZ, Oz etc should he have decided to represent his native country. Is he a treator or are the french poachers? no, its a mutually beneficial decision.
And the same goes on or could potentially go on at ‘lower level’: if a great player was spotted in Vanuatu, the Solomon islands or any small P.I island by a Tongan, Fijian or Samoan representative who was able to bring him back home, i think they would just do it without thinking too much. Thats the world we are in.
October 29th 2012 @ 8:22am
biltongbek said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:22am | Report comment
It seems nothing will stop the “change of allegiance” because of the almighty Pound, as much as I think it is wrong, it really doesn’t matter much does it?
The fact is also that every case is different, and you can’t throw the blAnket accusation of poaching around for every player, if a Polenesian, or Kenyan or whatever nationality was brought up in another country and learned his trade there he will have adopted and grown into that country’s rugby culture.
But the grandparent ruling is something that really only benfits the UK, as we all come from there originally.
But hey, ho, if England (or any other nation to lesser extents) can be proud of having ten South African born and developed rugby players in their national team over the last decade, then so be it.
I stronlgy identify with the culture of Bok rugby and I grew up and played in SA, so I expect and demand that my country select representatives that learnt their rugby in SA.
As long as I can proudly say I can identify with my team, the rest can sell their heritage, culture and pride for 30 silver coins.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:13am
Pot Hale said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:13am | Report comment
“But the grandparent ruling is something that really only benfits the UK, as we all come from there originally.”
I don’t think that’s true really. If you’re setting it at grandparent level, there’s plenty of players that come from other countries. Or were born in one country, maybe stayed a few months or even ten years, and then moved elsewhere. There’s plenty of players that have their heritage from Ireland, France, Holland, US, Canada, etc. Michael Bent, the prop from Taranaki, NZ qualifies through his Irish grandmother. Same as Isaac Boss has done. If they weren’t going to get a cap with the AIGs, then why not explore other opportunities?
The Strauss selection by Ireland is not really shocking since it’s been coming down the tracks for the last three years. He’s one of the Project players that the IRFU are intentionally developing. People argue that the residency period should be extended from 3 to maybe 6 or 7 years, before an uncapped player can play for another country. And perhaps they’re right. However, he is the first selected under this process even though it’s been in place for some time. And he still has to be picked play. It certainly doesn’t benefit his club, Leinster, as both their top hookers (Strauss and Cronin) are now in the initial training squad, and they’ll continue to play league mat ches whilst the November tests are being played – another contributory factor for the need to cast the net wider for countries with a lower playing population than some.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:17am
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:17am | Report comment
Last time I checked Drumbane Co Tipperary was in Ireland, not the U.K. – not all come from the U.K do they Pot?
October 29th 2012 @ 9:28am
Pot Hale said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:28am | Report comment
Indeed. I think Biltong is aware of that distinction, in fairness.
October 29th 2012 @ 6:00pm
biltongbek said | October 29th 2012 @ 6:00pm | Report comment
Perhaps i should have said Europe, it would be more accurate, eh?
October 29th 2012 @ 9:21am
Jerry said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:21am | Report comment
The grandparent rule hugely benefits the PI nations.
October 29th 2012 @ 5:31pm
rae1 said | October 29th 2012 @ 5:31pm | Report comment
Yes,if I was fortunate enough to play international rugby I could have played for NZ,NZ Maori,France,Scotland and Ireland using the grandparent rule
October 29th 2012 @ 8:46am
Ryan said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:46am | Report comment
The fact that Hansens comments and the message he was trying to get across after being questioned by a smartar$ed Australian journo have been taken out of context is laughable and the number of totally ridiculous and somewhat pathetic articles like this aimed purely at having a dig at Hansen just highlights how low and desperate the Roar seems to be for site hits.
Hansens was not and never was he talking simply about players born elsewhere, Quade Cooper, Pek Cowan, Will Genia etc all developed as players in Australia.
Harris, Kepu however did not. They were brought up through the NZ system both representing NZ at age group level, Players like Woodward and Hayward for example are leaving to play for Australian teams well and truly after being developed by the NZ system.
How is that so hard for Aussie fans and Media to grasp?
