International selections faletau, tuilagi, Waldrom et al

handsomecake

What is everyone's views on this trend?

Waldrom is not English by any stretch and spent his formative years in new Zealand and learned how to play the game there.

And before it's mentioned - I do differentiate between a Tongan moving to new Zealand when he is two or three and ending up playing for the all blacks and a new zealander in his late 20's/ 30's moving to England and playing for them. There is a difference in my opinion.

England have 166,000 registered players. France have 110000. New Zealand have 27,000. England shouldn't need to do this . they could have tuilagi , flutey and hape in their backline! And Waldrom and Botha in the forwards. And if we are being really pedantic - Stevens and corbisiero, oh and Hartley !

CatFromHue

Well I wouldnt be a fan of it but they havent broken any rules!

Luke Narraway, the Gloucester No. 8 isnt a fan of it either.

He has tweeted "Good luck to Thomas the tank and his English nan. #notbittermuch" in reference to Waldrom getting picked ahead of him.

http://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/2011/0620/johnsonm.html

thomond2006

Narraway tweeted later that he was only taking the piss with that comment.

totallegend

handsomecake wrote: »

International selections faletau, tuilagi, Waldrom et al

I totally agree re Waldrom, it's a ridiculous state of affairs that he didn't even have to wait the 3 years to qualify on residency.

I wouldn't tar Tuilagi and Faletau with the same brush. Tuilagi has been in England (illegally I think) since he was a kid, think Faletau grew up in Wales?

Judgement Day

It won't make any difference to England's chances anyway. Assuming they get out of their easy group (Argentina/Scotland/Georgia and Romania) and past France in the quarter final they will be taken down by the Aussies in the Semi. That is, of course, assuming Toby Flood retains the starting cap.

handsomecake

totallegend wrote: »

I totally agree re Waldrom, it's a ridiculous state of affairs that he didn't even have to wait the 3 years to qualify on residency.

I wouldn't tar Tuilagi and Faletau with the same brush. Tuilagi has been in England (illegally I think) since he was a kid, think Faletau grew up in Wales?

Fair enough on the other two, but in Waldrom's
case he left the crusaders/ new Zealand because he knew he wouldn't be picked for the allblacks and essentially whored himself out to England. I rate him as a player and I loved him for the canes and crusaders but it's mercenary stuff at it's worst.

Reminds me of the gervais quote in the office " I'd rather be at the bottom of a ladder worth climbing then half way up one that isn't " . Well Waldrom is half way up one that isn't.

Would you guys be happy with nacewa getting picked for Ireland on residency ( if he could hypothetically ) ahead of Kearney or Felix jones

handsomecake

Imagine being narraway and a new zealander pitches up half way through a world cup cycle and takes your place

Legion2008

Let's leave the debate about nacewa to one side .... it's a hypothetical ... what about Isaac Boss .... part of the NZ under 19 squad in 1999 .... I remember reading somewhere recently that he went to ireland because he figured he wasn't going to get into the All Blacks squad .... (think it was in the Independent but can't find the article)

Let's not be too hasty to judge, Irish teams have in the past used this rule and may well do so again in the future ....

desertcircus

It's a necessary evil. I'd rather have Waldrom play for England than deny a spot to someone who's lived here for the three years and honestly thinks of himself as Irish. It's both or neither, and I'd rather err on the charitable side. Boss stayed in Ireland when he left Ulster rather than move to France, so I'm not inclined to make a judgment call on how Irish he really is.

GerM

Boss always wanted to play with Ireland but didn't want to leave NZ until he had completed his studies. If stories are to be believed, he turned down an invite to a NZ training camp when he was with the Chiefs.

CatFromHue

None of these guys have broken any rules!

I do think the residency time should be lengthened to 5 years though.

It will be interesting to see how many of these guys stay in england or retire back home.

Actually the only guy to have broken the rules was tuilagi but he was given an exemption.

http://www.thisisbusiness-eastmidlands.co.uk/news/New-hope-Manu-stay-bid/article-2316897-detail/article.html

New hope Leicester Tigers star Tuilagi may be able to stay in Britain
Thursday, June 17, 2010, 09:30

There is fresh hope that a rising Leicester Tigers star fighting deportation may be able to stay in Britain.

Immigration officials have now called Manu Tuilagi's lawyer and told the Mercury they were "keen to achieve a solution" for the teenager.

