On Friday the 27th of October the Rugby League World Cup kicks off.
It starts with the traditional rivals of Australia playing England to a full house in Melbourne. The whole tournament should be epic. Yet, instead of building for such a significant event, rugby league once again seems mired in controversy – and it is of its own doing.
The eligibility rules around rugby league are not ideal. I won’t say a farce, simply because rugby league rules concerning eligibility are similar to most major sports in the world.
However, the rules do allow those who do not like rugby league to criticise it and make fun of its small international following.
So, let’s be real. The sport of rugby league is not a global game. However, very few team sports are. The one truly global sport is soccer. Though, try as I might, I feel no connection to the round ball game. It just does not get my blood pumping as rugby league does. In fact, no sport does. Despite its small reach, rugby league is making progress.
All the countries competing in the World Cup have a domestic league of some standing. This requirement has not always been the case, so when you hear commentators belittling our game saying the countries competing do not have a competition, you can tell them they are wrong.
More players than ever before have real connections to the country they are representing. These connections show that the international game is getting more respect from within the game than it has previously, although, more can be achieved.
The issue of Jason Taumalolo and Andrew Fifita switching countries at the last minute is a bad look. This cannot be denied. Again, our sports give the naysayers a free hit. Though, one can wonder why there is no such outcry when the shoe is on the other foot. Felise Kaufusi is going to play for Australia despite playing for Tonga twice before. There seems to be no drama with this.
(NRL Photos/Grant Trouville)
The current rules allow players to switch allegiances. According to the 2017 rugby league World Cup rules, dual eligible players can nominate one Tier 1 nation (Australia, New Zealand, and England) and one Tier 2 / 3 nation in which they are eligible for before an international tournament.
So what Fifita, Taumalolo and Kaufusi have done is within the rules. Cooper Cronk was right when he described Fifita’s timing as poor, but I would state that the guidelines set by the game allowed this to happen and as a result the rules are poor.
So, how can the game tighten the rules to remove criticism from inside and outside the game? The answer is simple. Make the representative game the pinnacle and afford it the respect it deserves.
The National Rugby League (NRL) although not responsible for the international game should take a much stronger leadership position. Mal Meninga is on full-time pay from the NRL, the players for Australia and New Zealand get twenty thousand dollars a Test match during the year and possibly over fifty thousand dollars if they win the tournament.
They get thirty thousand dollars for Origin. Playing for other nations such as Tonga might result in three thousand for the 2017 World Cup. This pay disparity is killing the growth of the game. Under the current rules Australia and New Zealand just cherry pick the best players.
The NRL should subsidise the pay for the coaches of Tonga, Samoa, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand and other Pacific island nations that play the game. The players of all these countries should also earn the same amount as you would if selected for Australia or New Zealand.
I know what you are saying: “You’re crazy, the game cannot afford that.” I agree the game cannot afford to pay the coaches the same as Meninga or the players the same as what Australia, New Zealand or Origin players currently get, but I do believe that the payments should be equalised. If this means that players get less for Origin or less for Australia and New Zealand then so be it.
This modified payment system would not suffice on its own. The next rule I propose would set us aside from most sports and put us more in line with soccer. Once a player represents a country, they can no longer switch. Maybe I’m old school; maybe it’s because I’m from a family with a single cultural link and maybe I just don’t get wanting to play for more than one country.
I do think, money can be a big driver. Would Semi Radradra have played for Australia, if Fiji played just as often and got the same amount of money? I don’t think so. I know Fifita and Taumalolo have turned their back on the money, but they shouldn’t have to. One thing this rule would do and do well is bring back instant respect for the game regarding its eligibility criteria.
David Collier, the CEO of International rugby league, has come out and defended the eligibility rules around the game. What else was he supposed to do, allow the game to be criticised without any defence?
Another issue I want to highlight that has been overlooked heading into this World Cup is the withdrawing of players from team selections. Did anyone else realise that Anthony Milford isn’t turning out for Samoa? I know Wayne Bennett said he wasn’t fit to play for Samoa, but he was fit enough to continue playing for Brisbane until they were defeated in the semi-finals.
Does anyone see the conflict here? Wayne Bennett is the England coach, Samoa is a rival at the World Cup. Wayne is putting the interest of Brisbane before the international game. The current rules allow him to do this.
