In his press conference ahead of his record-breaking 60th Test match as captain of Australia on Friday, 29-year-old Michael Hooper referred to 25-year-old Andrew Kellaway as “a kid”.
Hooper didn’t mean it to belittle the man. It was more that in terms of Test rugby, Kellaway’s six Test matches placed him well into the rookie category.
Yet Kellaway has been around the block. And if his comments in the official Rugby Championship Test match program are anything to go by, he’s not backward in coming forward.
Asked about the so-called ‘Giteau Law’ that places restrictions on which Australians can play for Australia, Kellaway says “the law’s got to be scrapped”.
“If you’re Australian you should be able to play for Australia. That’s regardless of where you’re playing in the world.
“The game’s changing, the world’s changing. If we don’t change with it, we’re going to find ourselves far worse off than we are now.”
(Photo by Getty Images)
Kellaway points to his former team, NSW Waratahs, who didn’t win a game in 2021. He worries that the Wallabies could look like that one day.
“At some stage we have to sit down and ask is it about winning or about nurturing the future,” he says.
“If it’s the latter, I would be extremely worried. The Wallabies might look like the Waratahs [did] this year.
“And unfortunately for those guys, it must’ve been a horrendous year to have to sit through that. None of them are to blame, it’s the people who thought it was okay to run what was essentially an academy side out of a professional team.
“That’s probably not a popular opinion and a little bit heavy.
“But I think it’s an absolute no brainer.”
The man is uniquely placed to comment. His rugby journey’s taken him from Gladesville to Randwick to Armidale to Northampton to Pukekohe to Melbourne to Abiko in the Chiba Prefecture east of Tokyo, and back to Melbourne.
His plan out of school was to play for NSW – which he achieved – and then the Wallabies, which took longer.
(Photo by Chris Hyde/Getty Images)
After that he assumed it’d be take the cash in France. He thought that’s just how rugby careers happened.
What happened to Kellaway was injury. Followed by the sad but sure realisation that he was on the outer at the Tahs. He signed with Northampton. It was the making of him.
“It was such a weird time in my life, leaving the Tahs and feeling really unfulfilled, there was no closure. I thought I had more to offer and I went to Saints, not ‘reluctantly’ but not super positive about footy either,” he says.
“I was 21, 22, away from home for the first time in this little town in the Midlands and wasn’t really that pumped about it.
“I was in a strange place but the people allowed me to be me and be comfortable being me. And it taught me about footy on the way, too.
“I still say now I’d drop everything and go back in a heartbeat.”
Kellaway’s biggest takeaway from Northampton was perspective. At the Waratahs he’d “stubbornly” and “arrogantly” fought against being a utility back. He wanted to play fullback.
At Saints he filled in at centre for injured Rob Horne before playing wing, fullback, wing and centre again.
“Northampton taught me that it doesn’t matter where you playing as long as you’re playing,” Kellaway says.
“I’d have played maybe 30 games either bench or starting and while I can’t say I played the best footy of my career, jeez I loved it. I was genuinely happy, is the best way to put it.”
Then a phone call begat a huge call. Melbourne Rebels had an opening though the money was a quarter what he was on. It was less even than his contract out of school with NSW. He took it anyway.
(Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
On the way home he picked up a ten week contract with Counties Manukau playing fullback. There followed a few good games for Melbourne Rebels when COVID struck. There followed an offer from NEC Green Hornets in Japan, money that was “too good to turn down”.
The Rebels were good about it. They appreciated that he’d taken the haircut to come home. Told him he’d earned it. Just come back to us as you left.
He did.
And then they picked for him Australia.
And here he is, a 25-year-old man who says he doesn’t want to be an “example” to his fellow professionals. But he would like to be a “reminder” of what’s possible. That no two journeys need be the same.
“I remember being told the number of Australian players currently playing outside of Australia and I remember being really shocked by the number. But it needn’t be the case,” Kellaway says.
“Hopefully with coming home and giving it a nudge, it’s a reminder to guys that it’s still an option if you’re willing to make a choice and do what’s necessary. It wasn’t easy to accept 25 per cent of the deal that I was on in England. That’s a tough thing to do. You talk about life after footy, that probably set me back.