On Monday, it was reported that Manu had his application to stay in the UK turned down by the Home Office, meaning he faces being sent back to his native Samoa.

It was a major blow for the 19-year-old, who was about to be offered a professional contract at Welford Road after rising through the ranks at the Tigers academy.

The teenager came to the UK with his family on a six-month holiday visa about six years ago, and stayed on without permission.


His lawyer, Chris Randall, said yesterday that the overstay made it difficult for Manu to secure a sportsman's visa, which he would need to play for the Tigers professionally.

He had an initial request for "leave to remain" in the country turned down, even though the club had argued the player's case was "exceptional".

However, officials from the UK Border Agency got in touch with Mr Randall, on Tuesday, to say they were willing to discuss his case.

Mr Randall, of London law firm Bates, Wells and Braithwaite, said: "We welcome that.

"There will be a meeting where we'll be able to discuss the case and I imagine they will be in contact at some point to set a date."

Manu is unlikely to be deported before the meeting happens.

Leicester Tigers said they hoped the meeting would be a "positive" step.

Simon Cohen, the club's head of operations, said: "We were concerned that they hadn't taken into account Manu's exceptional circumstances.

"If we can have an opportunity to chat to them and put his case on the table, I see that as a positive.

"If we're talking to them it means we're in with a shot."

In a statement, the UK Border Agency said: "We are keen to speak to Leicester Tigers to achieve a solution."

Manu has received glowing praise from Tigers coach Richard Cockerill, who said it would be a "crying shame" if he had to leave.

A Facebook group was set up after Manu's story was reported in the Mercury and it has attracted several messages of support.

Shaun Gibson, the Tigers season ticket-holder who set up the group, which already has more than 130 members, said that he had the support of fans.

Shaun, 43, from Glenfield, said: "He's a brilliant player and nobody wants to see him deported."

Manu's brothers Freddie, Henry, Andy, Alesana and Vavae have all played for Tigers but have not had problems with work visas.

Manu has played for the second team, the academy and in friendlies.

He was not available to comment yesterday.

JustinDee

handsomecake wrote: »

What is everyone's views on this trend?

Waldrom is not English by any stretch and spent his formative years in new Zealand and learned how to play the game there.

And before it's mentioned - I do differentiate between a Tongan moving to new Zealand when he is two or three and ending up playing for the all blacks and a new zealander in his late 20's/ 30's moving to England and playing for them. There is a difference in my opinion.

England have 166,000 registered players. France have 110000. New Zealand have 27,000. England shouldn't need to do this . they could have tuilagi , flutey and hape in their backline! And Waldrom and Botha in the forwards. And if we are being really pedantic - Stevens and corbisiero, oh and Hartley !

If they qualify then so be it. Up to England what they want to do with talent available to them. If Waldrom was Irish qualified, you can bet your keyster he'd be chased. He's a very good player.
Remember cheering for Simon Geoghegan? Boss scoring against England in 2007? Rep of Ireland in 1990 and 1994 World Cups? Ireland beating Pakistan in 2007 CWC?
Provided you haven't played at qualificable level for a country already, nothing wrong with declaring for another that you qualify for. Ireland is most certainly no different.

totallegend

handsomecake wrote: »

Fair enough on the other two, but in Waldrom's
case he left the crusaders/ new Zealand because he knew he wouldn't be picked for the allblacks and essentially whored himself out to England. I rate him as a player and I loved him for the canes and crusaders but it's mercenary stuff at it's worst.

Reminds me of the gervais quote in the office " I'd rather be at the bottom of a ladder worth climbing then half way up one that isn't " . Well Waldrom is half way up one that isn't.

Would you guys be happy with nacewa getting picked for Ireland on residency ( if he could hypothetically ) ahead of Kearney or Felix jones

There'll be a non-hypothetical issue in about a year's time when Richardt Strauss qualifies. Personally, yes, I would take him (Strauss); he took a chance coming over here, he's slogged his guts out for Leinster and he's set up home here. He'll be a great addition to the Ireland squad and if he maintains this season's form, it's not hard to see him being 1st choice.

