Now the dust has settled on the latest train wreck called Australian Test rugby, it’s a good time to re-visit the question of selecting overseas based Australian players in order to solve the current Wallaby woes.
It is so easy to say yes, yes, yes, especially after watching the Springboks’ overseas players perform so well last week.
But that is such a simplistic solution and what is good for the goose is not necessary good for the gander. Every country’s landscape tends to be unique and presents different challenges.
To prove the point, let’s look at the two juggernauts either side of Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.
New Zealand is definitely in the ‘no pick’ camp.
They bank on the pull of the black jersey to keep their best current and up-and-coming talent hooked and remaining in the country.
Amazingly, in this day and age of professionalism, it works up to a point and they only loose a small number of All Blacks and mostly towards the end of their careers.
Of course they do occasionally lose players they’d rather not (Carl Hayman, Nick Evans and Luke McAlister come to mind), but seem to cope and replace them without too much fuss.
But their perception is also that players spending time in northern hemisphere leagues almost need to be ‘re-educated’ on their return.
McAlister became very much a fringe player on his return and headed back disillusioned to the northern hemisphere before the 2011 World Cup (ironic when you consider what happened to the All Blacks’ fly half stocks during the tournament).
The gain for them is that it keeps top talent playing in their local feeder competitions, making them competitive and ensuring the production line of top talent keeps flowing on. The current quality of the ITM Cup a testament to that.
Now South Africa is moving very quickly to the ‘pick’ club. I suspect the haemorrhaging of talent overseas due to the low value of the rand and the high financial rewards offered elsewhere make it very tough for players to stay.
They obviously feel (surprisingly) their up-and-coming stocks are not good enough to compensate for this massive drain.
Also, unlike the McAlister example above, they are happy that overseas Boks drafted in are up to standard straight away, Francois Lowe and Fourie du Preez (in his short cameo) being classic recent examples.
On the flip side, I don’t think Francois Steyn ever hit his previous heights on his return from France.
The danger of their policy is if at some stage it begins to seriously denigrate their Super/Currie Cup teams, to the point where they become uncompetitive, can they then keep their very parochial crowds interested?
It hasn’t reached that stage yet and I guess even the European Clubs and Japan must have a saturation point for overseas talent. I await some of our Saffa friends’ comments with interest.
Now, Australia. The challenges here are unique and the structures and landscape are all topsy-turvy in comparison to the other two.
Also, unlike them, Australia faces crippling competition from the other two compatible football codes (I’ll ignore soccer), who appear to have much better administrative structures and professional set ups.
Under these handicaps it is absolutely astounding and a constant sense of wonder to me that Australia has managed consistently to put a competitive team on the field, and during short periods in the past has actually dominated the rugby world and won two World Cups.
However I fear the chickens are now coming home to roost.
With the onset of professionalism and this upside-down pyramid structure, the problems arise when injuries hit or a lean period in terms of talent development strikes – as is the case at present.
The demands on the limited playing stock are immense and arguably one of the main reason for the injuries.
That is when the call for selecting overseas talent becomes louder, but that scares me as it could potentially be the final nail in Australia’s rugby coffin.
I can see the temptation to bringing back a George Smith, and god how the Wallabies needed him last weekend, but he is an exception and a freak. If I was selecting a world team he would be there, bracketed with Richie McCaw.
But to automatically assume a Matt Giteau and others could walk in and perform to the required standard facing the Boks or All Blacks after overseas club rugby is open to debate.
However the main issue is the moment Australia selects overseas players there will very likely be an exodus.
Unlike South Africa and New Zealand, Australia cannot restock its Super Rugby franchises with local talent and keep them competitive. It can hardly do so now without league converts, Kiwis, Pacific Islanders and South Africans.
So where is your next generation of players going to come from? Can’t anybody see the danger?
The search for instant success also inherently carries the seeds of destruction. What little money the ARU has after years of mismanagement and wastage is squandered by trying to buy success rather than grow it.
What is my solution? Start at the top, the current management structures and priorities are rotten.
Parochialism is rife, fine, but when you reach the dizzy heights of the ARU top echelon, leave it at home.
Focus at growing the game below Super Rugby level and encouraging the development of that elusive level below is paramount.
That additional layer below (the Super nursery) should be non-negotiable. It almost doesn’t matter what form it takes, clubs, regional, ITM participation (if possible) or private ownership with controls.
Something really watchable, that can be packaged for television but fills that yawning gap that currently exists between Super Rugby and the next level. Sport is now a business and it has to present offerings to its followers/customers.
Hopefully it would be self-funding quickly, but if not, the financial hit is worth taking. The New Zealand Rugby Union runs the ITM cup at a loss, but it helps to keep their Super teams (consisting mostly of local players) competitive, and enhances the sponsor appeal of their top brand, the All Blacks.
