Is it time to scrap the Giteau law?

Scrap the law and make it compulsory to have completed a season of Super Rugby (or a feeder system) before being able to pull on the Wallaby Jersey.

You're right about Skelton and White, FC. They are at Saracens and Exeter, which have probably the two best rugby programs in England, the two clubs who played in this years' final. There are many more players who are at inferior set-ups or who aren't suited by the style of game played by their club. But they're being well paid regardless.

I think that's partly true Andy. But I also think that RA isn't necessarily sitting on its hands, it's more a function of that's what happens when you're in a card game and you don't have the cards nor the bank that other players do - you find yourself going along while others make the play, looking for an opportunity here and there, but mostly trying to hang in there, as you say, hoping for a miracle. This is really where my book came from. I looked at why the prognosis for Australian rugby and also NZ rugby was so poor, and posed the question, 'is this all because our administrators are so hopeless, or are there factors that are out of their control that are forcing them to make bad decisions, or that are so pervasive that it doesn't matter what decisions they make?'

Some good points there. The national jersey for any country will always have it’s appeal, and will keep people local if the money is competitive. That’s where the problem starts If rugby continues to have less support in Oz then RA will struggle to offer competitive packages. More players going OS despite the appeal of a national jersey. Compounded by the money OS also being on the rise. Don’t blame them. They only have a small time to make their money, and can set themselves up to not have to work for the rest of their lives. In a RWC year if two players are even, then select the local over the OS. Otherwise, if a clearly better player OS is available then we should drop the Giteau rule, and select that player. The showpiece needs our best team on the park, imho

Sandbox its certainly a question that isnt always getting a straight answer....I just feel that if we open the door its probably impossible to close it again.....If I use Arron Cruden as an example then NZ had 50 tests from him before he left so altho many say he left too early and that his leaving was a tragity it also shows that NZ had 50 tests from him prior to him leaving....If NZ gets 35 tests from someone before they are paid the big bucks OS then NZ will still remain competitive in world rugby.....maybe not no 1 but up the pointy end....Then of course there are quite a few that dont leave NZ at all or that choose short term sabaticles.....TBH I see Japan domestic rugby as the main savior for both Aus and NZ rugby retaining their players as their season is different to ours and they play minimal games per season so the player burnout is non existant.....Aus needs to stop the Giteau rule and make a brave call..back themselves to keep enough to be top 8 in the world and leave it at that....Only my opinion of course but I dont see an open selection policy as a success in the future

It auto-corrects to canary yellow when referring to Aus.

The Force joined in 2006 from memory. Since 06, we have rarely had more than one good team. Back in Super 12 we often had two very days teams. I’m not saying we should cut more teams, as it is a terrible thing for the players and fans of the team in that state, but I think you’re right, Rob, that Australia would likely be strongest with three teams. Good discussions.

Peter I get the passion. I’ll let some of those comments go because they’re not really my bag - Nic White, Sydney Uni etc But I’ll take you up on the main point about RA strategy. Sure, there have been some exceptions to the rule with the Brumbies, Reds and Tahs having a win each in last 15 years, but let’s not pretend that is good enough to succeed in the Australian sports market. The Wallabies slide in that time is also pretty obvious. There’s more than a correlation between poor SR teams and poor Wallabies. Crowds, winning habits, pathway aspirations. They are a flywheel of success. All the Australian SR teams have thin squads. We need to go back to go forwards, to earn the right to grow. The NRC is a marketing wet dream. It doesn’t tap into the tribal identity of clubs so is doomed and a waste of money in its current form. An end of season inter-state club comp would be a better place to start. I’m guessing you’re from Perth. I remember training there in the 1990s, great club spirit. For the record I wanted the Force over the Rebels because of that grassroots passion. I think it’s tragic that Twiggy’s money didn’t come earlier and couldn’t swing it. Again, I don’t know the details of what happened, but that seemed a crazy outcome to me. But how he’s spending his money now just seems pointless. Passionate but pointless. As hard as each of those 4 strategies are, there is a consistent logic to them. Focus on getting to winning teams at SR and Wallaby level so we don’t bleed to other sports. In a word: focus.

“little confidence that they are looking deep enough at Oz rugby’s structural issues.” Yep. Jez, the divide between you and Geoff is where I am sitting on this one. Geoff, you describe our challenge extremely well. I agree with all of what you say. But I also agree with Jez in that we need to do something structurally and significantly different. And soon.

Ryan The reason you need to use the phrase ‘canary yellow’ jersey is what exactly? ‘Gold’ is so much easier to write.

stakeholders sit down together first. Put aside self interest, see if something can be nutted out with Twiggy, deep pockets” This. Especially the self interest bit.

as I see it, this is not going to be a short-term solution, but maybe consider using the Super Rugby berths as a carrot of sorts for teams that do well in the National Rugby Championship (and have ALL STATES being represented, not just the bigger states/territories or the more developed, ALL STATES) Also, part of the reason why Australian Rugby is so much out of sight, out of mind, is that there is barely any representation, direct or indirect from outside of its traditional areas (as a South Australian for example, why would I support the Wallabies, when there has not been even one player from South Australia in its entire history, and no Wallabies tests since 2004 in Adelaide, as a result I would support anyone who plays against the Wallabies, and I really hope that the Wallabies get knocked out in the group stage of the 2019 Rugby World Cup, so that Rugby Australia, or should I say, Rugby East Australia can see how much neglect of the majority of its state/territory unions has alienated large swathes of the country)