CatFromHue

in a few years we could have a tight five containing struass, borlase, and sykes!

the rules need to be changed.

little173

JustinDee wrote: »

If they qualify then so be it. Up to England what they want to do with talent available to them. If Waldrom was Irish qualified, you can bet your keyster he'd be chased. He's a very good player.
Remember cheering for Simon Geoghegan? Boss scoring against England in 2007? Rep of Ireland in 1990 and 1994 World Cups? Ireland beating Pakistan in 2007 CWC?
Provided you haven't played at qualificable level for a country already, nothing wrong with declaring for another that you qualify for. Ireland is most certainly no different.

Hey - Simon Geoghegan?? Thats totally different. If you are a second generation Irish brought up in the UK where you always supported Ireland and would always play for Ireland its not the same as Waldroon who is basically NZ.
In any case, his star has waned somewhat, he couldnt get on the tigers team for either the HC semi or Prem final, dont think he will make the cut. Manu is okay but lacks the finesse for centre without having the all out power of a Nonu or SBW.

I dont like it personally, there is a difference between the rules and what feels right.

totallegend

CatFromHue wrote: »

in a few years we could have a tight five containing struass, borlase, and sykes!

the rules need to be changed.

Not on the evidence of this season!

durkadurka

I thought boss had an Irish granny?

yimrsg

Other nations are maximising their playing pools in accordance with the rules, why shouldn't Ireland? If a player qualifies via a long lost granny or residency and they want to play for their adoptive nation then so be it. To me is just a signifier of rugby's ability to bring people together.

France have gotten players who could have played rugby for other nations though nothing like the amount of players for their football team. Italy and Argentina have a long history of players going in opposite directions. USA have Ngwenya, Wales have earmarked that no.8 for Scarlets who is English, and England I think could nearly field a starting 15 that were born or who qualify in other countries.

CatFromHue

totallegend wrote: »

Not on the evidence of this season!

No but Strauss didnt get a look in last year. Jackman retired at the end of last season, then John Fogarty retired at the start of this season leaving Strauss and Harris Wright as the only hookers available.

Also Nacewa was viewed as a dud until he moved to the wing / full back.

I wouldnt write off Borlase just yet.

JustinDee

little173 wrote: »

Hey - Simon Geoghegan?? Thats totally different. If you are a second generation Irish brought up in the UK where you always supported Ireland and would always play for Ireland its not the same as Waldroon who is basically NZ.
In any case, his star has waned somewhat, he couldnt get on the tigers team for either the HC semi or Prem final, dont think he will make the cut. Manu is okay but lacks the finesse for centre without having the all out power of a Nonu or SBW.

I dont like it personally, there is a difference between the rules and what feels right.

Yes, Simon Geoghegan.
He is an Englishman who qualified for Ireland because his father was Irish. As far as qualifying for a country other than the one you are from, as far as Ireland and some other countries are concerned, grandparent or parent makes no difference.

JustinDee

handsomecake wrote: »

Would you guys be happy with nacewa getting picked for Ireland on residency ( if he could hypothetically ) ahead of Kearney or Felix jones

Well, you're Irish yourself. Do you object to the naturalised players who have played for your international team already?

handsomecake

JustinDee wrote: »

Well, you're Irish yourself. Do you object to the naturalised players who have played for your international team already?

Ogara and heaslip - pedantry - no issues with them

Boss middle of the road -

Nacewa - I wouldn't be impressed.

The problem with this whole debate I think is that there is lots of grey areas, some cases stink more then others.

Manu tuilagi- almost launched out of the country for being there illegally, has a brother who plays for Samoa ( who fought Lewis moody in twickers after upending cueto, has an un-English name, and is going to stand there in September belting out god save the queen with a red Rose on his chest. This is club rugby all over again

smurphy29

The rules are the rules, but one poster put it best when he said that what feels right has to be considered. One or two naturalised players is one thing, but England having seven in their RWC squad would be going beyond the mark, in my opinion. Hard to know how to combat it: extending the requirement to five years would be one idea, though.

handsomecake

smurphy29 wrote: »

The rules are the rules, but one poster put it best when he said that what feels right has to be considered. One or two naturalised players is one thing, but England having seven in their RWC squad would be going beyond the mark, in my opinion. Hard to know how to combat it: extending the requirement to five years would be one idea, though.

