Crusader winger Maitland joins Glasgow

By AAP,

Tagged:
 , ,

27 Have your say

    Related coverage

    Crusaders winger Sean Maitland has farewelled a promising New Zealand rugby career to sign with Scottish club Glasgow Warriors.

    The 24-year-old former New Zealand age group standout and 2010 New Zealand Maori representative has signed a contract, subject to a medical and visa clearance, starting next month to keep him at the club until 2015.

    The move could have international implications, with Maitland qualified to represent Scotland through his Glasgow-born paternal grandparents and he has never represented the All Blacks.

    He came closest to national honours last year following a bright attacking Super Rugby season with the Crusaders. His highlights were a memorable two-try performance against the Sharks in their match at Twickenham and a competition record-equalling haul of four against the Brumbies.

    Maitland has scored 24 tries in 54 Super Rugby games since his 2008 debut but this year’s campaign was ruined by injury and subsequent mixed form.

    Glasgow coach Gregor Townsend said securing Maitland’s signature was a coup for the club.

    “The back three is an area of the team where we already have a number of excellent options, and Sean will provide a further layer of quality as we enter another busy phase of the season,” Townsend told the club’s website.

    Tokoroa-born Maitland is a cousin of Australian international Quade Cooper.

    Maitland is the second high-profile addition to the Warriors ranks from Super Rugby in as many months following the signing South African Josh Strauss, the former Lions captain and No.8.

    © AAP 2018
    Getting hassled by a parent or partner about spending too much time playing video games? Now, you can tell them the story of how some ordinary gamers scored $225k for just seven weeks of work.

    Have Your Say



    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (27)

    • October 24th 2012 @ 8:46pm
      Johnno said | October 24th 2012 @ 8:46pm | ! Report

      And I do support the IRB policy of 1 country for life you pick you stick. Rugby league eligibility has turned into a circus and always has been. I think rugby league needs a 1 country for life right across the board, and start playing more tests to help the likes of Fiji,Samoa,Tonga develop. Then they would get players sticking with them for life, and players who might not become regular aussy or kiwi reps.

      Pacific island rugby has been helped not harmed by the 1 country for life rule now in place. For years I thought with cases like Sosene Anesi, who only played 1 AB test Samoa lose a medium standard player for life yes. But statistically for every 1 Sosene Anesi, they get 3 players from NZ with Samoan heritage eg A Paul Williams, Khan Fhoutali, Anthony Perenise. NZ developed all 3players, put them through the super rugby system only to lose them to Samoa for life, and club rugby in UK. NZ as someone pointed out yesterday has a staggering amount of players overseas playing for other countries. And can not go on forever losing depth it harms super rugby teams especially , and steve Hansen is right other countries need to develop talant more .

      • October 24th 2012 @ 10:21pm
        atlas said | October 24th 2012 @ 10:21pm | ! Report

        Johnno – and it goes both ways.
        Example – Scott Waldrom never played a test for NZ, but a match All Blacks played v Munster.
        Those 80 minutes (at least he got a full game!) on the field ruled him out of taking the England route his brother Thomas did (if he’d wanted to/selected etc)
        There are many other players in recent years who have given their best to be an AB, only got a couple of tests, who would have had grand-parent eligibility in other countries.
        While we have these eligibility laws, have to live with them.
        Wiki as my source as i wanted to check on Otago’s Brendan Laney – it says he was in Scotland two days, never played a match there, when he was named in the Scotland squad. Must be a record of sorts.

        • October 25th 2012 @ 12:22am
          Johnno said | October 25th 2012 @ 12:22am | ! Report

          atlas exactly it goes both ways, other nations cry at NZ for so called poaching , but they do it too just as bad as shown by you example. And I like the outage example Brendan Lany so funny. Make it only parents birth , anything further like parentsparent sis a joke.

    • October 24th 2012 @ 10:12pm
      Matt said | October 24th 2012 @ 10:12pm | ! Report

      I agree Johnno. Eligibility for Rugby should be linked to a persons official nationality, which generally has a 5 year residency period.
      A person should have to hold a passport for a certain country before they are eligible to play for that countries national side.

      That means you can’t just have a grand parent, which only gives you a 5 year Visa for the UK, or parent to get you access. You must have a passport and therefore legally be of that nation.

      It is time for the IRB to treat this seriously and make some changes to protect the integrity of test rugby.
      It is quite clear that there are now a number of National Unions who are using the loose IRB eligibility system to negate the need for investment in developing systems to produce local talent. Scotland is one, Australia is another. South Africa and New Zealand have also done it and England, Ireland, Wales and France have also benefitted from the naive 3 year residency or grandparent rule.