Sure they may never have made the ABs or got a regular starting place in a NZ SR franchise but it is a farce if they then in turn show up in Green and Gold by some Grandparent rule.
This is the point Hansen was making he was not alluding to the Digbys or Coopers, that is something that has been totally misrepresented here at the Roar in pure sensationalistic and arrogant pieces by some Australian Roarers who can not accept the fact Hansen has touched on a very cold hard truth. The Australian system is failing Wallaby rugby and it is time the ARU got it’s house in order.
Australia barely deserved a 4th team and most certainly did not deserve a 5th team it can not support it’s self and develop enough players for 4 teams let a lone 5 hence the need to continue to search offshore for foreigners to take their spots.
I can understand players going across to weak teams like the Force and Rebels for the dollars when they can’t crack a regular spot at home. But please don’t try and tell me Australian rugby does not have an active policy of luring talent to the country on the premise that one day they may be wearing the Green and Gold.
The most farcical thing of all is how Harris is now claiming to be “Australian” what an absolute crock of shizz, he’s no more Australian than Richie McCaw, he’s Australian as long as the media manager writes or tells him what to say and the ARU keep paying his salary. You could guarantee that deep down he sees himself as a Kiwi who just happens to play for Australia and is just being told to say all the right things.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:04am
Rob9 said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:04am | Report comment
Ryan, you’re angry and I get that. But this article is more focused on the events following Hansen’s claims. If you take a look I only touched on the Hansen issue as it has been done to death here and in the media over the last week. A lot has unfolded in regards to international eligibility on a number of different ways in issues that have recently popped up all around the world. I did go on to suggest that Male’s comments put Hansen’s into perspective and they do. Here’s a guy who can barely scratch together a 30 man touring party due to eligibility issues. What difference does it make to Hansen if Harris a few other fringe SR players cross over..?. I don’t agree with what we’re involving ourselves in at the moment but it makes no difference when compared to what Male is going through.
I agree with a lot of what you’re saying Ryan and stay with me on this one because I plan to put a lot of this perspective in a few more articles to come. This is just reporting the week that was in regards to eligibility issues.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:51am
Ryan said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
I’m not angry I’m just tired of reading beat up rubbish about Hansens comment.
You yourself come across as a little bitter by taking a dig and are way off the mark re Hansen having a whinge or being a sook.
He was answering a question Rob9 what do you expect him to do not say anything so then we can have a plethora of articles of Hansen being a closed shop and we would get more insight from a brick wall?
No matter what he does disgruntled people will find a way to have a go at him or the All Blacks.
As for the Fijian coach yes he makes valid points but I would like him to bring up cold hard facts of NZ /& Aus especially scouting Fijian talent to bolster their own squads. The two most recent All Blacks of Fijian origins Rocokoko came here as a child and is no doubt a product of the NZ rugby Acadamey, Sivivatu sure could be classed as a poach to a degree however one could argue his rugby was fine tuned and developed from Wesley college and beyond, but please Malo show me where since then NZ or Australia have plucked players from relative obscuirty and given them a shot at the big time under the guise of playing solely for either country.
I hope in your furture articles you pay homage to the amount of New Zealanders who turned out for Samoa at the 2011 World Cup in NZ also the number at the 2007 World Cup.
People all to quickly forget that Auckland is the biggest polynesian city in the world.
Of 1100 ABs the number born in the islands is less than 20 and of those 20 most were developed in NZ from a very young age.
The issue Malo has is with the European Clubs and the IRB needs to do something to help curb that problem, why the NZ Aus initiative of allowing discarded AB’s or Wallabies to take up places with tier 2 nations was not accepted only highlights that the IRB is not worried about growing the game globally they are worried about the top 5-6 teams first and foremost nothing more.
October 29th 2012 @ 11:46am
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 11:46am | Report comment
no non-samoan has ever played for manu samoa..they all samoans mate..
October 29th 2012 @ 12:27pm
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
Hey Terry do you remeber Mark Birtwhistle who played lock for Western Samoa in the 1991 Rugby World Cup. He looked whiter than me. How did he qualify?
October 29th 2012 @ 12:38pm
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
his mom is samoan..
