There has been much discussion in the previous week about the direction of the Super Rugby competition with an additional South African team and expanding into the Japanese and South American markets.
While this would be great for the game as a whole, expanding the Rugby Championship with an additional combined Pacific Island team and retaining these players in Super Rugby would be a great way to complement the expansion of the world’s premium provincial Rugby competition.
Many have argued against the Pacific Islanders as having teething and administrative problems that have hindered the Unions’ potential. These are valid points – but every cost presents an opportunity.
The Pacific Island team could easily use North Harbour stadium, just outside Auckland, as its home ground. The surrounding area is heavily populated with Fijian, Samoan and Tongan peoples who have emigrated to New Zealand.
New Zealand is a rugby-mad country, so filling stadiums with a local crowd wouldn’t be an issue, and difference in time zones and broadcasting would be a non-issue. Doubts about revenue and profitability are less of a concern.
The other legitimate question would be player welfare and the amount of rugby our top players are already playing. I don’t see this as too much of a problem.
It would be a great drawcard for Australian fans in particular. While on tour the Pacific Island teams would be great challenge for the Wallabies and could play regular fixtures out of Canberra, Newcastle, the Gold Coast and Adelaide.
Another valid other question that would be raised is that the Pacific Island team would not be able to play in front of their home islands. Playing out of New Zealand may diminish their reputation.
This can be overcome by each week training and holding open training sessions in Fiji, Tonga and Samoa respectively. However, the locals at North Harbour stadium would embrace the team with open arms.
Another way to overcome this would be for Fiji, Tonga and Samoa to play one another in a separate competition during the Super Rugby season, similar to how the African Nations Cup operates with football.
There would be obstacles and flaws in this idea – coaches would have to add more players to their roster, which comes at a cost. The Waratahs, Blues, Suntory and European clubs would be unwilling to release their players from domestic duty.
The inclusion of a Pacific Island team to the Rugby Championship would boost rugby’s profile throughout the eorld. The Pacific Islanders, when first pitched to the IRB, was marketed as the ‘West Indian’ equivalent of rugby.
The Pacific Islands are packed with talent, much of which unfortunately has gone to waste. How many developing Polynesian players, the likes of Lopeti Timani, Alfi Mafi, Ben Volavola in Australia alone, and many others fringe players in their trade in Japan, New Zealand and France would gladly represent their country of birth if given the opportunity.
This would have a positive impact on rugby as a whole, and there would be a positive effect on the current Super Rugby franchises, with players getting more exposure to the raw talent that many Polynesian players possess; which in time would translate to a more successful and entertaining provincial model.
This idea is certainly in its infancy, discussed over a merry fathers’ day lunch, so I would more than welcome a debate or any positive ideas on this matter.
Scott
Guest
No what they call on is New Zealanders with Polynesian heritage to call on.
Scott
Guest
What islanders you talking about?? find a islander that came to NZ to play for the all blacks that was not born or raised very early in NZ say b4 5 years old or so. Same as Oz, is it any different when all the NZ born players with samoan heritage go play for samoa because of heritage links. I only know of sitivini.
Scott
Guest
As long as they pick the samoans by birth, the ones that mainly play for NZ or OZ are born & breed there. Should Scotland be able to pick McCaw or anyother kiwi with Scottish heritage, its the same argument. You think because they have island heritage they belong to that country even if they born/raised in NZ/OZ learn to play the game there, that's short sighted. How good would England be if they could pick Daniel carter, Read, Messam will have some white heritage somewhere etc.