“But then I look at where I am now and that choice was instrumental in putting me in this position. And I wouldn’t change it for the world.”
Kellaway acknowledges his decision wouldn’t work for everyone. That the money in Europe and Japan can be just too enticing for some men and their families.
(Photo by Anthony Au-Yeung/Getty Images)
“We’re not stupid, it’s not always possible because of the nature of the game and the way things are in our country,” he says.
“But we do want as many guys playing in Australia as possible. And guys might see me and think, ‘He was shit when I played against him, if he can do it so can I!’.”
The interviewer laughs. Kellaways says that he’s “deadly serious”.
“You laugh but there’s so many guys overseas who could be playing for Australia,” he says.
“And there could come a time when we’ll see them playing for Japan. In another life they’d be playing for Australia.”
But wouldn’t our local franchises and greater competition struggle if the best players were in Europe, Japan or the USA?
Kellaway acknowledges that “guys will slip through the cracks” should the law be removed. Yet he argues it’s happening anyway. And that Australian rugby is the worse for it.
“I hear the argument about Super Rugby dying if we let guys come and go. But, to be perfectly honest, I don’t really buy it,” he says.
“If it were the case that any Australian at any stage of their career could just leave and go to another team, easily… it isn’t that easy.
“There aren’t infinite amount of spots for Australians to play rugby and vanish into good teams. It just doesn’t happen that way… I don’t buy it.”
As Hooper told reporters, Kellaway will “question things if he thinks they can be done better”.
“But he’s open to learning as well.
“The kid’s had potential and I say ‘kid’ because he’s still pretty young although it feels like he’s been around for ages.
“We’re starting to see him really grow now and it’s fantastic for him.”
For Australian rugby, too.
All power to him.
AndyS
Guest
Interesting point, so a country like South Africa really has no hope of supporting any sort of professional sport then...even lower GDP again than Argentina, and a still larger population over which to spread it? Frankly, you've got it entirely the wrong way around. Having a small economy only matters when considering a sport entirely supported from within. But the claim seems to be that the game will thrive due to a Test team that others pay for, generating income to support the domestic game. So if Argentina and the Islands are so poor, it should only make it easier to create a professional development environment where it otherwise couldn't exist. With the annual average wage in Samoa being about $15k/yr, budgets even less than those in NZ's NPC should be ample to allow a fully professional comp in Samoa. But they can't manage it, even with no real competition for the players, because put simply an overseas based team doesn't actually generate the income. And in answer to your last question, that is why Argentina pushed for so long to involve itself in SR and why they indeed tried to push back towards only selecting domestically based players...because they've realised it is a dead end for the code domestically. But they are finding it is a very hard egg to unscramble with geography being their biggest enemy. Their greatest hope is probably that the game can become financial in North America, but I'll bet the moment it somehow did they'd be looking to get involved and then unwind overseas selection.
Dave
Roar Rookie
Argentina is the same. GDP is 1/4 of Australia, GDP per capita is close to 1/6 of Australia. Argentina has a tiny amount of available resources for rugby compared to Australia. Rugby in Argentina is also competing against a juggernaut in soccer. Even still they probably could have a domestic competition if they could attract a major company as a sponsor. The question you should be asking, would Argentina rugby be better if they banned overseas players playing for their country. The answer is almost certainly no.
GJ
Roar Rookie
That is easily answered. Playing for wallabies makes you more marketable in other comps and gets crowds in. Already proven by the SA situation.
GJ
Roar Rookie
Way off piste there mate. Super rugby is not as important as a winning wallabies team in terms of crowd support and participation rates. That is what matters because that is what gives you tv dollars and increased participation which is what they need to fill the depth problem. We have the data from the World Cup winning years proving this. It is a fact. Just as easily make super rugby a domestic only league with the winner to play the winner of NZ or SA domestic league for example. The super rugby format has been broken for years. Or have a super cup against the winner of the Heineken. Plenty of options at the club level.
AndyS
Guest
Which is why Argentina was also included. Explain that too...population of 44M+, have a good but entirely offshore based Test team, but despite all the supposed benefits can't manage better than an amateur domestic competition. Is that your vision for Australia too?