October 29th 2012 @ 1:09pm
apelu said | October 29th 2012 @ 1:09pm | Report comment
Uncle, you obviously attach a particular skin colour to being Samoan. Try an educate yourself. Are all Australians white? Well, Samoans are not just of one-skin colour or one ethnicity, also. Don’t show your ignorance in the public space.
October 29th 2012 @ 2:52pm
richard said | October 29th 2012 @ 2:52pm | Report comment
His father was Bill Birtwhistle, the ab winger of the 1960′s, mother samoan, as Terry says.
October 29th 2012 @ 3:22pm
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 3:22pm | Report comment
Apelu,
MMM, ignorance. Seeing that Samoan’s come from the pacific islands and generally pacific islanders have darker skin than we caucasians I don’t think asking how a bloke with fair skin qualifies. Its called being inquisitive you ignoramus. You don’t learn if you dont ask do you? The fact that I ask indicates I am anything but ingnorant.
October 29th 2012 @ 6:07pm
Ra said | October 29th 2012 @ 6:07pm | Report comment
Did that boy attend Mana College in Porirua in the 1980s? I don’t think it was the same boy though – a mate and I coached league at Mana College back then. Most of the boys were Pasifika, and during stretch and exercise sessions I use to get the kids to count to 10 in whatever home language they identified with. One Niuean boy counted in Maori, because he didn’t know his own language he said, and a white boy counted in Samoan. When I frowned and asked why he didnt count in English, he replied he was Samoan/German and had no English heritage.
That was a very big wake up call for me
November 9th 2012 @ 8:20pm
Katipo said | November 9th 2012 @ 8:20pm | Report comment
Recently science learned DNA is passed on differently to sons and daughters.
Sons get 90% DNA from their fathers & only10% from their mothers.
Daughters get 50% from both parents.
This explains how Mark Birtwhistle can be ‘half Samoan’ and look like a palangi. He got 90% of his DNA from his Caucasian Dad.
This explains a lot huh.
October 29th 2012 @ 1:45pm
Ryan said | October 29th 2012 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
That is a stretch and you know it, many New Zealanders of Samoan decent have played for Samoa.
Ethnically they may be Samoan but they are New Zealanders first.
October 29th 2012 @ 5:58pm
Ra said | October 29th 2012 @ 5:58pm | Report comment
According to whom Ryan???? What level of consultation has taken place to support that claim? I know there is a lot of confusion out there amongst New Zealand resident Pasifika people of their status. They are afriad of making distinction because they are afraid to “hurt” or “offend” people. We’ve had to do a lot of work with Pasifika communities to get them to identify themselves by their Island nations on official forms even the un-user friendly school enrolment forms because our stats were being skewered, and many were missing out on receiving support and information.
Unfortunately, Maori are only just starting to “feel” New Zealand. Just starting to trust our establishment enough to shed shrouds of mistrust. It has taken a lot of years and i think seeing our language and culture being more “out there” and part of the coutry’s every day fabric, has contributed to that.
I remember a time overseas in the Asian region when Maori were known as Kiwis and Pakeha were known as New Zealanders. Now they say, you New Zealand, you Kiwi, ka mate ka mate.
It is one thing to have a name (and a flag) imposed on you, to be told by someone other than your own, who they think you are, and quite another to accept it as part of your own being, and own it
October 30th 2012 @ 9:47am
Vhavnal said | October 30th 2012 @ 9:47am | Report comment
indeed, most of them were actually born in New Zealand so basically hey were representing their country of birth..why are they making a big deal out of this?…Its only Fijians that have represented other countries have actually been born in Fiji..the likes of tuqiri (Australia),, vidiri (NZ), rokocoko(NZ) and sivivatu (NZ) were all born in FIJI, so was Ilivasi Tabua (Australia), Manoa Vosawai (Italy)..they are the only country that should be complaining and even then the number of fijians playing for other countries is quite small..in other worlds, more people of samoan and tongan heritage have represented other nations than those with fijian heritage..
