- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
On the weekend All Blacks coach Steve Hansen declared that in order to protect New Zealand rugby development he should be able to select Australian-based players.
Kiwi scribe, Liam Napier, wrote of Hansen’s desire in the Fairfax Press on Sunday, outlining how “30 players spread across Australia’s five Super Rugby teams were either born [in New Zealand], or are eligible for the All Blacks.”
“That equates to 20 per cent of the best 150 officially listed Australian-based players. Ten of those have also featured, or been selected for, the Wallabies,” Napier wrote.
Debate will rage about the perhaps tenuous inclusion of some of the 30 players listed, and particularly those born in New Zealand but raised in Australian from a young age. Brumbies winger, Henry Speight, was another listed, yet his All Blacks eligibility would be for the same reason he’ll become Wallabies eligible later this year – residency.
Nevertheless, the likes of Rebels pair Jason Woodward and Scott Fuglistaller, and rookie Brumbies lock Jack Whetton (son of All Blacks legend, Gary, no less), make the topic a discussion worth having.
Particularly in the case of Woodward, whose form for the Rebels this year has been excellent. Even with Highlanders skipper Ben Smith ahead of him, the up-and-down season of Crusader Israel Dagg would theoretically bring someone like Woodward into consideration.
Hansen’s point is that even if he wanted to consider Woodward, current New Zealand Rugby Union policy doesn’t allow it.
Napier wrote, “Close proximity and relaxed immigration laws allow frequent movement between the trans-Tasman neighbours,” and Hansen himself said, “I’m not advocating we discuss picking players from anywhere else other than Australia, which is in the same time zone and competition.”
And this is where I wonder if my long-held belief is about to come true. Will the SANZAR borders will be opened, allowing players to play Super Rugby wherever they like while retaining their national eligibility?
Further to that, the addition of the 18th Super Rugby team from 2016 is almost certainly the justification for opening the borders.
It might even be a requirement.
The 18th team, especially if it is to be based in a non-traditional rugby region like Singapore or Hong Kong, simply won’t be capable of being competitive from Round 1 without an ability to recruit players from offshore. Likewise, players just won’t go unless they know they can still be considered for national duty.
If the SANZAR partners truly do want to grow the game, and not just their revenue, then they will recognise that this will have to be the case.
Having the likes of Colin Slade, or Michael Hooper, or Patrick Lambie turning out for the Hong Kong Gorillas or the Singapore Swamp Frogs can only help attract crowds and build interest.
More locally, an opening of the rugby gates either side of the ditch could actually be of benefit to both countries.
Young Kiwis might be tempted to have a season in the Australian NRC straight out of high school, for example, while a young Australian prop might decide a season in the ITM Cup could be useful for his game.
At Super Rugby level, if Conrad Smith wanted to have a season in Melbourne playing for the Rebels, say, instead of heading to Japan or Europe, then he’d remain in close touch with All Blacks coaches.
He would even be available for All Blacks promotional work, while an Australian club pays his wages for six months.
Dan Carter playing for the Waratahs could keep him in Super Rugby, while also providing genuine star power in the toughest winter football market in the world. Alby Mathewson could stay in Perth, without the nagging feeling he’s giving something up.
New Zealand sides might be able to open up new avenues of sponsorship, too. If an Australian company wanting to expand into Auckland or Wellington wanted to pay for Quade Cooper to play for the Blues or Hurricanes in return for ground signage and cash, why not explore it?
Sister-club arrangements, or even short-term loan deals might even eventuate. The Blues and Brumbies, for example, might have been able to come to an arrangement during the Blues’ lock shortage there a month back, to send Whetton home for a stint.
ITM Cup and NRC players would suddenly have double the number of Super Rugby sides to impress.
One concern – in the immediate term, anyway – would obviously be that making it easier for young New Zealanders to leave home would be detrimental to the local game, but it could also be managed reasonably easily with quotas.
Additionally, this shouldn’t been seen as a relaxation of the overseas eligibility rules in either country. Such a move doesn’t undermine Super Rugby, nor the domestic comps underneath, and the players remain well within arm’s reach of national coaches and selectors.
Politically, in the rugby sense, such a move might even bring the two countries closer together. If the broadcast reaction to the proposed Super Rugby expansion plans remains lukewarm, then it could become the catalyst to come together for a trans-Tasman competition, even if it leads into Champions League-style finals with South African sides.
It’s surely worth looking at. If the visa and immigration requirements are easy enough for an Australian plumber or miner to work in New Zealand for a few months, then why shouldn’t it be the same for rugby players, coaches, referees and administrators?
Hansen might not genuinely want to pick any Australian-based players right at this moment, but that’s not to say he won’t want to sometime soon. So why not try to plan ahead by thinking outside the square, while at the same time opening up all kinds of new possibilities for the good of the game in both countries?