After the recent news of Samu Kerevi’s proposed move to Japan for the 2020 season, questions have been raised as to whether the ‘Giteau’ rule needs to be reviewed just one more time before the World Cup.
Kerevi has been one of the most, and if not the most, in form and devastating Aussie players in this year’s Super Rugby season.
For those who don’t know, the law is specifically for players who play their rugby in overseas competitions, like the Gallagher Premiership or Top 14, and are up for Australian selection.
The law has two fundamental criteria: the player must have played a minimum of 60 Tests for Australia and must have also played at least seven Super Rugby seasons.
While the law does make experienced players available, like Matt Giteau himself in the 2015 World Cup where his experience helped give Australia a shot at the title, it does minimise the squad depth that our international side has.
A perfect example of this is Scott Fardy, he is a well known campaigner with the Aussie side and was a key player in their run to the 2015 grand final however his move to Leinster earlier this year has left him stranded on 39 Tests.
It can be argued that his move was based on Cheika’s decision to overlook the veteran in the last few seasons, Fardy’s last Test was in 2016 in November against France.
More unprecedented talent in the pool of ineligibility includes the likes of Will Skelton (Saracens), Sean McMahon (Suntory Sungoliath/Sunwolves – he has struggled with a hampering knee injury anyway), Joe Tomane (Leinster), Taqele Naiyaravoro (Northampton) and even James O’Conner (Sale – although it would be a highly disputed return).
The main negative with abolishing this rule however would be the supposed slow decline in the standard of rugby we witness in Australia and, in general, Super Rugby.
European rugby and also Japanese rugby are in the spotlight when it comes to expensive salaries for players of varied experience while Super Rugby seems to lack player interest.
This could have a detrimental effects on Aussie rugby, especially with negative criticisms about Aussie rugby never far away and the phrase “Aussie rugby is dead” being tossed around so often.
What is needed now is a spark, something to re-ignite the flame that Australian rugby once had even if it means risking it all.
Yes, it’s risky but relaxing the Giteau Law for overseas players may give us the best opportunity to win a World Cup or even maybe The Bledisloe Cup.
Maybe these victories could once again prove to the Australian public that rugby is indeed the greatest game on earth.
Kp
Guest
Scrap it altogether and just pick the best team. Most people (kids especially) without fox can’t watch super rugby anyway so it’s not like we’re depriving them of anything. As for going to a game, no one is going anyway (largely because there is limited following due to it only being available on fox). Just pick the best team.
Waxhead
Roar Rookie
YES it's time - change to 30 Tests imo
Offside
Roar Rookie
HAHAHA, sounds about right ????
jeznez
Roar Guru
Actually watching the fans leave and not changing what we are doing sounds a lot like the Wallabies with game plans not working and not changing either.
Offside
Roar Rookie
Fans are already leaving in droves so, let's just give up trying to keep them? Am attitude that might explain the backbone in the Wallabies..... ;-)
Onside
Guest
The Giteau law is actually the Gateau law , because it feeds RA executives cake regardless of performance.
Pogo
Roar Rookie
comment of the day.
Jack
Guest
We don't need to speculate on whether the current policy works. Evidence on the ground that it's does not work. Crowds have halved, results over the last 5 years have been poor, the Wallabies win less than half their games, TV revenue is down and the best young players are leaving. The Kiwis will change their rule in a heartbeat if they they start losing. There are players with 20 and 30 Tests who really, on ability, form and delivery should have played one or two.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Every Super Rugby team survives on RA hand outs. Just because things aren’t going well now it doesn’t mean they cannot go worse. Which is what is likely to happen if players are just parachuted in from all over the world like you propose. Let me ask you this. Why is every other top nation trying to ensure all their talent is playing locally now?
Jack
Guest
Pick the best available for each test. I'm sure the players will be available for the World Cup. The current policy is a failure. The Wallabies are loosing and we have one decent Super Team. Ironically it's the only team that doesn't survive on ARU handouts. Rugby hasn't nothing to lose. The professional game is in dire straights. Continuing to to the the same thing and expecting a different outcome.....
Kirky
Roar Rookie
Across the Ditch, you've just had your last game for your Country if you do what you suggest, as you're classified as having ''abandoned ship'', end of story! ~ There has been quite a few top Representative Players head overseas in their prime over the years and have never played International rugby for their country again!
jeznez
Roar Guru
Don’t worry Kirky, Brodie is coming back!
Kirky
Roar Rookie
Jez! In New Zealand if you choose to head overseas regardless of who you are or whatever quality Player you are, you ''crap in your own nest'' and any thought of coming back and getting your spot back, ~ forget it, as it won't and doesn't happen;
JB
Roar Rookie
Well, it is a regular occurrence lately with young talent such as Kalyn Ponga, Angus Chrichton and Cameron Murray all coming from very well known rugby union schools and are all now playing high representative level NRL. These are just a few examples of many and further shows that Rugby Union is doing many things wrong and the Giteau's law is definitely one of them.
JD Kiwi
Roar Rookie
When Pulver caved in to Cheika to create this short termist law it subtly devalued the wallaby jersey. It says, ok you turned your back on the jersey to take the cash on offer in Europe, but we need you, you are bigger than the jersey. Australia still failed to bring home the cup, or any silverware since. And more and more players have left since. The top nations in the world in recent years - NZ, Ire, Eng - have no tolerance policies. Wales have tightened theirs and have also improved. Australia and South Africa? If you keep your best players at home you can manage their workload and travel. You can bring them into camps. You don't have your veteran hooker flying around the world to play in England on Rugby Championship rest weeks. You have your veterans teaching and mentoring your kids in Super Rugby. More importantly you are all in it together, you have prioritised the jersey, nobody is an outsider, And you are more likely to be successful.
ethan
Guest
The games they play early in the year currently are criminal with the heat. They need to start it later, not play through the summer. It also doesn't make for a good spectacle when the ball is a cake of sweaty soap and there are stoppages every 2 minutes.
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
You’re never going to set up a contracting policy around the options down the depth chart though
liquorbox_
Roar Rookie
Surely if the first picked Wallabies get injured you would rather bring in a has been like AAC because he is a known quality over Kervevi (looking to next year)?
Luca Dimeglio
Roar Rookie
interesting that you have brought nrl into the equation wouldn't have thought of that
The Neutral View From Sweden
Roar Guru
Only meant for the professional game. I think NRL and AFL steal a lot more interest from SR than cricket does. The game is already dying in OZ, something needs to be done.