I understand it isn’t simple. NZ has the depth and SR/domestic teams to always choose local, regardless of the quality OS. Fiji, for example does not. Australia is currently somewhere in between. Probably on the NZ side of half way Should we always choose local? Arguments for: are the retaining of players, promoting the game, competing with the other codes. Arguments against: game is dying even with this policy, too costly to pay someone like Hooper $1M a year to prevent him going OS, a more competitive RWC will give the game a higher profile (that year at least), it’s heading towards a global game, like soccer, and like soccer, some countries just aren’t in the position to only choose locally

Rob M, lots of people like your comments. I’m not so sure. You say Australia was most competitive in SR when we had NSW, Qld and ACT only. Meh. The Force joined in 2004, Melbourne in 2011. Australian teams won in 2004, 2011 and 2014. Blows that argument out of the water. We don’t have enough money. Which is why the incredibly stupid ARU spent 12 months killing the Force and doing $1 shenanigans with the Rebels. Killed a very strong and growing Union based community in Perth for a shonky mob in Melbourne who can barely get their Sherrin-obsessed heads around the fact that Rugby is not league. Oh, and is that Monopoly money billionaire Andrew Forrest is using? That could have been available, from outside your North East Australia Rugby Union, if that NEARU wasn’t so tribally obsessed. “We don’t have the player pool.” And we’ll grow that pool by cutting to 3 teams. Of course. In simple terms, that’s 3 fullbacks required, not 5. Boy, that’s really opened up those pathways you talk about! I think the NRC needs to be strengthened. Pathways, remember? And bugger what the Friends Of Sydney University or Shute Shield Ackadoos might want. Speaking of which, how stinking off is is that Nic White, with not one second of SS play during the season, can waltz into the grand final? What sort of message doe# that send the players for whom you spruik “developing pathways”? Sorry, it’s great that you’re putting out ideas. Loud applause for that. I just think that much of it is not right.

"Those domestic competitions work Jez because AFL and Rugby League are (essentially) domestic sports, and their competitions are the pinnacle of their sport." Surely Union and League are competing for the same talents. If it is domestic, Union will probably have a better chance to be as appealing as League. If it appeals, it can monetise better. If it monetises better, more can go into the players' pockets. Overseas based. You do a Skelton law, not a Giteau law. Players can play overseas and be selected for Wallabies when they are playing for one of the Top 4 teams either in England or in France or Top 2 in NZ, SA or the Pro14.

Scrap it. It's a protectionist measure a bit like import tariffs that ultimately stifle the local economy. Time for RA to acknowledge that it's a global sport and players will want the experience of playing OS.

Sandbox what do you believe the NH clubs look for? They dont go and buy all the up and coming potential talent so NZ will keep producing that talent whether the top guys are being poached or not....Rugby is unique with its qualification rules and with them being tightened recently it is less likely now to go OS and end up playing for a different test team than it was....Every 4 years the SH test sides have been decimated yet here we are still looking at 2 SH sides dominating betting for the WC and Aus being a great shot at going some distance....England, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, France, Italy etc dont lose any players every 4 years other than the usual retirements and yet they still cant consistantly win V the top SH sides....Is the player drain a real pain? For sure...Is it the death of rugby in the SH? Not yet and not while we continue to develop our talent to be the best in the world.....And if the ABs were 6th in the rankings then so be it....But that has not happened yet and we are now heading in to the 9th running of the WC...So if it hasnt happened yet and the club scene in the UK and france is tightening its qualifing rules then when is this going to happen? So far...after 23 years of pro rugby and 23 years of NH pilliging the SH its not happened yet.....

I think we agree it should be the strategy Geoff, but I would have expected to see far more direction and movement if it actually were. I think they are actually just drifting aimlessly, hoping for a miracle, and the decision will be made for them by others.

I have always said the Giteau law was a dumb law. Players are busting their guts week in, week out playing Super Rugby for Australian teams. They turn down overseas and League offers in the dream of chasing that Wallaby jersey, only to see some bloke who's plying his trade offshore get selected with a big wad of cash. Those players, become disillusioned with the ARU and will start taking those offers from League and overseas. This will in turn mean selecting players of club standard only to play Super Rugby. You'll have close inter state clashes, but lose by 50 points against any overseas team, including the Sunwolves. Fans will fall away in droves. Your TV networks won't have viewers and therefore, wont be buying content. More and more young players will switch to league as they see the ARU lose money hand over fist and can only offer its players bugger all. You then have clubs not releasing its players. You make it to the world cup. Hooper playing, For Sale, has an "injury" and is "unavailable". So are all the other flankers you've let go (because you know the law will get less and less stringent and more and more players sod off because some bloke overseas keeps getting selected for the Wallabies). So Hoopers replacement will be Shane from Coober Pedy who's played three Super Rugby games for the South Australian Outbacks. You will almost become the Brazil of the Rugby world. A great international record (thanks to the firm arm of FIFA), but a broke, second rate local comp. Like Brazil, but without the firm arm of FIFA. (or the international record).... Get rid of the Giteau Law.

I don't think that comparison works. Quade didn't lose out on a jersey to "mercenaries" and his lack of selection certainly has nothing to do with the attempts to get back Skelton. He lost out as a specialist flyhalf to Foley and CLL both of whom are the opposite of mercenaries - they've played in Australia for the best part of a decade or more. While Quade may be willing to "do anything for a gold jersey", it was his form at the back half of the Super season that made sure he was never going to see one.