The performances of the Pacific Nations during the 2011 Rugby World Cup were mixed. Tonga would have considered their campaign a success, Samoa should be satisfied with their performance but Fiji were embarrassing.
The important thing now for Pacific Rugby is that they not lose the momentum that the Rugby World Cup has given them. (Or in Fiji’s case they must take a hard look at themselves and try and learn from their disastrous campaign.)
Details of the turmoil within Manu Samoa during the Rugby World Cup come as no surprise to those who know how things are in Pacific rugby. For all the accusations about how the IRB doesn’t want Pacific rugby to progress I believe the biggest thing holding back Pacific rugby is, well, Pacific rugby.
The IRB has been an easy target for people to point the finger at but the lack of professionalism in Pacific rugby has done more to harm them than any ref’s decision.
The Fijians have the military running their Rugby Union now with the Chairman of the Fiji Rugby Union Colonel Mosese Tikoitoga suggesting that future Fijian sides should be “made up of 70 per cent local players” as a “matter of policy.”
That’s basically what happened when Fiji played Wales which was Fiji’s most embarrassing World Cup match ever.
The Tongans had their share of off field issues with the Nili Latu selection fiasco, coupled with the drama of their Chairman Bob Tuckey resigning only weeks before the World Cup.
As for Manu Samoa, the players vs management saga has really shown how far their administration has to go in order for them to progress further in international rugby. The report given to the SRU Chairman by the Manu Samoan captain Mahonri Schwalger is more explosive than anything that Eliota Fuimaono-Sapolu ever tweeted.
So what is the answer? Is there even a solution to these issues?
I believe that there is but in order for Pacific rugby to move forward we’ve got to see things through the point of view of the players and management and try to figure out where the disconnect is.
This is a very general overview and is not meant to blanket every player or rugby administrator.
– Most players who can’t play for a Tier 1 nation want to represent their country but the realities of professional sport make it financially very difficult to do so. Unlike the Tier 1 nations the professional players based in the Northern and Southern Hemisphere’s take a paycut (most of the time) to play for their country where sometimes they have to pay their own way.
– Most of the older generation players of Pacific Rugby find it hard to understand how the present generation don’t cherish the jersey like they did back in their time. Back then they had to sacrifice things to play for their country and most of the time they only got a pat on the back. Of course these are vastly different times from then but the generational misunderstanding remains.
– With the Islands being small communities, most rugby administration jobs are not given based on merit but on relationships and seniority (jobs for the boys sort of thing)
– Overseas based players come from highly professionally run teams and when they come back home that same professionalism isn’t shown in their Test team.
– Sometimes when players come back from overseas to play for their countries that time is often treated as a holiday and the same professionalism that they had overseas is not shown at home.
– It is often difficult for management to run a tight ship because the players don’t necessarily view their time playing for their countries as vital to their rugby careers. That means that its alot easier for them to say no to playing or just leave the camp.
– Politics and rugby are very closely interwoven in the islands with politicians holding various rugby posts which leads to people having hidden agendas. (Well more than the usual rugby politics anyway). A classic example is the SRU where the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman took vastly different public views on the Eliota Fuimaono-Sapolu tweeting saga. The SRU Chairman is Tuilaepa Lupesoliai Sailele Malielegaoi who is also the Samoan PM. The Vice Chairman is Lefau Harry Schuster who is the Tautua Party MP for Vaimauga West. Lefau is a senior opposition MP to the government. So we have the SRU’s top two positions held by opposing politicians.
With all that in mind a very important cultural issue that needs to be understood is that in the islands its drummed into you at birth to be respectful of the elders no matter what. Basically even if you disagree you don’t make a fuss, just grin and bear it.
This can present problems to players who have been bought up in New Zealand and Australia as well as players who have become used to the egalitarian way of doing things during their time abroad.
My take on a way forward is that the management of the Unions need to change and become fully professional. By professional I mean their attitude more than their pay. Understandably that would be very difficult to initiate but its something that is within their circle of influence and it would be alot easier than trying to change the thinking of the IRB on issues such as the eligibility rules.
In terms of appreciation from both sides of rugby management and the players, the management believe that they are doing the players a favour by organising the players for their matches or tours. The players believe that they are doing the management a favour by showing up and busting their gut on the field.
Now if they both treat each other like they are the ones doing the favour you get a meltdown because both sides will think the other side is acting ungratefully. Then you get players breaking the team rules by sneaking out for instance or the management not really caring about the players.
