It’s time for the ARU to review their decision regarding the Wallabies rugby stars being able to play overseas and still be eligible for selection to play for Australia.
The ARU has feared local rugby will be weakened by its Test players leaving the country to maximise their incomes.
To protect their local competitions and TV ratings, Australia and New Zealand – but not South Africa – introduced a policy of making overseas based players ineligible for the Wallabies or All Blacks.
This policy clearly disadvantages Australia as its depth of talent is not as deep as New Zealand.
To stay at the top of the IRB rankings Australia needs as much competition as possible for each position within the Wallabies.
The Australian selectors should able to select the very best eligible player for each position, from anywhere in the world.
Some say we cannot allow all our talent to leave, that this will weaken the local competition and ruin Australian Rugby.
In my opinion, comments like these are a knee-jerk reaction.
The current policy seems unfair as it forces the best players to stay in Australia if they want to represent their country. At whatever cost to the player and whatever cost to the team’s performance.
Let’s assume the stars are going to leave anyway, what then?
Imagine not being able to select the following because they want to play overseas: James O’Conner, Kurtley Beale, David Pocock (when fit), Michael Hooper, Berrick Barnes, Wycliff Palu and Will Genia. In the past, George Smith and Matt Giteau.
This would obviously be a mistake.
The ARU should amend its rules to allow those Wallabies who meet specific thresholds of having represented their country to play overseas.
An example of the rule change could be the following: A player having had played 60 Tests or more for Australia may continue to be eligible to be selected for the Wallabies, whether they chose to play in Australia or not.
Only three Wallabies currently qualify (Adam Ashley Cooper, Drew Mitchell and Stephen Moore) but the list will grow in the future. I would hate like to see the prodigious talent of James O’Connor or Kurtley Beale – when they are in their prime having played 60 Tests – to not be eligible for the Wallabies.
Australia has already lost George Smith (110 Tests) and Matt Giteau (93 Tests) in the past, there is no need for the ARU to make the same mistake.
The ARU provides training and support, as well as creating the opportunity for players to become famous and earn large incomes. They should include transfer fees in player’s contracts for them to play overseas.
The biggest benefits to the ARU would be the additional income on transfer fees, like soccer, as well as not having to pay heavy top up fees to keep the stars in Australia.
Australian Rugby would benefit by having more money to expand the game at grass roots, increasing local player numbers and unearthing more talent.
There is an argument that the star players based overseas lose their edge. This is not fact, only speculation.
Even if we do assume they have lost their edge, is a ‘good’ Michael Hooper or a Liam Gill better than a George Smith who is off the pace?
I would take George – or a player like him in the future – and see if the current crop of up-and-coming stars are any better.
To keep the current status quo of artificial restraints on experienced Wallabies is not in Australia’s best interest.
It’s time for the current ARU management to provide some fresh thinking to deliver the best outcomes for the benefit of Australian rugby.
atlas
Guest
they are rare - apart from those two - Nonu's was 3mths? - and not always to play rugby abroad: McCaw negotiated a break, flying his glider in Arizona; Conrad Smith negotiated a break from the third Bledisloe test and three-match end of year tour - 'rest, travel and recondition' before returning to play in the 2014 Super Rugby competition. Unsure if there are any others?
Jerry
Guest
Australian born & raised JOC doesn't have an Australian passport?
Jerry
Guest
It's not even close to an illegal restraint of trade (which has to be one of the most used, least understood legal phrases in sports). Honestly, read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restraint_of_trade and then have a think.
jeramiah
Guest
haaahahahahah macalister anyone he came bak and stunk i dontt want to watch a team full of no ones cause all the top players are overseas i like to go down to suncorp watch the likes of genia gill and when quades on him or when my hurricanes come ere imagine no conrad smith in the canes cause he playing overseas imagine not being able to watch live these star run around for your team we dont want the reds going backwards again surely
Gnostic
Guest
The ARU has been flirting the edges of their rules for a couple of years now with the signing of Elsom and Vickerman. In those two cases the ARU while conforming to the letter of their rules regarding eligibility they went against the spirit of the rule. Their integrity is a total shambles. In both those cases the players were deemed vital by Deans so they chose to play semantics and allow both to play for the Wallabies despite not playing a game in the southern hemisphere in that year. In Vickerman's case he hadn't played at the top level and was not fit. Now consider the case of G. Smith, he is currently on a short term contract with the Ponies and actually playing in Oz. Yet Deans states that he will only be considered if he signs for the full year. There is an easy out for the establishment with Smith not on a full contract but that is just an exercise in semantics to deny Smith who had been discarded by Deans. There are so many arguments against this practice and the only one favouring it is the limitation of the playing pool. To mind my there is not one player that is currently playing overseas that would be a certain starter and only G.Smith who IMO would be of value in the squad, but in his case he went overseas because of Deans, why would he come back with the same bloke in charge? This argument is about integrity in process and the ARU must act to re-establish that and with current managers like Deans in place that will not happen as they are compromised.
I didn't say Pienaar was weaker, I said pedantic.