(AAP Image/Dave Hunt)
The rules should require that all players that get selected for international duty or train on squads leading up to a tour or tournament need to be examined by that international team’s doctor before being excused from international duty.
Further to this, failure to comply with this rule by either the player or club, then that player should have a two-game ban for every international game missed. In the case of Milford, if he had been deemed unfit by the doctor then that is fine. However, if the Samoan team doctor cleared Milford to play then he should be playing.
If Brisbane refused, under this proposal Milford would be suspended from club duties for the beginning of next season. Therefore, if by chance Samoa made the final – six games – then he would miss 12 games for Brisbane. I’m sure under this rule Bennett, and the Broncos would not have denied Milford the chance to play for Samoa or at the very least attend the teams medical.
I know what you are saying, if Milford doesn’t want to play then he shouldn’t have to. In a sense I agree, however, do we want players choosing where and when they play international footy.
If a player wanted to withdraw from a match, tour or tournament for personal reasons then this would need to be approved by both the players’ national chairperson and agreed by the International Federation chairperson – currently Dave Collier. However, this dispensation would be granted only in the most special of circumstances.
If a player were to seek retirement from representative rugby league, once approved, this player should no longer be allowed to play representative rugby league. This would make it impossible for a player to ‘come out of retirement’ in time for a major tour or tournament.
Implementing these rules, although strict would let all fans, players, coaches and officials know the standing of the international game.
It would most certainly stop any criticism that the representative version of the sport can receive. It would also allow fans to be talking up the action that is going to be happening on the field instead of the issues off it.
For the tragic fan like myself, once that whistle blows, and the ball is kicked-off on October 27th, I will forget the chaos that can follow the game. I will be absorbed in the contest. Until then, I just wish the game could be its best self.
Cathar Treize
Roar Guru
What is the basis of your comment that the domestic scene in Tonga & Samoa is basically 'non-existent'? Actually Tonga & Samoa have very good domestic set ups & just because they don't feature in RLWC squads doesn't mean they are non existent. The NRL do tremendous work in these countries & have extensive school programs also.
terry tavita
Roar Rookie
there's no stand down period for rugby..once you play representative rugby for a country, that's it, no switch..the stand down period is for players who have never played international rugby but have moved to another country..
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
It's called power privilege...
Josh
Guest
I dont understand where the outrage was when Semi played for Australia or when Fifta was pulled out of the tongan squad earlier this yr to play for Australia
Benji
Guest
Yeah but once they change country there is a 3 year period of stand down - RU is about to make it 5 years something Paul Cully didn't mention in his sop piece in the Sydney Herald trying to defend the RLWC. IN cricket once you change you have to stand down and in most others for 3 years you have to prove residency. Please give examples of other genuine sports because you cant where players can just swap back and forth. Bizarre..
not so super
Guest
because they previously werent good enough to make the kiwi side
not so super
Guest
it wont happen because most people prefer to represent their country of birth and upbringing - that is Australia
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
I'm all for switching as many times as you are eligible for. The problem isn't that players switch (there didn't seem to be a public problem when players eligible for more than one nation chose the better paying nations...). The problem is that there haven't been enough Test matches played. The simplest solution is to play more Test matches between the nations. That's all there is to it. Once you have that, the need to 'switch' will no longer be seen as an issue.
William Dalton Davis
Roar Rookie
From what I understand it was up to the club doctors whether or not he'd participate in the World Cup. they decided that he needed to have surgery asap or he would miss the start of the new season. I can't see a scenario that could ok the idea of a player who needed surgery being suspended. Though I suppose if we wanted to go a hardline route like this one you can argue that representative footy should overrule the club. Yet then again at the time he was aligned with QLD and Australia. So would Samoa even get a say in the matter anyway?
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
It's all a big furphy if you ask me. As for the pinnacle concern, just keep staging and playing Test football matches.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Milford is a strange example. Everyone knows his shoulder was hanging by a thread for most of the season. He couldn't raise his arm above his head for the second half of the season. To suggest an internationally aligned doctor should be able to over rule a club doctor who deals with the injury week in, week out is bordering on negligent. I really don't think Bennett had too much to do with this decision. Anyway as you say WDD, it's a bit hard to rule him fit for the tournament after he's had surgery. Unless he only had the surgery to avoid the World Cup?