Double Agent
Guest
:laughing:
Gavin
Guest
Are the overseas players available to play for the Wallabies in the rugby championship or are they bound to their clubs.? If bound to their clubs and unavailable then this whole agreement is pointless,
James123
Guest
Agreed, Seriously if there was no restrictions on selecting overseas players for the Wallabies how would you select? Maybe some forwards but can't name any backs. Reminder they have to be better than the ones the are replacing, Most of the players currently overseas were not first choice Wallabies or ex Wallabies way past their best.
ethan
Guest
Yea this makes much more sense. Although arguably 'caps' is a bit too limiting, as players battle injury and selection. Id just say 7 years contracted in the top (not development or extended) squad.
Dave
Roar Rookie
It’s not disingenuous at all. “No one’s being told they can’t go overseas.” – They are being told that they can’t go overseas and play for Australia. “There are no limits being placed on anyone’s ability to earn.” – Of course there are, they are forced to either play overseas and not play for Australia OR play in Australia and be allowed to play for Australia. Both choices are limiting earnings. It’s actually disingenuous to suggest otherwise.
FrancisF
Roar Pro
Yes, get rid of the Giteau Law. Rugby Australia is not doing any favour to the code. The chaps in suits in RA had been the problem not the solution to the current state of hopelessness in Australian rugby. If the Giteau Law cannot be removed, then steps should be found to remove the current deadwoods in Rugby Australia. Clueless organisation… and that is why the Wallabies is like a box of gold tied to a rock and being stuck at the bottom of the sea for more than a decade while other teams are enjoying the sunlight.
Machpants
Roar Guru
He must have a good offer overseas for next season
Dave
Roar Rookie
Would Australian soccer be in a better situation if overseas players were banned for playing for Australia? There is no evidence of that. Putting barriers in pathways for people that want or might want to play rugby only hurts rugby, in participation numbers, player remuneration, quality of players and the amount of money Australian rugby generates. In fact in general, this kind of restriction of trade always has a negative effect. Unfortunately this negative effect is magnified by the fact that rugby is competing with other sports for athletes so any disincentive to play rugby does a lot of damage.
Dave
Roar Rookie
That's a bit of a stretch. Why do the pacific islands not have a strong domestic competition? Because their entire countries economy is miniscule compared to Australia - that is the reason, nothing to do with players playing overseas. The situation the pacific islands are in is absolutely nothing like Australia. To compare them is actually quite ridiculous, not a strong example.
stillmissit
Roar Guru
This ain't the gimme Kellaway thinks it is. I am in agreement with the idea but it needs to be approached with some serious discussion and crystal ball gazing. I have listened to the arguments from both sides for years and the Giteau Law broke it open and I am surprised that it's taken this long to get to this point. The biggest unspoken problem is the shrinking number of players to pick from. We have all read the blurb about player numbers but from the ground, it strikes me that many clubs can't field 4 teams let alone be a feeder to a major team or SR. Nobody is talking about changing that and I have never read any analysis of the situation. This is the #1 issue facing RA over the next 10 years with a proviso that it could change if youngsters decided to ignore mum, pester the anti rugby school and play the game. To summarise, it ain't easy but if we just let it go there will be no alternative to bring em back!
Colvin Brown
Roar Guru
GJ, I guess you're not lost in the 90's like the rest of us but it's considerably more complicated than you say, I'm afraid. If Super Rugby is important (and I'm sure it is given the extent TV funding funds the local game) then there is the need to keep players here. The SA Super teams have been decimated in recent years as have been the Aus. Super teams. But definitely relationships with overseas clubs are important and in the case of Aus. there needs to be the ability to identify and bring back more players for the WBs. It's the easiest thing in the world to criticize Aus. rugby administrators but without funds they've been quite limited in what they could do. Things are looking more positive now so let's hope it continues. Keeping players available to play in Super teams is key and RA needs to come up with a solution on how to do it. The SA structure can hardly be the solution in Aus. The NZ system appears much better.
Double Agent
Guest
Oz rugby player wants to have cake and eat it too. What a surprise.
piru
Roar Rookie
So why change the law?
piru
Roar Rookie
Exactly, so why does the rule need changing?
piru
Roar Rookie
No one's being told they can't go overseas. There are no limits being placed on anyone's ability to earn. This argument is at best disingenuous