14/45 players born outside england

totallegend

Just for context, Ireland's naturalised or parent-rule players from the last ten years or so (top of my head stuff):

Boss
Court
McCarthy & Wilkinson (in RWC squad but not capped yet)
Tuohy
the Easterbys
Maggs
Gleeson
Henderson
Bishop
Burke
Mullins
Ward
O'Cuinneagain
J Fitzpatrick

Probably missing a load of others, but of the above list, Simon Easterby, Gleeson, Maggs and Henderson made major contributions to Ireland in the early to mid-2000s, so maybe we should give England a break...

desertcircus

Manu Tuilagi has lived in England since he was about twelve years old; why isn't he English? His entire competitive rugby career has been in England as far as I know.

And the origin of his name means absolutely nothing. He could be called Jgrbsuf F'Gurogjdhe and it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference. Same as a Dallaglio captaining England.

GerM

We should give them a break. Traditionally, we've used this rule more than nearly any other nation.

Also, Gleeson is 100% Irish. Moved to Australia in his youth when his family emigrated.

bamboozle

i think the residency rule should be extended to 5 years. International rugby is going to be the big loser if countries stack up their squads with lads who are not from that given country.

PhatPiggins

I think we're getting side tracked onto a residency conversation we've had on here a dozen times already in the last 12 months. I think the OP's main point is that with the highest player numbers in the world do England need to be going down this road?

What does it say to the guys who come up in the academy and underage systems, spend their entire careers gearing towards playing for England (like Narroway) but are simply dumped when a (better?)short term solution like Waldrom comes along. Sends the wrong message imo.

totallegend

GerM wrote: »

We should give them a break. Traditionally, we've used this rule more than nearly any other nation.

Also, Gleeson is 100% Irish. Moved to Australia in his youth when his family emigrated.

Correct, original post edited. However, he came back to Ireland to further his rugby career rather than any wistful grá for the old country. Since he turned out to be such a hero on the pitch, he was more than welcome.

profitius

Every player should choose a country before they are 20 years old and not be allowed switch for 10 years at least.

Some people ask what is the big deal of it all. Well, in the case of Manu Tuilagi his brother plays for Samoa but he chooses England. Don't tell me he feels more English because thats BS.

Waldrom likewise suddenly realises he has an English grandmother. Maybe he got a memory boost because its world cup year. At least he is part English though.

I don't mind Court and Boss playing for Ireland because they are part Irish. Fair enough.

JustinDee

handsomecake wrote: »

This is club rugby all over again

No it isn't. If you haven't played for a country at qualification level (Senior, A, Sevens) you haven't played senior international level.
If you have done, you cannot switch therefore no international transfer market and therefore nothing like club/provincial/franchise rugby.

profitius

JustinDee wrote: »

No it isn't. If you haven't played for a country at qualification level (Senior, A, Sevens) you haven't played senior international level.
If you have done, you cannot switch therefore no international transfer market and therefore nothing like club/provincial/franchise rugby.

Any player can potentially play for any country. Thats more like club rugby than international rugby.

roycon

out of all the players mentioned the only ones who have any chance of getting their game are flutey/hape in the centre

Pete_Cavan

I have no problem with guys with Irish parents/grandparents representing Ireland. They are of Irish heritage and their parents/grandparents can instill national pride (which is what international rugby should be about) in them, regardless of where they live. OK, grandparents may be pushing it a bit but some people are raised by their grandparents, or their grandparents can be the biggest influence in their life so I would just allow everyone with an Irish grandparent in rather than going through everyone on a case by case basis.

I do have issues with the residency rule though. I dont like the fact that a guy can live here for three years and then take a green jersey from someone who has grown up here and spent his life working towards representing his country. However, we should differentiate between those who have grown up here and those who come here as adults when they think they will never get the chance to play for their own country. I think that an exception based on residency should only be extended to those who have lived here for at least three years before their 18th birthday.

Therefore I have no issue with Tuilagi or Hartley representing England but, imo, Waldrom shouldnt play for them (nor should Straus be allowed to play for Ireland btw).

LightningBolt

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I have no problem with guys with Irish parents/grandparents representing Ireland. They are of Irish heritage and their parents/grandparents can instill national pride (which is what international rugby should be about) in them, regardless of where they live. OK, grandparents may be pushing it a bit but some people are raised by their grandparents, or their grandparents can be the biggest influence in their life so I would just allow everyone with an Irish grandparent in rather than going through everyone on a case by case basis.