If both sides treat each other like they were the ones receiving the favour and all parties have a shared vision then you get something so much different. You get both management and players putting the team above themselves and basically doing it for each other.
In order for that to happen someone in each of the Pacific Unions will need to take a real leadership role in this.
Its a very idealistic ambition I know but its something that I reckon will help Pacific rugby get in shape for a serious shot at the Tier 1 nations.
Nick
Guest
I don't understand why people keep suggesting NZ poaches pacific players. Take a walk around Auckland, it's a pacific city. In 2006 265974 people pacific islanders lived in NZ, 60% of whom were born here. Virtually an equal number of Samoans live in NZ as in Samoa. I don't see the UK countries complaining that NZ/OZ poached their players, because most of them descend from there.
Working Class Rugger
Guest
How's the game going in Oregon?
kovana
Guest
At the moment Fiji has around 36030 registered players.. They used to have around 60K quite a while ago.
Damien
Roar Guru
Hi Matt. Thanks for your comment. Not sure what you meant by 'other side' and 'Island Way' Warburton's tackle was bad IMO and it would have been no different if Faletau had done it. Wales understanderbly cried foul but no one round thought twice about what heritage the tackler had. No one in rugby has a problem with physical play as long as its legal. Cheap shots have no part in rugby. If people have a problem with legal physicality then maybe rugby is not for them. Just an observation of mine in regards to Polynesians in the US. I'm 100% Polynesian and was raised in the islands. I have family in San Jose, Sacremento and Seattle that I see every few years or so (as recently as last year). For some reason I dont think that they are the same as Poly's from the Islands. Maybe it's the environment but I find my US cousins so much different from us. There's no problem or anything like that. Or maybe it's just our family LOL. I agree on your goal for Island rugby being to get more games against Tier 1 nations but the management also need to make sure they don't waste the opportunity. Stories of the Samoan team canceling training so they can attend functions that the playets had no idea about is very amateur. No professional team can function properly with that sort of management. Here's hoping that Pacific Rugby can reach the heights that they are capable of..
Matt Manley
Guest
I coach high school rugby in Portland, Oregon, USA. Most of my team is made up of Tongan boys, our head coach is Samoan. I have seen life from the other side. There is a lot of angst toward Polynesian players. The physical game they play usually gets labelled as unnecessary at best, and barbaric at worst. When Sam Warburton got a red card, the Welsh cried foul. If that had been a Polynesian player, it would have been seen as a "justified" ruling. I don't expect those not associated with Island Rugby or Polynesian players to understand how things work completely. Winning within the Island way is possible. With players like Kahn Fotuali'i choosing Samoa over New Zealand, it shows progress. If the talent can choose their Island of origin over a black or yellow jersey it can mean the on field product has greater parity. The Key is leadership from team and coaching staff through administration. All have to be focused on the same goal. Which at this point should be more Tests against Tier 1's.
Damien
Roar Guru
Thanks Dopey I reckon sensitive topics like this should be written about in as balanced way as possible so that sensible solutions and discussions can take place which will help the issue rather than inflame the situation. The highly charged emotional stuff is OK if you're hyping a game but if you start with the inflammatory statements then people just end up arguing over things that don't really have much to do with the issue or it's solution..
Johnno
Guest
No matt i jumped the gun and simply assumed FIFA has control of a global calendar, tha tis the image that is portrayed but reaility could not be more different. I thick why FIFA in my opinion give off the vibe that they have a global clanger Matt is they have firm quite storng compulsory FIFA dates and clubs get punished if they don't stand down players often for national duty. Also soccer is easier to recover from physically ,for the players rugby need longer rest between seasons, and matches, so now in modern soccer often pre seasons almost do not exist, for club,player , or country. Argentina and russia are interesting leagues they basically seem to go non stop. I think though rugby in summer can work fine in Europe play matches at night anyway , or even at 4pm or 5pm in eorupe weather is fine, and i have said this before super 15 pre season matches and super 15 comp start sin Southern hemphispehere in summer anyway and i have no objection with rugby in australia running from September to march. We play footy finals in septmeber, play super 15 in summer now anyway, have played 4 nation rugby league and rugby league world cup, A-league soccer is summer, and no players as matches are at night never hear complaints of heat stroke being an issue, and not every night in Australia.NZ/South Africa is hot and humid anyway. ANd cricket has to now compete with soccer , so rugby can be added to the list to as well as basketball
Matt
Guest
The FIFA leagues aren't anywhere near as aligned as you think Johnno. I just did a quick search on the net and found the following: England: Aug -> May Germany: Aug -> May Italy: Aug -> May Russian: Previously a summer season, but is now changing to match most other UEFA nations. They have an 18month long season whihc will see them become Aug -> May. Japan: Mar -> Dec USA: Mar -> Oct Australia: OCT -> Mar South Africa: AUG -> May China: Mar -> Dec Argentina: Aug -> May Brazil: May -> Dec So it's really all over the place, as it is in Rugby. Europe tends to be on the same page, but everywhere else is random. In fact, in South America you have Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela playing over summer (AUG->MAY) while Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Equador, Paraguay and Peru play over winter May-> Dec. This is possibly due to the more southern countries wanting warmer weather, where the more northern ones get warth during winter anyway? But the point is that FIFA definitely has not got anything close to resembling a global calendar.
