Fireworks wrote:I think the rule change will help but I still think there will be issues. There is the spirit and the letter of the law and I think that thought has already been given in how some might look to get around the spirit of the rules.
I don't think that the likes of Strauss and other project players from top 8 countries is the area where the focus should be. If the second tier countries, especially the islands, can keep their talent and get some investment it could be great for the game. It could make the WC more competitive and expand the reach of the game.
Thanks to those with the real info for the clarifications.
The SH sides were very keen on allowing players to switch back eg like of Chris Masoe with no NZ caps for a long time playing for Samoa but Celts were biggest stumbling block
Be interesting if that is revived and what criteria proposed
Islands have no pro rugby so its more about tying players IMO
Retired from babbling. Can be found on twittter @okeeffesimon
Dave Cahill wrote:Artemiev definitely played for the u19s, I saw him play against the Aussies up in Ravenhill
He wasn't allowed play for Ireland in the U-19 World Cup
Wasn't allowed or wasn't selected? The U19s were never a disqualifying level and he played in the u-19s tri-nations tournament here, an IRB (as was) tournament, winning the triple crown IIRC
Dave Cahill wrote:Artemiev definitely played for the u19s, I saw him play against the Aussies up in Ravenhill
He wasn't allowed play for Ireland in the U-19 World Cup
Wasn't allowed or wasn't selected? The U19s were never a disqualifying level and he played in the u-19s tri-nations tournament here, an IRB (as was) tournament, winning the triple crown IIRC
Wasn't allowed to be selected. It was due to the fact that his family home was deemed to be in Russia while he was boarding in Blackrock.
cormac wrote:
Wasn't allowed to be selected. It was due to the fact that his family home was deemed to be in Russia while he was boarding in Blackrock.
That only matters for teams at a disqualifying level, and at that point in time that was the u-21s. The U19s were Irelands 'Schoolboys' level team (n.b. Schoolboys, not Schools) where you represented a System rather than a Nation - same concept as Irish Universities.
I'm somewhat familiar with his family circumstances, and indeed he was never resident in Ireland as regards IRB regulations - but what I'm saying is that for the u19s that wasn't a requirement - you just had to be u19 and part of the Irish education system.
neiliog93 wrote:What they could do is make a rule that if a player moves to a new country as a teenager but at least one guardian does not, then it doesn't count towards eligibility (as would likely be the case for a French club tapping up a 14 yr old Georgian prop or Fijian/Pacific Isle wing). However, if one parent moves as well, it is more likely to be a case of genuine emigration. Now, you might say what's to stop French clubs or Saracens from paying for parents too, but I think it's a significant cost risk for early teen players who may not ever develop as projected.
Saracens would much rather that their young talent were not eligible for international rugby. So that would be win-win for them ... they get a player who can play for Saracens and Fiji (but knows if he regularly plays for Fiji he'll probably get dumped from Saracens) which is much better than a player who can play for Saracens and England.
neiliog93 wrote:What they could do is make a rule that if a player moves to a new country as a teenager but at least one guardian does not, then it doesn't count towards eligibility (as would likely be the case for a French club tapping up a 14 yr old Georgian prop or Fijian/Pacific Isle wing). However, if one parent moves as well, it is more likely to be a case of genuine emigration. Now, you might say what's to stop French clubs or Saracens from paying for parents too, but I think it's a significant cost risk for early teen players who may not ever develop as projected.
Saracens would much rather that their young talent were not eligible for international rugby. So that would be win-win for them ... they get a player who can play for Saracens and Fiji (but knows if he regularly plays for Fiji he'll probably get dumped from Saracens) which is much better than a player who can play for Saracens and England.
I think you mean Clermont surely, the team with the academy in fiji in order to get around JIFF regulations and the espoirs squad stuffed with foreigners?
neiliog93 wrote:What they could do is make a rule that if a player moves to a new country as a teenager but at least one guardian does not, then it doesn't count towards eligibility (as would likely be the case for a French club tapping up a 14 yr old Georgian prop or Fijian/Pacific Isle wing). However, if one parent moves as well, it is more likely to be a case of genuine emigration. Now, you might say what's to stop French clubs or Saracens from paying for parents too, but I think it's a significant cost risk for early teen players who may not ever develop as projected.
Saracens would much rather that their young talent were not eligible for international rugby. So that would be win-win for them ... they get a player who can play for Saracens and Fiji (but knows if he regularly plays for Fiji he'll probably get dumped from Saracens) which is much better than a player who can play for Saracens and England.
True, but at that point the RFU or World Rugby could make rules limiting the number of foreign players in academies.
"This is breathless stuff.....it's on again. Contepomi out to Hickie,D'Arcy,Hickie.......................HICKIE FOR THE CORNER! THAT IS AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What is really needed is a benevolent billionaire to sponsor a Super Rugby team in Suva, with the aim of mainly keeping international standard Fijian, Tongan and Samoan players close to home. He would fund the first team as well as reasonable academy infrastructure in the three countries. Obviously players would still leave but it might help to stem the flow, and boost the performance and player availability of the three international teams (and help prevent other nations poaching them).
"This is breathless stuff.....it's on again. Contepomi out to Hickie,D'Arcy,Hickie.......................HICKIE FOR THE CORNER! THAT IS AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
First post in that link quotes an Irish Times article.
Its a weird one so - not allowed play for a team in an IRB sanctioned tournament after playing for the same team in an IRB sanctioned tournament earlier that season!
First post in that link quotes an Irish Times article.
Its a weird one so - not allowed play for a team in an IRB sanctioned tournament after playing for the same team in an IRB sanctioned tournament earlier that season!
My recollection is that his ineligibility was pointed out only just before the U-19 RWC tournament in the UAE that year. My suspicion is that he probably wasn't eligible to play in the tournament you're referencing either but no-one had copped it at that stage.
2006 was the last year of the u19/u21 teams before they were folded into the u20s we have now - i'd say things were a bit chaotic. I'm certain he should have been allowed play for the u19s in that world cup as the u19s were never a 'national' team, unlike the u21s
Dave Cahill wrote:2006 was the last year of the u19/u21 teams before they were folded into the u20s we have now - i'd say things were a bit chaotic. I'm certain he should have been allowed play for the u19s in that world cup as the u19s were never a 'national' team, unlike the u21s
There was an U-19 RWC in 2007 too. It took place in Belfast. Ireland fielded an U-20 team in the 6N in 2007 but the Junior World Cup (i.e. U-20's) only started in 2008.
By we I meant Ireland, we sent an u20 team to the JWC in 2007 - teams amalgated their u19/21 teams at different paces, the 2007 6 Nations had mixed grades too
simonokeeffe wrote:knock on effect: Wales bringing back an A side next season, say theyre aiming for one fixture but hopefully that will grow
tis but a dream but I loing for a return to a full A 6nations
Why?
why would I like to see the A 6 nations back?
dont think it will happen with league fixture pileups but they were great games to go to (cheaper and more fun than most full internationals), fans and coaches get to see players try to bridge gap between provincial and international, theyd have a good chance of selling out the provincial grounds too so with TV cash theres money going round too. Also good for getting guys up to full fitness for seniors too. Away fans used to love them too
Retired from babbling. Can be found on twittter @okeeffesimon