I do have issues with the residency rule though. I dont like the fact that a guy can live here for three years and then take a green jersey from someone who has grown up here and spent his life working towards representing his country. However, we should differentiate between those who have grown up here and those who come here as adults when they think they will never get the chance to play for their own country. I think that an exception based on residency should only be extended to those who have lived here for at least three years before their 18th birthday.

Therefore I have no issue with Tuilagi or Hartley representing England but, imo, Waldrom shouldnt play for them (nor should Straus be allowed to play for Ireland btw).

Pretty much all of this. If the player is not born in the country but spends a significant time playing schoolboy rugby up I see no problem with it. If they come in mid career and qualify to play due to residency rules I'm not too happy with to be honest. Wouldn't like to see Strauss or any of the possible Leinster contingent play for Ireland truth be told. I've no doubt that they will do.

totallegend

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I have no problem with guys with Irish parents/grandparents representing Ireland. They are of Irish heritage and their parents/grandparents can instill national pride (which is what international rugby should be about) in them, regardless of where they live. OK, grandparents may be pushing it a bit but some people are raised by their grandparents, or their grandparents can be the biggest influence in their life so I would just allow everyone with an Irish grandparent in rather than going through everyone on a case by case basis.

I do have issues with the residency rule though. I dont like the fact that a guy can live here for three years and then take a green jersey from someone who has grown up here and spent his life working towards representing his country. However, we should differentiate between those who have grown up here and those who come here as adults when they think they will never get the chance to play for their own country. I think that an exception based on residency should only be extended to those who have lived here for at least three years before their 18th birthday.

Therefore I have no issue with Tuilagi or Hartley representing England but, imo, Waldrom shouldnt play for them (nor should Straus be allowed to play for Ireland btw).

Erm, do your first and third paragraphs not contradict each other? You're allowing the grandparent rule but objecting to Waldrom?

I think any hard and fast rule, whether it's residency or ancestry, is going to be open to guys like Waldrom taking the p*ss but neither can you have a case-by-case basis because that means subjectivity and it will all end up in court.

Personally, I don't mind the three-year rule but I could see the merit in this being extended to five years. I'd be in favour of trimming the grandparents rule back to parents only.

In an ideal world, the rugby unions themselves would take a stand, put their efforts into developing indigenous players and go from there. It's not going to happen though.

PhatPiggins

totallegend wrote: »

Erm, do your first and third paragraphs not contradict each other? You're allowing the grandparent rule but objecting to Waldrom?

I think any hard and fast rule, whether it's residency or ancestry, is going to be open to guys like Waldrom taking the p*ss but neither can you have a case-by-case basis because that means subjectivity and it will all end up in court.

Personally, I don't mind the three-year rule but I could see the merit in this being extended to five years. I'd be in favour of trimming the grandparents rule back to parents only.

In an ideal world, the rugby unions themselves would take a stand, put their efforts into developing indigenous players and go from there. It's not going to happen though.

England have 166,000 registered players have they any real excuse for not developing their own players?

They should be more concerned with teaching their under age teams proper ball skills rather then just turning them into gym rats. I can't remember the last time the English produced a quality centre now they're forced to turning to journeymen like Flutey and plod like Hape. If they're going to insist on a multi national team then they could at least poach some decent players.

TopOfTheRight

roycon wrote: »

out of all the players mentioned the only ones who have any chance of getting their game are flutey/hape in the centre

If Manu is given a chance in the warm up games he could make a big impression and in the 13 jersey although Tindall is a favourite of johnson and will surely play the bigger games

Banahan at 12 and Tuilagi at 13 will be very interesting if we see it in August, will be entertaining if nothing else!

TopOfTheRight

Also Waldrom is far superior to Easter imo but probably wont be given the chance to prove this, johnson will stick with easter regardless i would say

PhatPiggins

TopOfTheRight wrote: »

If Manu is given a chance in the warm up games he could make a big impression and in the 13 jersey although Tindall is a favourite of johnson and will surely play the bigger games

Banahan at 12 and Tuilagi at 13 will be very interesting if we see it in August, will be entertaining if nothing else!

Interesting in how many times they get caught out of position. Tuilagi at least can improve but Banahan is a terrible centre, turns like a bus has no positional sense and runs only 2 lines: straight and sideways into touch.

smurphy29

handsomecake wrote: »

14/45 players born outside england

Get away?! Really?! Can you list the 14?

handsomecake

smurphy29 wrote: »

Get away?! Really?! Can you list the 14?

hartley nz
flutey nz
hape nz
waldrom nz
botha sa
fourie sa
stevens sa
tuilagi samoa
simon shaw kenya
charlie sharples hong kong
corbisiero new york usa
joe smpson australia
matt banahan jersey
delon armitage trinidad

Problem isn't England's, it's the IRB's.