      And the rules should be the same for all tiers, regardless of the initial impact on the lower tier countries. We need some consistency and credibilty here. Otherwise we’re just ignoring the fact that nations will pay foreigners now rather than investing in local youngsters for the future.

      The SRU have a full-time (ex Kilted Kiwi, the irony) searching the globe for ‘development’ prospects who can play for Scotland. Quite clearly Scotland was a second choice for Maitland and he has waited for a call up to the All Blacks until he can no longer wait. And then he has decided that he is actually Scottish, much in the same way as Mike Harries has decided he is now Australian.

      But you can’t tell me these guys, just as Hape, Waldrom and Flutey for England actually feel ‘English’?!
      The truth is that they want to play test rugby, for the money and the glory, and don’t care which colour jersey they wear to do so. That to me goes against what the point of international Rugby is about and what makes it attractive and so passion filled compared to Club rugby.

      What next, the French team resembling Toulon with a stack of guy born and raised in Argentina, Georgia, Fiji, Samoa and South Africa? Maybe Australia paying for deliberate spaces in their Super Rugby rosters for non-Australian players of promise to be paid to change nationality…oh wait, that’s already happening.

      IRB, fix it.

      • Roar Guru

        October 25th 2012 @ 1:00am
        Corne Van Vuuren said | October 25th 2012 @ 1:00am | ! Report

        Matt, South Africa doesn’t take players from developed countries, Players from Zimbabwe and Nambia come to SA as teenagers hoping to get professional contracts as there are no such options in their home nations.

        Beast MTwarira is the only guy I can think of that played school rugby in Zimbabwe before coming to SA, others come here as youngsters and learn their trade in SA.

        • October 25th 2012 @ 2:48am
          Matt said | October 25th 2012 @ 2:48am | ! Report

          I know that South Africa is NOWHERE near as guilty of enticing players for professional contracts, but they’re also not entirely innocent either biltong.

          And I wasn’t really trying to get into a finger pointing exercise either, more to just highlight the fact that nearly all countries are guilty and therefore the rules need amendment, because people just can’t help themselves when it comes to self-betterment. In the end humans are selfish and do what’s best for them (including Steve Hansen, Mike Harries, John O’Neill and me). I just think the rules should be changed to protect the ideals of test match rugby from self interest and to ensure it doesn’t become just about money.

          As an aside (I know I said I didn’t want to get into finger pointing…) apart from Tendai “Beast” Mtawarira there has also been Tonderai Chavhanga, Brian Mujati and Adrian Garvey to represent South Africa during the professional era, dispite being native Zimbabweans. I also believe that you could guarantee that if a player like Hadleigh Parkes, who I coincedentally when to school with in NZ, starts showing form playing for the Southern Kings over the next few seasons then SARU will consider offering him a Bok jumper. And based on cases like Maitland/Harris and Strauss with Scotland he’d probably accept the pay rise and chance to play test footy. And of course he’d say he’s proud to wear the green and gold, but really he’d prefer to be wearing black and it’d be a shame for all those true South African men who wore that jersey before and would have given anything to do so.

          So the point I’m trying to make is that all countries are now offering guys pro contracts at a club/provincial level, which is fine as that’s part and parcel of domestic pro sport. But to then start capping players with such thin ties to an adopted country to me suggests the rules for test qualification need amendment.

          If you’re good enough to play for your country that’s fine, but to then jump ship to play for another country suggests it is a decision based more on money than a burning desire to represent a nation. Mike Harries is a Kiwi playing for the Wallabies, Sean Maitland will be a Kiwi playing for Scotland. But if they had the choice to play for the All Blacks before either of these teams they would take it and to me that means the current rules are wrong, because we are seeing Test rugby be treated like Club rugby.

          • Roar Guru

            October 25th 2012 @ 3:11am
            Corne Van Vuuren said | October 25th 2012 @ 3:11am | ! Report

            Matt, it is true that no country is innocent, however the fact is the European based teams have deliberate “project contracts” to entice players to join their clubs.

            I believe it is 3 Non Irish, or Welsh etc. qualified projects per team.

            In SA we don’t contract players as such, they move to SA most whilst still at school, if they do ever qualify for SA then it is merely coincidence.

            Beast was the first player who came to SA and had to first gain an SA passport before reprsenting us.

            In other words he was the first one that was an issue.

            The others were here long enough not to have that issue.

      • October 26th 2012 @ 10:35am
        Bakkies said | October 26th 2012 @ 10:35am | ! Report


        A person should have to hold a passport for a certain country before they are eligible to play for that countries national side.

        That means you can’t just have a grand parent, which only gives you a 5 year Visa for the UK, or parent to get you access. You must have a passport and therefore legally be of that nation.”

        A British born grandparent entitles him to a passport so he probably already has one.