I am horrified (if the hearsay is correct) at the salaries Super and Wallaby players command in comparison to their trans-Tasman and South African counterparts, and also at the pay of ARU top staff if the rumours of John O’Neil’s salary are correct.
Good though he might turn out to be, the signing of expensive league players like Israel Folau solves nothing, the ARU and Super franchises can’t afford to sign 15 of them.
The desperation with which he was courted was obscene, and at the end of the day he was an unproven acquisition and a massive gamble over whom doubts are already surfacing.
Trim everything to a comparable level with our main competitors and start investing. A few players might be lost but you will be assured the ones remaining want that jersey really badly.
I feel the long suffering Australian rugby public switching off in droves at the moment might even stick around through some lean times if they could see that there was a plan and a light at the end of the tunnel – short term pain for long term gain.
The alternative doesn’t bear thinking about.
JimmyB
Guest
Bruticus, I suppose we will have to agree to disagree. I'm not suggesting that SH rugby isn't first rate, however I think you belittle NH rugby, based on a all to common arrogance which eminates from the SH, mainly NZ. Maitland was incredibly lucky to be selected for "the mighty British And Irish Lions", most observers could have put at least 10 better picks ahead of him, however the head coach was a kiwi, so hey ho. Perhaps "the mighty British and Irish Lions" shouldn't tour NZ anymore, seeing as they are clearly inferior, so that you can play amongst yourselves and get some good competition and pat yourselves on the back at the same time. Just my opinion for it's worth, but obviously I'm not a pro like you mate.
Muzza
Guest
The long road back starts at growing the game at junior grades. Forget comparisons to SA and NZ with CC and ITMC. Union is by far the #1 game in those countries and if Aussie really want to compete (consistently) in this pro era they need to grow the game from its base: junior, club and provincial (I guess Super for now). When the Wallabies start winning they should promote the hell out of it and grab League by the throat. One issue though (seen from a distance) is that there are too many Prima Dona idiots in the game that make for really bad role models. They need more stand up adult role models not spoiled brats.
Bruticus
Roar Pro
Thanks for your viewpoint JimmyB but I would disagree. European club rugby maybe close to NH test rugby but would fall short of SH test rugby. I would suggest the physicality of European rugby is only due to less dynamic open field play. Ruck ball is so slow players have more than enough time to recover for the next phase. Besides physicality is only one aspect of a game. What about skills, fitness, and creativity to name but a few other aspects for example? All areas in which European club rugby falls far short. Implying that scrums are only considered a restart opportunity in the whole of the SH shows your naivety too. That is only true to a certain degree in Australia rugby (ask the Lions about the Brumby scrum). To NZ, SA and Argentina, it is a treasured part of the game. Even if the Australians were to be ‘marmalised’ at the 10-15 scrums in the game, even they would dominate the 180 odd breakdowns. Guess which has more of an impact on the game? Hayman was already the best TH in world rugby when he left for the $$, anything he learnt only made him better. It is a fact that players take far longer to readjust back to NZ rugby. That it is offensive is unfortunate but it doesn’t change the fact. Ask James Haskell how he went at the Highlanders and then ask Sean Maitland how he managed to go from warming the bench at the Crusaders to playing for the mighty British and Irish Lions.
Ben.S
Roar Guru
It's different for SA and NZ rugby, that's why I made the Australian distinction. I'm sure there's hundreds of NH players that would love to play Super Rugby, but then you end up playing without a break like James Haskell did after featuring for the Highlanders. Effectively he took himself out of Test reckoning for a period, so it's a lot to weigh up if you're not at the end of your career. There's also the issue of NZ sides, for example, being very cautious about non-eligible players featuring for them. Same with the Irish provinces - if you only have a small amount of top tier sides then there's no value in flooding in players regardless of their quality. Re: player drain there's also the small things like travel and life experience. A lot of people would jump at the chance to live in Paris on a high salary for 2 years and be able to travel all over Europe 1st class. I don't think there's a solution tbh.
Sporting Tragic
Roar Pro
great article Cyclops.
richard
Guest
Firstly,I'm a kiwi.And what you say does make sense.But I would also add that I believe the player drain is one way because the money on offer would be generally higher in the NH.Or at least that is the perception.The SA's are bemoaning their player drain,which is even higher than ours,citing their inability to compete with NH money.NZ can also relate to that. I completely concur with your last point,it is the market.And market forces always prevail,sadly.