Johnno
Guest
With what your saying matt is good ideas i like it a lot, but to say there is to much resistance is a 50/50 call in my opinion, for what it is worth. SImply look at soccer, FIFA have basically established the leagues al in europe and in Asia falling along the same time table why can't rugby union in NH switch, or even i have suggested we in SH switch to spring summer comp. We play footy finals (AFL,NRL) in september spring, host 4 nations and rugby league world cup in spring here, play the super 15 in summer in Australia pre season matches january and fEBUARY SUPER 15 COMP STARTS IN SUMMER. Cricket is falling in popularity, rugby in summer would not have to compete with AFL or NRL, it would basically be rugby and the the a-league. ANd with tv rights in rugby goring in euro with new markets russia spain, portugal, belguim,germany,sweden, rugby is on the up but especially euro rugby, plus throw in tv rights in USA where USA rugby is booming, rugby is going to soon match soccer in next 10 years for some of the money contracts on offer i think. Come say 2023 world cup which might be in russia rugby is going to be massive plus throw in the 7evens olympics tv deals and exposure to.
Matt
Guest
Personally I don't think rugby will ever have a global rugby calendar Johnno, as nice as it would be. There are simply too many parties pulling in different directions now and the game has become too big. One strength of the limited spread of Rugby League is that they are able to respond very rapidly to trends right across the sport. But there would SO much resistance to moving NH rugby to summer than it just would never happen. So instead I've looked at what can be done within the current calendar windows and there is no reason to have the Continental Cups on at the same time of the year. Having them in the traditional domestic windows in the North and South actually has a few benefits: 1) They don't compete for coverage with each other. They're also both perfectly positioned to get great coverage amongst local sporting codes (giving Rugby a major tournament to go head to head with the NRL, AFL etc) 2) Islanders in the NH clubs will be available during the European Cup time slot, meaning they can cover for those local players unavailable on National duty. Then, when the Continental/Union Cup is on in September/October the Euro stars are back and the NH clubs are more likely to be able to cope without their non-european stars. The biggest benefit to having these two competitions would be the possibility for massive TV money and bigger crowds for the minnow nations then they'd ever otherwise get. Ideally you'd want the competition to generate far more money than the corresponding 6 Nations/4 Nations matches they are replacing. Each competition would provide 28 matches for television. There would be a lot more matches to view on TV and far greater markets to sell the competitions too. The Russian, Spanish and Portuguese markets could be massive for rugby and the Euro matches would sell far better there if the national teams were present in the competition. Likewise the Japanese and American markets could be huge for SANZAR, but you can't build a brand awareness without somehow getting your foot in the door so people can watch your team play.
kiwidave
Guest
You've gotta face the fact that an increasing proportion of people in NZ and parts of australia are pacific islanders or of pacific island descent, whether they play rugby or not. On top this they generally have higher rugby participation rates than non-pi and the population is generally younger (i.e. comparativewly more people in the age range from which pro rugby players are selected) so it's not necessarily a symptom of random poaching if teams are full of Pacific people.
kiwidave
Guest
People can be both (or more) is the simple answer. Just as people can hold more than one citizenship or passport.
kiwidave
Guest
Bang on, as long as there remains a clash between international and club duties players will be pressured not to play. Obviously that might happen even with an international window but not so much. I think possibly the best thing that could be done for all teams outside the top tier would be to give visiting teams a share of the profits (after expenses). 20% of a game at Twickenham is worth more than 100% of a game in Apia $ wise.
Johnno
Guest
Greta article Damien i read it, it is amazing to think just what Samoa could of done with better iRB scheduling and a competent management team the standard of the all blacks just how good they would of been this world cup. And we complain about robbie deans and the shambles at times of the ARU, nothing compered to the nonsense the samoa players have to deal with from there rugby board and management. They actually make macro livermont an dipper de villeirs come across as competent,.
