Rugby Australia to review 'Giteau Law'

Rarely is the case for a Reduced 50 or 40 test Giteau law limit stated - but there are benefits as well as all the usual negatives thrown around. Allowing experienced WB players to go overseas but remain eligible rounds their skills out (most become better players) and opens spots in the SR sides to develop more talent at that level. Maybe it actually stops these situations where young talent stuck behind ageING incumbents just never get a sniff and leave for league. How many WB U20s Five-eights are still in SR from the last 5+ years???? Not many because they never get a game.

I honestly think there has to be transparency and accountability. This is a sport, not a business. You read a lot of my comments TWAS so I suppose you know this is a big issue for me. We should be making decisions on what is best for all of the player population and the interests of the sport. Decision makers need to be accountable to the rugby fraternity. (Which is how the governance should be constructed I suppose) Pretending it is a "business" means we get decisions made by people who are supposedly qualified to make them and then shrouded in the secrecy of a public company. That method is working well for banks. We are entitled to know Johnson's recommendation to Castle and Castle's recommendation to the Board, and the details of the Board's ruminations. The RBA tells everyone that information about interest rate cuts. As for the decision itself. The bitterest complaints about Cheika is sticking with players he trusted to get the job done. Once we start selecting players from different competitions overseas my concern is that it will become harder for players coming through to break in to an established team. At any one time the majority of the established team will be overseas so the new player has limited opportunity to play against competitors in his position. SR teams will be weaker and with fewer experienced players so player development will be slower. There will need to be a lot more Kerevis before the balance is tipped far enough.

Yes, just came back.

Vermuelen and Brits were both SA based.

But it’s a seasonal sport – so you build over seasons. Even if every 4th year isn’t your target. It’s a season to season build. Integrating overseas players in a RWC year in your way would see your team basically starting from scratch the next year in developing your XV again. A huge part of Fiji’s struggles is they don’t build. They play 3 years and then get a bunch more fully available for a world cup. It’s an example of how it doesn’t work because all their opponents have been building a team over 4 years.

Naiyavoro would be filling the same role as Koroibete and we know Naiyavoro has some weal weaknesses that could be exploited too. Morahan would be completing with Hodge as the 2nd fb. But Hodge is partially there due to his long field and goal kicking.

The point of 60 tests is too ensure they are proven internationals.

a friendly against the barbarians :silly:

Corne “Willie le Roux wasn’t great until the final.” Well if you were going to pick a bloke to play one good game, which game would you like it to be?

Train, without taking sides here, the wings would return because we need two or three specialist wings, not one?

What happened to Fardy?

You are correct and that's a lot of talent and the correct decision was made by SA to allow overseas players and will prove to be beneficial in future as well. I think for the Wallabies removing Giteau Law wont make a real difference as pointed out they only have 2 real standouts as it is for NZL who have many good overseas players but besides Piatau who else is really outstanding that will make there 23 man squad. The focus for the Wallabies should be utilising the talent which they have in AUS and only if like SA you have a long list of outstanding players then change the law by all means but it's not worth changing now.

Scott Fardy??

Well if you consider the overseas players in the squad. Cheslin Kolbe Cobus Reinach Duane Vermeulen Faf De Klerk Francois Louw Franco Mostert Frans Steyn Schalk Brits Vincent Koch Willie le Roux I think the 80 minute men are the ones to look at who made an impact on the tournament. Cheslin Kolbe most definitely Duane Vermeulen definitely Faf de Klerk definitely (although his pedantic prep before box kicking drove me up the walls) Franco Mostert was good, but then eclipsed by Lood de Jager Willie le Roux wasn’t great until the final. Brits was there for his experience, guidance to the younger players and all round positive influence on the squad, Frans Steyn for his experience and utility value. Although never really needed during the RWC. Reinach had limited game time, Francois Louw and Koch experienced bench options.

Why did it work so well for SA ? The answer is simple they brought in players who had been in outstanding form not just good Kolbe,Mostert,Koch etc. Australia should only consider an overseas player if his form is outstanding and they will get the same result. So which overseas players fall into that outstanding bracket and no disrespect to players like Fardy and Gill who I really like ,but if its overseas players they must be of a high standard and there are only 3 that have been outstanding consistently and that is Naiyaravoro,Skelton and Morahan. So Giteau law should not be a major subject and can probably remain in place because there are only 2 players Skelton and Morahan thar are in a class of their own that can't be matched by anything in AUS.

You can pick overseas based players that are in outstanding form like a Kolbe who came in against Australia and New Zealand last year. If there's a shootout between an overseas and local based player then you choose the local player. Also 60 caps is way too high a threshold. Make it maybe 3 seasons of super rugby worth of caps (so maybe 30, provisioning for injuries and bans). But what is clear is that you can't continue not picking your best available players whilst your rival teams have removed these restrictions because you are not going to be competitive. What New Zealand, RSA and Australia should do is to appoint a European and Japan based coach/scout who watches these overseas based players to keep track of their form and performances in the same way they watch super rugby players because as much as we might hate it, the game of rugby is now global and therez not much we can do to reverse it. Money always talks the loudest at the end of the day.

That's why the 60 test rule makes sense. You've got a long history of test selection to reference.

Why do we need to bring wingers back? Koroibete was our best player for example.

Hard to tell TWAS. Players like Frost,Hockings and Mcreight could in a few years become better players than what DR selects 2020/21,I think 2022 is probably when we will have a clearer idea of what the the squad will look like 2023. Overseas players we not talking about 10-15 players 4/5 for the most so the overseas players wont bring lots of chopping and changing. What comes in from overseas has to be better than what's in AUS otherwise what's the use. 1.Arnold No, I am happy with the lock stock in AUS 2.Kerevi No, highly overrated 3.Coleman No,he is average 99 percent of the time. 4 .Gill No,like locks we have enough talent in AUS. The only players that I can see bringing value are Naiyaravoro and Morahan they are 2 of the best wingers up North. McMahon,Fardy and Skelton who is a lock and I have mentioned we have enough in AUS,but what he brings in attack no lock in AUS can provide.

Out of those players only Latu would be picked ! Most of them like Higgers are done, particularly Genia. Overall he was disappointing at WC. Much rather see a Powell, Tate get a shot over a “hasbeen”.