October 29th 2012 @ 12:11pm
Rob9 said | October 29th 2012 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
No bitterness here what-so-ever Ryan. Again, I actually agree with a lot of what Hansen said. What I do take exception to is the coach of the All Blacks telling the ARU to ‘get its house in order’. The ARU’s ‘house’ is none of his business. What happens in the ARU’s house has no impact on him doing his job and it’s not his place to make comment. And on what grounds does he make such a comment? A couple (which is literally all it is, unlike the situation in Europe) of Kiwis switching to Australian Super Rugby sides(due to not getting a regular shot with one of the NZ sides) and potentially switching allegiances to the Wallabies. These few Kiwis represent the smallest percentage of Australia’s young talent and he’s telling the ARU to ‘get its house in order’. Again I understand points regarding Harris, but he needs to take a leaf out of his captain’s book and know when to bite his tongue in a press conference.
Don’t stress Ryan, my next article is a balanced review of the so-called poaching that takes place. I’m definitely critical of some poaching cases (the Harris case is one that falls into this category) but I also give credit where credits due (NZ’s contribution to other rugby nations does make an appearance yes).
October 29th 2012 @ 2:29pm
Hurl said | October 29th 2012 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
If it was just a couple Hanson probably wouldn’t have said anything
October 29th 2012 @ 6:35pm
GWS said | October 29th 2012 @ 6:35pm | Report comment
At least until he finished walking on water…
October 29th 2012 @ 4:08pm
Bono said | October 29th 2012 @ 4:08pm | Report comment
He has every right to tell the ARU to get their house in order as they were given two extra s15 teams based on the understanding that most of the players making up those two teams will be home grown or overseas based Aussies. Since those statements we made, big Jon has been proven to be a liar, as Aussie teams have poached about sixteen players that have come through the NZ system. If Jon hadn’t made those false promises right at the start, then you might have had a point.
“What happens in the ARU’s house has no impact on him doing his job.
I find this comment laughable. For example,Hansen is a massive fan of Jason Woodward and made no secret that he had the potential to be an AB. I’m sure he would have been picked up by a nz s15 team at some point especially with the recent departures of guys like Sean Maitland etc. Like it or not these departing players are weakening nz rugby and the flow on effect impacts the AB’s and Hansen’s job to some degree.
October 29th 2012 @ 4:31pm
moaman said | October 29th 2012 @ 4:31pm | Report comment
Woodward is a great example.
October 29th 2012 @ 5:10pm
Rob9 said | October 29th 2012 @ 5:10pm | Report comment
Alright Bono, let’s take a look at it. Of Australia’s current 5 x 29 man Super Rugby squads for 2013 there are 4 players outside of the Rebels (our most recent team to enter SR) who you could lay claim to coming through the NZ setup. These 4 players include 28 year old Toby Lynn, former All Black Alby Matthews, and Brisbane born Winston Stanley who all represent the Force. The fourth is Mike Harris whose life story we’re all well familiar with now. For obvious reasons Alby will never pull on a Wallaby jumper, I doubt Lynn would ever be called up considering our depth in the lock position and Winston was born in Brisbane and therefore has every right to represent his place of birth but I also doubt we’ll see this. Within the Rebels, a further 5 kiwi products exist. Outside of Woodward, the 4 remaining players to come off the NZ production line range in age from 24 to 29 and again I don’t think any will ever be in a position to have a Wallaby cap handed to them (considering many will struggle to be regular starters for the Rebels next year). Woodward could be an exception and if that were to occur then I agree it’s another example of the eligibility rules letting the international game down. Although I have heard that he wishes to maintain his allegiances to his native New Zealand so if this were to remain the case then it’s all a bit of hot air.
So along with Harris, Woodward would make a massive total of 2 kiwi products playing in our system that could potentially stare down a haka. Hardly a huge impact on Steve Hansen and the job he does for the NZRU.
I agree, ideally you really want to keep kiwis in NZ, especially the good ones. But I’d be taking this up with Europe before telling the ARU to ‘get its house in order’. And 9 (only 2 of which have/could realistically become Wallabies) kiwi produced players in 145 is hardly a dominating our system which is apparently broken. Please.
October 29th 2012 @ 5:49pm
Jerry said | October 29th 2012 @ 5:49pm | Report comment
You missed Grayson Hart, Jayden Hayward, Sekope Kepu, Leon Power….