The Barry
Roar Guru
How do you "make" international footy the pinnacle? The rise of Origin coincided with the decline of test footy. No one within rugby league made Origin the pinnacle. It happened organically. It's not something that can be switched off. Allowing flexibility in eligibility is clearly trying to increase the competitiveness of international footy. And there's still eligibility criteria that has to be met. You can't pick and choose who you want to represent. I agree last minute switches aren't great but I'm not sure there is a solution. With dual eligibility players need to be allowed to wait until squads are announced and squads can't be announced until after the club season has finished so they know who's available. It's really not that big a deal. Once the tournament has started no one will care.
Johnno
Guest
I previously supported unlimited flip-flopping but after the events this week now have this view.. RL elgibility solution idea: 2-swtiches allowed only: You can make “two-swtiches” in your career only between a Tier-1/Tier-2 rather than "unlimited" whenever you wake up out of bed and wanna flip-flop... e.g. case study Jarryd Hayne. He played for Fiji, then switched to aussies(1 switch), if he plays for Fiji at this world cup it will be a 2nd-swtich and that's it “NO More” switches... What about something like that? Under this proposed policy JTaumolo who first played for Tonga then the kiwis and now back to Tonga would never be able to play for the kiwis again he now has done “two-switches”.. But I think a “two-switch” policy is fair, and credible.. Plus if you do switch you have to give either a 30-day or 50-days notice to the “RLIF/and your national governing body” that you intend to switch if selected for another team... So Jason Tamulolo would had to of given a 30 day/50-days notice of his intention to switch e.g. like in mid-August this year etc as many teams do training camps for players not involved in the NRL finals series, so all teams shouldn’t have there time wasted by last minute switches... Hence why players should nominate there 1st preference like 30-days/or 50 days out from the official squad naming day in future etc... I just think after this week, unlimited switches between a Tier-1 and Tier-2 whilst having good intentions has turned out messy. Where as two-switches policy would still be fair and credible and helpful to the developing nations to build a player base to be competitive and it’s clear and organised not messy... ps- playing for a youth team eg u-20”s or schoolboys then switching in your senior career that does not count as a switch. Your youth side you played for is not counted as a switch in your senior career it’s irrelevant...
Johnno
Guest
The NRL already do help put the pacific islands with the "pacific strategy"...
Terry Tavita
Guest
there have been virtually hundreds, if not thousands, of olympians who migrate to boost another countries medal prospects..representing countries they have no heritage nor affiliation with while they were developing their talents..it's called transfer of allegiance..
vincent b
Guest
It is possible but difficult to change allegiances under the IOC charter. https://stillmed.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdf Section 41 states : 1. Any competitor in the Olympic Games must be a national of the country of the NOC which is entering such competitor. 2. All matters relating to the determination of the country which a competitor may represent in the Olympic Games shall be resolved by the IOC Executive Board. The Zola Budd debacle back in the 80's prompted a tightening of the rules regarding nationality. The basic principle is you need to be a national or citizen of a nation to represent it. Obviously athletes can change nationality, and with it apply to change the country they represent, but it is a lengthy process, and changing more than once I think is only possible through special dispensation. There is a mandatory three year stand down period when changing national allegiances.
Terry Tavita
Guest
obviously a mockery to many people is choosing to play for another country other than nz or australia..there are players in the nz squad who played for samoa and tonga but no one is saying anything about them..
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Make the representative game the pinnacle and afford it the respect it deserves." That is the problem. The biggest representative game is State of Origin. This is why so many players nominate Australia rather than their heritage or birth nation. Under the Tier 2 rules, players not picked for Australia can be picked up by other countries. That's why it is a joke to see Hayne and Civoniceva play for Fiji one game and Australia the next. Like Origin, players should be allowed to decide where they want to play, heritage or whatever. Once this decision is made, they have to stick with it.This allows the other international teams to plan and play for the future and not rely on discards. Will it happen? No, because Origin is king.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
This is the case at the moment. If a player turns down playing for Australia unless prior approval given, he would be stood down for that game.
William Dalton Davis
Roar Rookie
The Olympics allow athletes to switch which nation they wish to represent. Cricket has had players turn out for England and then later switch to Scotland and Ireland I believe. In fact I think a 90s West Indies player turned out for the US in an ODI not too long ago.