Damien
Roar Guru
Hope you not expecting any KFC though. KFC shut up shop coz the military gov. wanted the 11 secret herbs and spices recipe. This was for 'quarantine' reasons aparently. The Coke plant must be feeling alittle nervous bout now. LOL..
Pillock
Roar Rookie
I have not got a problem with the scholarships and they are great for individuals and families to improve there quality of life. The point is that they are not doing PI rugby any good in terms of development. Of course they are not designed for that purpose so why should we care?
Pillock
Roar Rookie
I'm moving to Fiji after those posts.
Johnno
Guest
I think in NZ there is a pacific islands rule that Fijians, Samoans, and tognans can play in super 15 teasm in NZ unrestricted. SImply look at Tusi pusi and , Samoa captian now playing at the chiefs. The thing is the euro wages ar higher so they go over there and play more often. But many have had super 15 experience eg Khan Fautuli , anthony periness just to name a few but euro wages are higher than super 15, so it is a no brainier. But NZ does do an awful lot for developing NZ samoans , and samoans who what to go an delay in NZ eg Jerry collins as one example of many. And many samoans,tongans,fijian, developed in NZ junior system as they were born there or moved there when they young now are turning out for Samoa, and no financial compensation given to the NZRU. So it works both ways. I still believe though in the cooling off systemf or the pacific island nations that almost got approved by the IRB but wales and scotland held back, england and nz favoured it. Where a player can represent the island nations 12 months or 3 years after there last team. SO eg jerry collins could now play for Samoa if picked.
Dopey
Guest
Damien, Congratulations on writing a balanced article on the perils and pitfalls of Rugby in the Pacific. How refereshing to read an informed piece that looks at some of the genuine issues facing Rugby in the Pacific - rather than the usual barbs that get slung at the IRB, the ARU and the NZRU. Personally I think the IRB are doing an admirable job in helping the Pacific Island Unions grow - as many have pointed out, the iRB seems to be investing plenty of money in the Pacific - but as you point out, there is always room for improvement and some of the areas that you (and many of the people posting subsequently) have suggested, should be looked at. Also, it is easy to throw mud at the ARU and NZRU for 'poaching' players - as if stopping this is the panacea for Pacific Rugby. As many have pointed out - many of the players that leave the Pacific Islands to play rugby in Oz and NZ do so on school scholarships. And what is wrong with that - if rugby provides a pathway to a better education for these guys then surely, in the broader scheme of things, that has to be a good thing? Certainly it is beyond the control of the Unions (ARU, NZRU and the Pacific Island Unions). You, and many of your readers, have hit the nail on the head. Rugby in the Pacific is a microcosm of the countries (and region) in which they exist. As the National sport, the problems that are around in Pacific Island Rugby are problems that exist in business and politics in the countries - what makes anyone think that rugby, a sport, can buck the trend of a nation? Fanciful thinking. Of course more can be done by the IRB and the bigger Unions to assist. Relaxing eligibility criteria is one - so that more Pacific Island players can play in Super Rugby, and encouraging more tests between Tier 1 countries and the Pacific Islands (although I understand moves are afoot to do this and Scotland will be touring the Pacific next year). But at the end of the day, the Pacific Island Unions need to help themselves first. I think there is some sympathy for the plight of the Pacific Island players but really- the way they have gone about things recently is doing them no favours. As if SANZAR would invite the tweeting circus of Samoa into the Tri Nations at the moment - it's not worth the drama.
Johnno
Guest
Matt and this brings in my point before , about having a global rugby calendar. All the major leagues running on the same timetable unless weather issues eg (russia,sweden node day finalnd), they play soccer at different times to EPL and seria A but basically play all year round to compete in champions league. Rugby needs ot move towards the soccer model of meaningful comps, with 1 being a contentment cup and other world cup. I would like eventually in rugby that no SH tittle needs to exist. In other words Argentina and south africa can compete in Africa and south america alone, and not need asia pacific teams, Aust/NZ/Japan/Samoa. Africana nd south american rugby is developing very well, at youtht level, and brazil uruguay,chile, and kenya and namibia and ghana, and ovary coast and botswana are improving. And pacific island needs to have more money spent on facilities and coaching, one of the reasons why PNG rugby league is so average so much talent but no infrastructure. Rugby union is now investing in PNG and they are doing well at sevens rugby now PNG Matt. And also global rugby calendar matt and others these type of proposed competition models could happen.