October 29th 2012 @ 6:30pm
Rob9 said | October 29th 2012 @ 6:30pm | Report comment
Apologies, throw 4 more onto the list (2 of which came back to their place of birth) for a new total of 13 with one extra Wallaby on the list in Kepu. My understanding with the Wallaby prop is that he always intended to represent his country of birth at senior level too.
And my point is, how many of these 13 players could realistically go on to represent the AB’s? 3 if that? It would only be 3 that could realistically have a shot at the Wallabies. Many were struggling to crack a SR squad let alone play for the All Blacks. I repeat, the impact on Hansen and the AB’s has been minimal at best.
Let me reiterate, I am not a fan of NZ born and bred players going through the NZ system and coming over here to qualify on the grounds of a grandma/3 years of residency. There is one example of this occurring in the current Wallaby squad. Again, Hansen’s ‘house in order’ remark was out of line and an example of him sticking his nose into business that doesn’t concern him.
October 31st 2012 @ 1:08pm
richard said | October 31st 2012 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
To Bono @4.08pm,made the point on another thread about why Aus were given two more sides, and how O’Neill has gone back on his word. My personal view, is that O’Neill had no intention of going after off – shore ozzies,but was just going to use the extra franchises to target nz talent.
October 29th 2012 @ 8:30pm
zhenry said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:30pm | Report comment
Good points Ryan. Don’t forget Tew was the one who took O’Neill at his word (AU nationals here and overseas for the new franchises)? How naive and foolish. It was obvious to many people at the time that he would take mainly NZ players and I also wrote comments to the fact. Should never have given him the franchises; SA could see O’Neills motivation, NZ could have stopped it. Before Tew, NZRU were much more proactive re their own interests. Hard to figure Tew, the AU owned NZ media of course write him up big, but Tew gives me an awful uncomfortable feeling concerning the robust future of NZ rugby: His actions continue to be disastrous for NZ rugby (the truncated provincial comp. has seriously deteriorated standards of play, especially the defence of teams; it is also unhealthy for the players welfare. Again NZ were naive and foolish in selling off their private media to foreigners, mostly AU. There is no one (the NZ public media is the worst in the world) to publically speak out for NZ interests.
October 29th 2012 @ 8:50am
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Frankly, Male does not speak for Samoan rugby..Samoa has never had a problem with Samoans representing other countries..if they make it to the ABs, good, if they get paid more money, even better, if they want to play for samoa, great..we don’t have a hang up on those identity issues..no matter what color jersey they wear the world can see they are samoan..
October 29th 2012 @ 10:04am
Ryan said | October 29th 2012 @ 10:04am | Report comment
Tevita it would be hard for the Samoan rugby union to have an issue with Samoans representing the likes of NZ or Aus the former especially.
As I point out in the above comment there was a huge contingent of NZ born and raised Kiwis of samoan decent playing for Samoa at the two most recent world cups in France and NZ. Samoa benefit a lot from New Zealands development system that can not be denied.
As for players like Nonu, Mealamu, Tana Umaga, Victor Vito for example they are all New Zealanders born and raised of Samoan decent and they have every right to pull on the colours of the ABs.
The World may see their ethnicity but the reality is they are Kiwis born and bred.
When you watch the Olympics do you see Usain Bolt as African or Jamaican?
One must take note he is a descendant of African settlers.
Do you look at Dan Carter and go oh yes he’s a Englishman playing for NZ?
I’m just curious as the ethnic issue is something you have quite frequently raised!
I don’t look at anyone in the ABs jersey as anything else but a Kiwi, you may choose to look at colour and claim Nonu as Samoan although he was born and raised in Wellington I look at him as a Kiwi with Samoan heritage playing for his country.
October 29th 2012 @ 11:31am
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 11:31am | Report comment
well that’s your opinion..but this is digby’s opinion, which is pretty much samoans’ opinions..
“Half their team has Samoan heritage anyway,” Ioane said of the All Blacks.
“I just don’t get those comments. I don’t understand why Kiwis are not just happy to see Mike succeed.
October 29th 2012 @ 12:37pm
Jerry said | October 29th 2012 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
Well firstly, he’s wrong about the current team being half Samoan (in fact the Samoan presence is about as low as it’s been since the Canta-Blacks) and secondly people aren’t criticising Harris, they’re criticising the ARU.