passion of the Pacific
Guest
The Pacific Island team 2004 was proof that we can compete against the big 3 at the time (All Blacks, Wallabies, Springbok) - With our TOP talent - not our 2nd string - not our 3rd XV - but our Best team - We would fair better then the Arggies at the moment. In 2004 we may have lost 3 games but we averaged 14 pts margin. 2006 and 2008 tours of europe were a bit poor but the ethics and fundmentals of the team was still there. Now I know Manu Samoa decided to quit Pacific Island Rugby Union - due to the fact "they werent generating enough funds" by Peter Schuster 2008. But where is Samoa now since then - they beat the wallabies in 2011 which was there greatest achivement thus far, however the damning reports of Funding and player availability etc has lead to believe that the idea of Manu Samoa Rugby can not to do it on there own including The Abysmel lost to Georgia - a complete whitewash tour of europe 2013. Same goes with Fiji - who just recently has had there IRB funding slash - for reason only FRU and IRB to know. Their terrible RWC campaign in 2011 The Pacific Island nations Record at World Cups have averaged at best quarter finals. So we have to ask the real question - Can the Manua Samoa, Ikale Tahi Tonga and Fiji ever win the Rugby Union World Cup. I think as people of the pacific - we have to realise we are pass the honey moon stage of RWC - we cant just be entertainers by throwing big hits and make highlight reels, we want to win the world cup. We cant settle for crumps but something better - So to the first question - NO - as individual unions - as untied front - I would bet my Years salary on it we can. I plead with the Tonga, Samoa, Fiji to combine there efforts - Warrior it through the world of rugby together as one, not just for the good of the Pacific but for the good of Rugby World. In future i would love to see - Pacific Island Team in the Rugby Championship. Then compete as One in RWC. But of course thats just a dream and others still like being participants rather then winning.
sheek
Roar Guru
Katipo, Thanks for your thoughtful response. I do believe you can only have one citizenship at any one time, same as play for only one country at any one time. That's not to say, you can't play for another country at a later time if you choose. But the criteria to play sport must be strict to prevent people jumping from one country to another for convenience. And that means they must do time in residency, just like qualifying for citizenship. In 1983, Topo Rodriguez toured Australia with the Pumas. His country was still under a military dictatorship & they had endured the Falklands War the previous year. Topo liked what he saw of Australia & decided to bring his two young sons to Australia in order to give them a better life. At 31, he felt he had had a good rugby career & wasn't seeking to prolong his international career. I believe he came to Australia for the "right" reasons. However, in 1984, Australia had a new coach in Alan Jones. The outstanding young prop Tony D'Arcy had defected to league, veterans John Meadows & Stan Pilecki had retired (he then reneged) & young Cameron Lillicrap was too raw. Jones desperately needed someone like Topo to fill the breech. These were amateur times & after the obligatory three months residential qualification, Topo was a fully fledged Wallaby before he could speak English properly. Had this happened today (apart from the fact it couldn't happen that quickly) we might have a different view. But playing for the Wallabies had never been the primary reason for him coming here in the first place. A situation like Topo's is acceptable because he didn't do it for money, or sporting opportunity. He ended up playing for two different countries while securing a better future for his family. Some of the player movements today is pure opportunism. I feel for the Islanders. Professional rugby has past the Islands by. There's no financial incentive to involve them outside the world cup & having them at the world cup is purely a numbers exercise to make the IRB look good in supposedly spreading the game. Neither do Australia or NZ care. Having islanders fill positions, especially at the Wallabies, is an advantage against other more developed football codes. It's an entirely messy situation that doesn't bring credit to too many people unfortunately.
Katipo
Guest
Sheek. I'll bite too. The IRB has created this situation by maintaining its own national eligibility test concurrent to citizenship. The notion of citizenship is well established. Citizenship should be the test for representing a nation at rugby. It works for the Olympics including sevens. End of story. Unfortunately this is not workable because Great Britain passport is shared between England, Ireland, Scotland and Northern Ireland (and Ireland picks it's rugby team across NI & Eire). Many people claim the IRB's eligibility criteria are established to disadvantage PI but in reality that's just a side effect. The purpose is to control GB and Ireland players so they represent just one international team. The end result - one international team for life and residency test for eligibility for all. I have given this some thought over the years and I have a solution. The IRB should default to a citizenship test for all unions (with officials checking for eligible passports before allowing players on to the park to represent their country) but make an exception for GB & Ireland who keep the current laws due to their unique circumstance (the home nations aren't actually countries & Ireland well, you know, you have Irish heritage). What if a player has dual nationality? Fine. Let them play for two nations during their career. This would appease the island nations who could select their Australia and NZ residents if the Wallabies and AB's decided not to (if they had a PI passport and probably not represent both in the same calendar year). That's the problem and that's the solution. Got Australian citizenship? Great. You are eligible. PR? Sorry. No. But you are eligible for the country that have citizenship. Just sayin'.