Hightackle
Guest
Burgess, Giteau, MMM, Mumm, Vickerman, Pienaar, G.Smith, Kaino, McAlister, Thompson, Afoa, Palmer, Kimlin, M.Steyn, SBW, Elsom, F.Steyn, Louw, Botha, Steenkamp, Brits, Masoe, Hayman, Mauger, Donald, Evans, Fourie and many many others. They leave and will leave more often soon.
Hightackle
Guest
The European stint DOEsNT make them weaker. R.Puenaar was considered by many as the best 9 in the world last year, Louw was prolly SA best after he was bought in, Steenkamp was also pretty good. So the examples you have named are Steyn and the world 15 half of 2012?
And the good thing is we don't use them all, five teams ten positions, only three foreign players.
Ai Rui Sheng
Guest
But they are mostly playing overseas. They were mostly born in other countries. lol.
Johnno
Guest
biltongbeck right now that is the policy in South Africa. SARU, rules are 2 foreign imports per team allowed. However SARU are flexible on African players, not being counted as imports. Examples,, the Beast, Brian Mujati, and Daniel Odongo.
I like the fact that the super XV teams are discernable by their nationalities, if it goes the way of the European clubs where you have half a sqaud from another nationality then it blurs the lines. One or two players max for me.
winston
Roar Rookie
Its about the possibilities. Maybe Cruden is playing for the Tahs. I know we love to hate on QC but he does have his moments.
Darwin Stubbie
Guest
Why would the chiefs trade down in the 1st 5 stakes ? .... Cruden has played over the top of Cooper every time they've matched up
winston
Roar Rookie
It would be interesting to share players through Sanzar. If for nothing else the it would be good to see a Geinia, DC combo or QC playing for a team like the Chiefs. I think the weather in Aus would be an attraction for a lot of ABs. I would imagin Rebels would get a lot better. Though on the downside it will mean that combinations like Smith/Nonu or Genia/QC won't develop as well and will effect the national teams.
Hi nick, yes, it is an individual things. but exactly what you say there is the issue. Having croussants, cheese, good things in life means your commitment to be the best possible professional is overridden by you succumbing to the vices of good life, you are there as you rightfully say, enjoy the good things in life whilst making good money. There is no sacrafice. Playing for your country requires sacrafice, you withold from the good things in life and keep peak conditioning, otherwise you should not be good enough. Hence my thought on you commit either to country and glory, or money
niwdeyaj, sure it is a policy issue, and the policy issue has to do with the points I have raised in regards to leaving out players commited to the domestic cause vs overseas players, also the commitment issue, and finally the issue of measuring the individuals who plays in a different environment. However having said that, the example of players I used is purely to illustrate the point that the majority of these "stars" are not coming in as better players. As for your sixty test suggestion, Frans Steyn is 25 and has close to sixty tests. He still has a hell of a lot to offer South African domestic rugby, in experience and talent. For me I like what John Smit as done, he went overseas after the won the world cup in 2007, and was asked to come back, he did and served (albeit 2 years too many) his country in domestic and international level. Same goes for Habana who served his country and now only in his late twenties is planning to move to France. Finish your career in your own country up to say age 28-30, then make yourself available for overseas contracts. That is why I respect Bakkies Botha, Fourie du Preez and Jaque Fourie, they all made themselves unavailable when they left. That is the honourable thing to do. It also sends out a clear message to a coach who might get desperate when injuries hits his domestic players
johnnoo
Roar Pro
Exaclty Ross, the global player base expands further with more countries included.
nickoldschool
Roar Guru
Biltong, I think it's more an individual issue than a rule for all springboks that a Europe stint makes them weaker. If a player goes overseas for the money and to enjoy life, eat cold meats, chocolate croissants and pâtés, chance is he isn't going to improve and he is likely to gain weight and be unfit. Look at KB here or Piri Weepu in NZ; you don't need to go to france to become unfit. I think Joe Pietersen did all right there and might have learnt a few things. Guys like Vosloo or Joe Van Niekerk got better in France. Then you have all the others who got there at a fairly young age because they weren't good enough to secure a SR spot. Claassen became the player he is thanks to french rugby. In this respect, I am glad he has chosen to represent France.
Ross
Guest
Good points Johnno. 2x S15 slots for PI, 2x S15 slots for Argentina, and 2x marquee players from anywhere (without req for them to eventually qualify for AUS). The marquee players should then count as a fixed amount (e.g $200K) against the S15 salary cap with the club allowed to top that up as much as they see fit/need to. Add to this 3x S15 slots for Kiwi & Saffa players. This allows most of the contracted players to still be eligible for the Wallabies, some Wallabies playing/learning/reinvigorating their rugby in NZ/SA, and SANZAR nations adding variety to their squads with PI/Arg/other players. ARU would need to retain an ability to approve all non-Wallaby players into each S15 club, so that you don't end up with overseas players at every club in the same position, etc. This allows us to exploit some super stars and assist the PI nations and Argentina in their growth/development along the way. We grow our game, add variety to career of experienced players and help other countries develop. And these teams would be interesting and entertaining... Imagine having Dan Carter play 2 seasons for an Australian S15 team? Or Brian O'Driscoll? Imagine having Fiji be an all round better opposition because several of their most talented play here and in NZ earning decent money instead of moving to Europe and only playing occasionally for Fiji, etc.