October 29th 2012 @ 11:50am
Seriously, Who says Oi? said | October 29th 2012 @ 11:50am | Report comment
“When you watch the Olympics do you see Usain Bolt as African or Jamaican? One must take note he is a descendant of African settlers.”
“settlers”? Try slaves.
October 29th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
yep very poor analogy..
October 29th 2012 @ 1:55pm
Ryan said | October 29th 2012 @ 1:55pm | Report comment
What is poor Tevita is your inability to again answer questions posed to you, instead looking for a way out to side step the issue.
So do you see bolt as African or Carter as English?
If not why not?
How many generations being born in a foreign land does it take before a person with Samoan / English heritage becomes Australian, American or South African for example.
I am interested because the basis for 99% of your comments come back to ethnicity.
Nationally I am New Zealander
Ethnically I am Maori, Greek, Maltese
Racially I am Polynesian, Caucasian
Just wanting to know if you grasp that ?
October 29th 2012 @ 2:13pm
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
you know ryan..when the tongan team went to the world cup last year..12,000 tongans turned up at the airport..30,000 turned up to watch them practice at mt smart stadium..cars and houses were painted with tongan colours and decorated with tongan flags..many of the proud tongans were second–third generation tongans you saw up and down queen street and the bus station at k-road..you don’t understand these things because you are not tongan nor a person of culture..
October 29th 2012 @ 3:42pm
Ryan said | October 29th 2012 @ 3:42pm | Report comment
The fact you are clearly incapbable of answering questions raised makes a mockery of your so called ‘Pro” title here at the roar.
You not only sidestep the questions I have raised you havve resorted to a callous and personal attack on myself and my lack of culture.
Your comments are disgraceful and smack of someone who does not like his thought process questioned.
Aside from hurl insults my way Tevita you have still not answered the questions I have raised.
I will but this down to you simply not wanting to admit to the hypocrisy and racist undertones in your own comments.
Who are you to tell me that I have no culture?
What is culture Tevita please do tell us all.
Your argument that thousands of Tongans turned up is irrelevant, I still support the Greek football team and if they decided to come down under I’d probably head out to meet the team too. it just shows pride in my Heritage. Like I said is you can still be a New Zealander of Samoan or Tongan decent, I know plenty of Samoans my age and older who have never bean to the South Island let alone Samoa, does it make them any less proud of their heritage no but does it make them Samoans before Kiwis well thats where we differ
October 29th 2012 @ 1:50pm
Ryan said | October 29th 2012 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
Yes you are right they are the descendants of slaves and yes I used the wrong wording here and I am man enough to acknowledge that.
However Tevita can clearly not see past his own bias.
If he sees Ma’a Nonu as Samoan then surely he must see Bolt as African and Carter as English or does his method only apply to those with Samoan Ancestry.
Hell many Kiwi Samoans in New Zealand are now 4th or 5th generation.
October 29th 2012 @ 4:31pm
rae1 said | October 29th 2012 @ 4:31pm | Report comment
Agree with you Ryan. When is a Kiwi a not a Kiwi – according to some, its when they have PI heritage. If one was to follow the same line of thought, the ABs would only have people with Maori heritage as the ‘others’ can trace their heritage back to other countries. Something needs to be done to tighten up eligibility and I do understand what Male is saying particularly when it comes to their schoolboy talent being picked off. Its happening here too, not just in rugby but also in league. However, don’t dump all this on big bad NZ.
When the Tongan team arrived in NZ for the RWC and many thousands of NZ Tongans (and others) turned out, I took a lot of satisfaction in those pictures being beamed out to the world. I actually thought “maybe the rest of the rugby world might actually get a glimpse of the shear numbers we have here and start getting off NZs case re. poaching.”
The fact that this group supported the Tongan team (likely due to shared ancestry, heritage, and cultural ties) is inconsequential. No different to many ‘Cape Crusaders’ actively supporting the ABs. They are still SA citizens just as many of the Tongans TT refers to are NZers. Its where they reside, its where their children are being born and raised, its where they pay their taxes, where most will vote and in doing so have input into how the country is run. Nationality and ethnicity do not automatically go hand and hand. If anything one could argue PI’s living in NZ and Australia have choices a regular Kiwi or Australian doesn’t have.