sheek
Roar Guru
Nigel, After consideration, I'll "bite." It's fine for players of islander heritage to aspire to be a Wallaby or All Black. But you aspire to be an Australian or New Zealander first. Sporting aspiration comes second. Being born here is one thing, considering yourself Australian another. There are people here who have permanent residency & enjoy all the benefits Australia has to offer, but have no intention of claiming citizenship. When I open a newspaper & see one-third of the NSW Waratahs squad refer to themselves as the "Tongan brotherhood", I wonder where their allegiance actually lies. If the guys of the "Tongan brotherhood" consider themselves to be more Tongan than Australian, then what are they doing aspiring for a Wallabies jumper? Are they Tongans, or Australians?? I understand about cultural pride, but when you wear your heritage as a badge above your supposed nationality, then it does draw questions of what you really consider yourself to be. For a very long time, many Australian born anglo-saxons considered themselves British. You might think we still are British the way we (many of us) cling to the monarchy! I understand it takes time for people to draw a line under their heritage from somewhere else. My heritage is Irish, but it was 150-odd years ago when my ancestors landed in Australia. I'm proud of my Irish background, but I consider myself 100% Australian. There are Australians who come from many different cultural backgrounds - Italian, Greek, Irish, Slavic, Chinese, Vietnamese, etc - who are proud of their heritage, but don't place it above being Australian. A person should aspire to be Australian first, then want to play for the Wallabies or Kangaroos second. Professional rugby is not, nor should it be, an opportunity to fly a flag of convenience. But I'm wasting my breath because that's the way it's going anyway..........
Nigel Imrie
Guest
Dream on, IRB flex it's muscle to release PI players to play in RWC, ever thought these same players didn't want to be released to play RWC, some PI players have had bad dealings with their home nations or are not happy with the appointment of a coach and don't want to play for him, the financial incentives to play for their club far outweighs the financial rewards to participate in a RWC which some of th have already done, this scenario does not apply to all PI players! For those of us who live in Aust, NZ etc it is paradise compared to being at home under financial pressure, so having the freedom to earn and look after family is a great incentive to keep playing!
Davey
Guest
I thought it would be viable if the PI team is based in New Zealand or Western Sydney because not only your getting tv ratings from playing against the local NZ or Australian super rugby franchises your probably get Pacific Islanders from both countries watching so its a win win situation for broadcasters. The new Pacific Sky pay tv network based in Fiji is now available in many nations in the South Pacific so they will defentlly pay for the rights as well.
Nigel Imrie
Guest
If the islanders were smart! Interesting comment, we are smart mate that is why our best players are playing with some of the best teams in Europe and are not released for the once in a blue moon fixture that nobs like you dream about, yes it's a game to the likes of us who watch and dream but to the combatants it is in the end their trade! So the boys from the islands have got themselves out of the very limited market place in Samoa, Tomga and Fiji and are now VIP in a very competitive market place and they are delivering! Would you like to play as a combined Wallaby and AB team? We don't want to know about that concept in the islands, it was tried before and it fizzled out....we can and always haveanaged our own affairs with a little help and for that we are grateful but the powers that be are also restrained by financial constraints andvtherefore their priority is to their home nations, the pacific will always be an after thought which pops up periodically, and that is what you chaps are doing! On the issue of PI playing for AB and Wallabies etc, it must be understood that a great number of our people have made these nations home and there are many generations of young PI who are Aussies and Kiwis, English, Welsh and even French and they have the same aspirations as any other kid to be a Wallaby or an All Black!!!