Colin McCann
Guest
Speaking as a Canadian, I'll refer you to Rugby Canada's policy. They actively encourage their test level players to play abroad. Admittedly this is because there is no professional competition here, but it's also so they adapt to a variety of different coaching styles, playing styles, etc. but most of all, it's so it leaves space in the national training squad for other local players to fill. In a sense you get two players developing, all for the price of one. When it comes to Test selection, if the foreign based player is in better form as is usually the case, they select that player but they have no qualms with selecting the local amateur if need be. Perhaps this is the ARU's new route, just with the emphasis on the local talent? Consider foreign based players in Test selections, just make sure Super Rugby talent is considered first. Lacking any 3rd tier comp , Australia can't hope to cope with just 5 teams to draw players from. Allowing players to play abroad yet not conclusively rule themselves out of test selections old outsource player development in a way. And it would do so on someone else's dollar. I'm saying this would be good in the interim. It shouldn't be permanent, and it isn't it Canada's case either. But until a 3rd tier comp is set up to correct the "upside down" structure of pro Rugby in Aus, it's one way to develop depth.
JimmyB
Guest
No worries TEC, just get a bit precious sometimes. They are quite different competitions so it's difficult to compare them like for like. Teams have to fight tooth and nail to get into the HC ( well the English and French have to ), unlike SR where it's like a franchise system, so there is no pressure to qualify year on year, players just get to go out and play, therefore it's not surprising to see teams throw the ball about with abandon. The latter stages of the HC are of a very high standard once the wheat has been sorted from the chaff and I would argue that it is as close to the intensity of test match rugby as you can get. On a side note, the Aussie sides would simply get marmalised at scrum time in Europe, let alone in the HC, where it would become embarrassing. I believe SA would do well to look north, the competition is strong and pretty relentless, I think it would suit South African rugby and their fans would be pleasantly surprised.
JimmyB
Guest
DR, poor old johnny, no wonder his shoulders are buggered ay?! He's always put himself in positions that "sensible" fly halfs steer well clear of.
Ben.S
Roar Guru
There's no attitude to take because Australian players are not wanted in Europe apart from in France and Japan and even that won't last forever. And the reason the player drain is one way is because of the overlapping seasons and the fact that Super Rugby is generally opposed to foreign inclusions. Also, look at the players England has lost multiple players to France. You can't fight the market.
Two Eyed Cyclop
Roar Guru
Completely lost me there, haven't got the foggiest what you are talking about.
Two Eyed Cyclop
Roar Guru
JimmyB, apologies, no offence meant, just my perception, must make an effort to watch some HC matches (as opposed to the odd highlight), and get a more balanced/educated view. The re-educate comment was very much based on the fact that unlike most countries, NZ teams to evolve uniformly, and players plying their trade in NZ tend to slot into the next level when required very smoothly (Taylor, Luatua, Saili being recent examples). Somebody coming from another country would probably need some time in the local comps to get into the groove. As a matter of interest how would you rate the HC vs S15?
Itsbecomeajoke
Guest
For how much longer though felix? I'm in favour of only picking players playing locally but with quota's being reimplemented at Vodacom Cup level we are going to see a lot more youngsters heading off overseas to ply their trade. This poses SARU with a multitude of problems. One is losing players to other nations, expect to see a lot more saffa's playing for the 6 nation teams and probably Wallabies too. And don't for a moment think they're not considering quota's for SR and CC.
Rodknee
Guest
LEROY HOUSTON BATH, Killing it
DR
Guest
re-educated is a poor term I agree Jimmy. Im sure the standard is a lot higher than some would realise. I can though honestly tell you that MaCallister was rubbish when he ventured back here before the WC. Friend of mine showed me a clip of a rather large human absolutely barrelling wilkinson http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=OrDWUGVakB4 looks fairly entertaining to me
JimmyB
Guest
Oh yeah, Cipriani wasn't even half the player he was by the time he came back to English rugby, he certainly learned nothing of value at the Rebels.
Colin Kennedy
Roar Guru
Cyclop, I once attended a 'league' club when I was in Brisbane for a Sunday roast. Clearly those clubs are part of Aussie culture in the same way as the pub is in Britain -- but more family orientated? That's a difficult infrastructure to copy because the clubs seem so wealthy. But surely its a matter of engaging locals in rugby in the same way, making the club or franchise part of the local culture, getting locals in behind their team. League does it very well and there really is no reason rugby couldn't do the same - start with families and kids and build from there?
JimmyB
Guest
Chan, it's not American English, just English. That is the definition of Mongrel.
JimmyB
Guest
It's also good for NZ rugby Garth, the last two AB coaches and their teams refined their skills in Europe before taking up their posts. Wouldn't be surprised to see Gatland, Schmidt or Cotter end up in the AB hotseat in the future.
richard
Guest
That may all be true,but it's very easy to take that attitude considering the player drain is all one way i.e south to north.