October 29th 2012 @ 4:38pm
moaman said | October 29th 2012 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
Heck–when the Tongans turned out with their banners and smiles I got a hell of a kick out of it( and I’m not Tongan
) and I reckon they kick-started what led to a lot of kiwis going out and flying the Silver Fern during the Cup.Some of them are still around!
October 29th 2012 @ 4:33pm
Pogo said | October 29th 2012 @ 4:33pm | Report comment
The problem is that you are treating these things as mutually exclusive.
Ma’a Nonu is both Samoan and a New Zealander. Just because he is a NZer doesn’t mean he isn’t a Samoan. Obviously he can only represent one of these things on a rugby field though.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:06am
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:06am | Report comment
Hi Rob,
I enjoyed your article. I think the IRB should look at tightening up the laws as it is becomming a bit of a farce and we do not want to go the way of the 13 man game where Luke Ricketson played for Ireland becuase his great, great, great 9th cousin once vacationed in Donegal…..for a day. Here is some food for thought;
1. Scrap Grandparental eligability. Make it mum and done only. Both parents must be from the nominated country ie if both your parents were Irish etc.
2. If you do migrate it is a 5 year residencey not 3, however dispensation to be considered if one of your parents was from the nominated country may bring that residency down to 3 years.
3. For smaller nations like Fiji, Tonga and Samoa the IRB should look at paying each of these players $10,000 each per test that they play. Thier home unions can’t afford such money but the IRB surley can. Whilst I think of the Willie Offahengaue’s, Illie Tabua’s and co that served Australian rugby so well it is a slap in the face of the islands. However If you are a Digby Ioane or Ben Tapaui who were born in Australia and New Zealand there should be no incumbancy put upon them to go back to represent; only if they chose.
4. The siutation may arrise where players have dual eligability. They must nominate at 18 who they wish to play for and that is binding. If a player comes from another code ie Brad Thorn then they must also nominate.
Your thoughts?
October 29th 2012 @ 9:11am
Brett McKay said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Uncle, just on your rule 2 there, if mum or dad if from the nominated country, then wouldn’t the player automatically qualify under your rule 1?
October 29th 2012 @ 9:16am
Pot Hale said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:16am | Report comment
Don’t think so, Brett. he said both parents in Rule 1. And just one parent in rule 2 for reduction in number of years.
I think you’d have a hard time making it mum and dad though in this modern age. And are we talking birth mother or foster mother. What if you’re adopted? What if the heritage of one of your parents is unclear?
October 29th 2012 @ 9:18am
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
Correct Pot. Does that make sence Brett?
October 29th 2012 @ 9:21am
Pot Hale said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:21am | Report comment
sorry Uncle. I was editing my comment there and added in a second comment beneath what I originally posted. Your response only applied to the first sentence.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:49am
Brett McKay said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:49am | Report comment
Sorry guys, misread it completely!
October 29th 2012 @ 9:28am
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:28am | Report comment
Ask the next door enighbour and/or the Milkman.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:59am
Pot Hale said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:59am | Report comment
It wasn’t me, guv.
October 29th 2012 @ 12:29pm
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
The youngster is walking around in an Old Belvo jumper, I am not convinced Pot
October 29th 2012 @ 9:18am
Rob9 said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
Hi UA, thanks for your comment. It appears great minds think alike, I’ve got 2 more articles up my sleeve on this, that last of which is focused on cleaning up the mess that is IE. A lot of what you’ve just listed out may be making an appearance.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:20am
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:20am | Report comment
Appologies if I have stolen a touch of your thunder.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:18am
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
such rule changes will only benefit tier one nations..
October 29th 2012 @ 12:33pm
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 12:33pm | Report comment
What Australia benefits by Samoan players getting paid well for play for Samoa instead of Australia? I fail to see the benefit. I am all for Samoans playing for Samoa and getting paid well to do it. I actually want to see and Asutralian play for Australia, not a bloke looking to pick up a few bob to send home.