Ra
Guest
it was a poor reflection of Island rugby when the IRB could not get their NH players released to play. The IRB need to flex its legal muscle in that area or be a puppet of club sponsors. Those guys are heading north to play because we cant sustain all that talent down under - sadly. but that is also happening in all other sporting codes too. The Kiwis league and cricket teams use to rely heavily on a half dozen professionals flying home from England to bolster up our amateurs at home to fly the flag on international duties we were so weak, and now the PI's are in the same boat. Luckily they have numbers playing in NZ comps to call on. Are Aussie based PI going home to play rep rugby too ????
atlas
Guest
"Sioane Luaki and Sivivatu deferring to the ABs" Perhaps after both having spent at least eight years in NZ, playing schoolboy rugby, club rugby, provincial rugby, Super rugby - they felt they were New Zealanders? I don't like making decisions on someone else's behalf based upon their ancestry. "Oh, you're an immigrant you should be playing for _____" Grown men and they had/have choices.
Benny
Guest
Where is this demand you talk of? It's not coming from the three countries involved as none of them see any benefit in combining. Come world cup time, they would be playing alone and wouldn't have had a chance to develop on their own. The PI team would essentially be a NZ B team, made up mostly of NZ-born Samoans and a few Tongans/Fijians. The three unions have made these views very clear in the past. And in terms of sponsorship - Fiji played with a clean jersey last November as they couldn't attract a sponsor.
B-Rock
Roar Guru
Correct you are - misinterpreted, skimmed it and thought it was a SR article. Gotta play as individual islands rather than combined PI - keeps the history and test status.
Chan Wee
Guest
ditto not only that, the players also will be able to earn much more in europe than playing in SH. contrary to popular belief, most of samoa tonga fiji papua new guinea players are in europe. only a few are in nz & oz. these countries have difficulty to field their best 30 for a world cup, because some players aer not released by the clubs.
Working Class Rugger
Roar Guru
As a commercial venture the Islands aren't viable. It's unfortunate but it is a reality. A combined team wouldn't likely work either. What could work is if the Super B concept gets up, the Island based teams that participated in the Pacific Rugby Cup could be included especially now as the Pacific Rugby Cup has been cut by the IRB.
El Cao Putrido
Roar Rookie
A combined PI team would definitely add extra value to the RC, a challenge would be attracting and retaining existing talent within the SXV. In time hopefully there would be a sustainable platform for Samoan, Fijian and Tongan players to make a living playing for their respective Unions as opposed to the likes of Sioane Luaki and Sivivatu deferring to the ABs. When you have a look around the fringes of a lot of SXV squads, there are many polynesian players who would be good enough already to represent their country of birth/heritage, and this talent could just as well go to waste, as 90% of the year they would spend training, 10% playing Shute Shield/ITM cup on a Saturday. Having the islands compete with the provinces would be a more costly exercise; however as a combined team during the RC, your running costs of travel etc would be offset by the fact that you would be playing in NZ over 2 legs, by splitting 2 test matches over the 1 flight in the tournament, which suits for Australia, South Africa and Argentina. Finding a major sponsor shouldn't be too hard; and your would think that there would be an increase in revenues in broadcasting and sponsorships, combined that with hopefully some grants from the IRB; its obvious to everyone that there is a demand for a PI team and the style of rugby they are inclined to play; this would have a positive flow on effect on the SXV as talent from the islands are better utilised, would also make for great viewing as these guys hit hard and run the ball.
Steve
Guest
Which Pacific Islanders have used Australia or NZ as a flag of convenience?
Davey
Guest
It is sad to see that the Pacific Islands have been left out when in fact it was their participation in the South Pacific Championship in 1986 and the Super 10 (1993) that made it possible and laid the foundation for Super Rugby. Is there a way we can write to a billionaire like Bill Gates to finance and help the Pacific Islands rugby blight?
Cantab
Guest
Running costs of a super rugby team range from 15 - 25 million, Ignoring start up costs. Not to sure where this cash will come from.