        • October 26th 2012 @ 6:19pm
          Matt said | October 26th 2012 @ 6:19pm | ! Report

          Bakkies, no a British grandparent does not entitle him to a passport. It entitles him to a 5 year Visa, which is a stamp that goes in his NZ passport and allows him to work in the UK for 5 years (provided he can prove a legitimate line of birth/marriage from said grandparent through to himself).

          I should know, because that’s exactly what I’m currently using to work here in England. And if I stick around for 5 years then I’ll be eligible to apply for British Citizenship, making me ‘British’ and entitling me to a passport. Until then I’m a Kiwi who can work here for slightly longer than the normal 2 year Visa.

          It is my opinion that until a person has a passport for a country then they shouldn’t be able to represent that country. A work Visa entitles you to work, should a private company (read rugby club) be willing to hire you. But being paid to represent a nation is not the same and therefore the IRB rules should stipulate as such.

          I don’t blame the players for taking the extra money/glory on offer. I don’t blame the countries selecting them, as they want to win. Simply, the system is wrong and erodes the idea of test match rugby pittng one nation against another. If a player wants to represent that nation then they should have to put the effort in to obtain citezenship of that country or serve a 5 year waiting period. That means you have to be serious about wanting to play for that country, not bailing because you’re not good enough and then pretending you’re a proud Scotsman a couple of months later.

    • October 25th 2012 @ 12:19am
      Johnno said | October 25th 2012 @ 12:19am | ! Report

      matt I agree 100% with your opinions and point.

      The IRB is better in the credibility stakes than say cricket or rugby league. Cricket example England VS Irleand.

      Ed Joyce one minute he is playing for England next minute he is playing for Irleand. Eoin Morgan 1 minute he is playing for Irleand next minute he is playing for England. Rugby league needs to get tough too.

      And reality is by making it tougher eg parents born only not there parents, and 5 years is it all evens out anyway, and it helps the smaller nations more not harms it. As what is happening right now is players are going to Europe 18, or 19, 22 ready to represent say a England or France, or wales,Italy, Scotland, it is a joke. 5 years is more clear and would motivate the players to play test footy earlier as they would get impatient and a desire to play in a world cup.

      But even if they don’t scrap the 3 year rule to make it 5, I think if rugby ever goes back to the 2 coutnry policy not 1 you pick you stick for life it will be doomed much the same way cricket and rugby league are.

      And someone like Hape, Mike Harris or Sean Maitland, or The Waldrom brothers, are all just as bad as James Tamou.
      Oh and I should also mention Henry Paul and Lesley Vainokolo playing for England, what a farce and circus and joke that is.

    • October 25th 2012 @ 12:23am
      Johnno said | October 25th 2012 @ 12:23am | ! Report

      matt I agree 100% with your opinions and point.

      The IRB is better in the credibility stakes than say cricket or rugby league. Cricket example England VS Irleand.

      Ed Joyce one minute he is playing for England next minute he is playing for Irleand. And Morgan too. 1 minute he is playing for Irleand next minute he is playing for England. Rugby league needs to get tough too.

      And reality is by making it tougher eg parents born only not there parents, and 5 years is it all evens out anyway, and it helps the smaller nations more not harms it. As what is happening right now is players are going to Europe 18, or 19, 22 ready to represent say a England or France, or wales,Italy, Scotland, it is a joke. 5 years is more clear and would motivate the players to play test footy earlier as they would get impatient and a desire to play in a world cup.

      But even if they don’t scrap the 3 year rule to make it 5, I think if rugby ever goes back to the 2 coutnry policy not 1 you pick you stick for life it will be doomed much the same way cricket and rugby league are.

      And someone like Hape, Mike Harris or Sean Maitland, or The kiwi brothers, are all just as bad as James Tamou.
      Oh and I should also mention Henry Paul and Lesley Vainokolo playing for England, what a farce and circus and joke that is.

    • October 25th 2012 @ 12:27am
      Johnno said | October 25th 2012 @ 12:27am | ! Report

      Atlas and Matt I agree it needs fixing up. And it goes both ways. Increase it too five years and hold a passport for sure, i agree. And it helps all countries and once again under this system the smaller countries would in fact be helped more not harmed. As would other countries as they would focus on developing more locals born in that country which would be much healthier for the promotion of the sport.

    • October 25th 2012 @ 7:37am
      ABlacks Fan said | October 25th 2012 @ 7:37am | ! Report

      I’ve heard on the talk back radio few days ago, that Sean can play either Scotland or Samoa through his Mother’s side.
      My money is on Scotland on this one.

      Good on him as I don’t think the ABs coaches will even have a look at him now after he was the form winger in 2009 – 2010 but didn’t get picked for the ABs.

    Explore:
    , ,