October 29th 2012 @ 12:41pm
Terry Tavita said | October 29th 2012 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
well you don’t have to worry bout that..australia would rather gives a bob to washed up english first fives, saffas and argies..
October 29th 2012 @ 3:25pm
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 3:25pm | Report comment
What?
Are you suggesting the Wallaby selection policy is anti-samoan?
October 29th 2012 @ 3:43pm
Ryan said | October 29th 2012 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
Don’t ask questions that you clearly will not get an answer to UA.
He is clearly incapable of having a reasoned discussion without ignoring questions posed and continually playing the race card.
October 29th 2012 @ 4:39pm
rae1 said | October 29th 2012 @ 4:39pm | Report comment
Like it UA. I particularly like “They must nominate at 18 who they wish to play for and that is binding.”
October 29th 2012 @ 9:15am
Brett McKay said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:15am | Report comment
Rob, I agree with your points here (aside from the ‘storm’ label perhaps), but the point on Fiji’s high numbers of unavailabilty isn’t to do with eligibility, but the old standard club v country arguement. And given this isn’t new, perhaps the IRB need to look at expanding their Test windows to ensure very few Tests are played outside the designated period, and therefore, players will not have to choose bewteen club or country. I do like the suggestion above of the IRB funding the PIs match fees though, that would also help..
October 29th 2012 @ 9:45am
Justin2 said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:45am | Report comment
I tend to agree Brett and I believe this all comes back to a global season.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:46am
Rob9 said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:46am | Report comment
Hi Brett, the storm reference was made in reference to the number of different issues that involved international eligibility in some way. Personally I can’t remember a week like it in that regard. But I agree, with the possible exception of Male’s outburst (which has received next to no media coverage in Australian media, especially compared to Hansen’s comments) there hasn’t been anything that explosive. So apologies to yourself and others who may taken the ‘storm’ reference another way then what it was meant.
In regards to the Fiji issue, my understanding is that young Fijian talent is being brought over to French (and English) club academies in their teens. Once in the system they are actually changing their allegiances to France and knocking back Fiji caps. So it isn’t so much a ‘club vs country’ issue because they may well being missing games for their clubs in November and the 6 Nations window in the future should they get selected for Les Bleus. For the time being they’ll just be playing for their clubs in November in the hope that they’ll have the opportunity to represent France down the track.
October 29th 2012 @ 10:37am
Brett McKay said | October 29th 2012 @ 10:37am | Report comment
No need for the apology Rob, yours wouldn’t even be the first headline this week to push an envelope just a tad!
I guess what I mean though, is that this sort of thing comes up every year in some shape or form. The Home Nations have been qualifying players on residency grounds for a good while now, and the grandparent rule is not exactly new either.
It’s a professional world now; players will follow the opportunities wherever they may arise. Mike Harris probably isn’t even the first NZ-born player to annoy the All Blacks, and I think Hanson’s jibe had as much to do with deflecting the focus away from his side’s error rate than any genuine concern about international eligibility.
The Fiji issue as you’ve highlighted it obviously a complex beast, and one that probably won’t be resolved without some genuinely open-minded thinking from the IRB. Currently, the situation’s not helped by the passport and visa assistance those from the PIs can get if heading to Europe, where it’s quite easy to gain entry.
Ultimately, this will keep boiling down to money: who’s got it, and who can afford to pay versus who doesn’t have it, and can’t afford not to live..
October 29th 2012 @ 9:15am
Jerry said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:15am | Report comment
In respect of NZ, I think Male’s comments are off the mark. Even if you subtract Vidiri, Sivivatu and the Fijians that have represented NZA & the 7′s team (and I think there are certainly some cases where Fiji can feel aggrieved) surely Fiji has a net benefit from those schoolboy players learning their rugby in the NZ system? Fijian players in NZ, providing they’ve not been capped by NZ in some form, are still going to be eligible to play for Fiji and if the schoolboy recruitment is as widespread as he makes out, that’s a fair bit of talent developed here that he can benefit from.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:27am
Uncle Argyle said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:27am | Report comment
I guess it depends Jerry if those young Fijians aspire to be like a Sivivatu or a Samo and see their path playing for New Zealand or Australia and not Fiji. I think it wrong they should not aspire to play for their country over ours.