Tell a coach to win a World Cup, tell him to pick the best players available to him, and then when he does, tell him they're not English enough?

Come off it, just because it suits us for a change as we've only a couple of naturalised/grandfathered players to cast a stone. Ireland has made serious use of those rules in almost every conceivable sport in the past.

handsomecake

Deleted User wrote: »

Problem isn't England's, it's the IRB's.

Tell a coach to win a World Cup, tell him to pick the best players available to him, and then when he does, tell him they're not English enough?

Come off it, just because it suits us for a change as we've only a couple of naturalised/grandfathered players to cast a stone. Ireland has made serious use of those rules in almost every conceivable sport in the past.

oh i agree,no body has done anything wrong and ireland have done the same. i am just worried about the trend and if it snowballs it could become a joke.lets just say matt todd at the crusaders says **** it ,mccaw has 7 sewn up for another 4 years im off to saracens to make mega dosh and if i live there for 3 years i can play for england and enjoy all the trimmings that go with it.

waldrom is new zealands leftovers,but is in the england squad ahead of other " english " people.he should be happy to be the 6th or 7th best number 8 in new zealand.its honourable. his brother scot was on the end of year tour a few years ago and you can bet your bottom dollar thomas was watching tv in a bar or at home rooting for the allblacks to smash england. now he will be standing shoulder to shoulder with wilkinson and the boys ......give me a break.


whatever abouth players moving around as teenagers/childeren ,the like of flutey and waldrom all of a sudden becoming english is repulsive.they are all only up here in the first place because we pay top dollar. the only reason these guys play internationals for other countries is to prove to themselves they can "make it" and to massage their own ego's.maybe even to give 2 fingers to the country that overlooked them too.

on a sidenote an observant poster on planet rugby noted that now there are 3 maori players in the england team they can form their own "iwi".

Ah ok, read you completely wrong.

It's up to the IRB to figure out what to do about this, although I'm not certain that they'll ever find a solution that suits everyone

theboss80

handsomecake wrote: »

on a sidenote an observant poster on planet rugby noted that now there are 3 maori players in the england team they can form their own "iwi".

An England haka vs All Blacks ala Munster style :D

desertcircus

It is strange that the English setup seems to have so much trouble producing players by itself. What's weirder still is that the "imported" players aren't even usually that impressive; Shontayne Hape? Hendre Fourie? None of them have been superstars, or even significantly above the standard set by their nearest native rival for the jersey.

Manu Tuilagi, though, I have no problem with (at least regarding whether he's English). He's been there for seven years, since he was thirteen years old. He's played rugby in England at every age level from under-14 up. Give the guy a break. It's unfair to expect him to declare allegiance to a country he hasn't lived in since he hit puberty. He's English - he went to school there, he learned to play there, he grew up there. Bracketing him in the same class as the likes of Flutey is unfair and inaccurate.

tolosenc

Do people have objections to players who are naturalised citizens, or are eligible to become naturalised citizens, playing for a county?

smurphy29

desertcircus wrote: »

It is strange that the English setup seems to have so much trouble producing players by itself. What's weirder still is that the "imported" players aren't even usually that impressive; Shontayne Hape? Hendre Fourie? None of them have been superstars, or even significantly above the standard set by their nearest native rival for the jersey.

Manu Tuilagi, though, I have no problem with (at least regarding whether he's English). He's been there for seven years, since he was thirteen years old. He's played rugby in England at every age level from under-14 up. Give the guy a break. It's unfair to expect him to declare allegiance to a country he hasn't lived in since he hit puberty. He's English - he went to school there, he learned to play there, he grew up there. Bracketing him in the same class as the likes of Flutey is unfair and inaccurate.

Indeed, they're usually fairly underwhelming. Let's face it, if they were world beaters they'd be getting caps in their proper home countries. It's a pretty damning indictment of English rugby given their playing numbers that they have to resort to this sort of carry on.

theboss80

http://talkingrugbyunion.co.uk/international-teams/foreign-players-for-england

Decent article about it here