NIE rules - consigned to the bin?

athtrasna

http://www.irishrugby.ie/news/25137.php On 21 December 2011

The Irish Rugby Football Union today announced some refinements to its professional player contract policy to further support the national succession strategy for the Ireland team to come into effect from the 2013/14 season.
The challenge for the IRFU in an increasingly competitive environment is to strike a long term balance between success for the Ireland team, through exposing Irish players at the highest level of the professional club game in the Heineken Cup and RaboDirect PRO12 and the needs of the provincial teams in terms of the recruitment of quality overseas playing talent to complement Irish qualified players.
The Ireland team remains the financial engine that supports each of the four provincial teams and so it is a critical objective for Irish rugby that the Ireland team remains competitive in the long term by being populated by suitably experienced Irish qualified players.

The opportunity to build this experience is primarily through time on the field in top level competitions.

To support this strategy and following an extended period of consultation which took place with the Professional Game Boards of the provincial teams and the national team management the following principles have now been agreed by the Union.

The following principles are designed to deliver at least two suitably experienced Irish players in all 15 field positions for national team selection:

- One non-Irish eligible (NIE) player only in each of the 15 field positions across the provinces of Leinster, Munster and Ulster e.g. one foreign player allowed across all three teams per position.*

- For the 2013/14 season and onwards, for any given position involving a contracted NIE player, a province will not be permitted to renew that NIE player contract or bring in a new NIE player into that same position in its squad.

- All future provincial injury replacement players must be eligible for selection for Ireland.

- All future provincial non-Irish eligible player contracts will be position specific.

* The Connacht professional side is external to this process as it has recently commenced a new programme of structural and performance development agreed with the IRFU.

The desired outcome of the changes to contract policies is that Irish-qualified players who have progressed through the provincial Academy systems will see greater opportunities for professional game-time experience, allowing both the IRFU and provinces to deliver the maximum amount of value for the €2.5million that is invested annually across the four provincial Academies.

The overall objective of the new policies is that there will be a minimum of two Irish-qualified players per position playing in the Heineken Cup and RaboDirect PRO12 as first choice selections.

The refinement in the contract policies will be operated in such a manner as to enable the professional teams to enjoy continuing success at both national and provincial levels.

IRFU Chief Executive Philip Browne said: "The challenges for the IRFU and the provincial teams are to continue to try to be successful at all levels, but balance this by recognising the model under which Irish rugby has produced that success over the last 12 years.

"The provincial teams have contributed hugely to the achievements of the Ireland team, but it is important to remember that the Ireland team is the marquee competitive outlet for the game in Ireland and also the financial mechanism that funds rugby at all levels.

"On this basis, it is essential that the Ireland team is given every opportunity to remain competitive at international level and to do that, it requires Irish-qualified players to gain continuous experience at club and provincial level.

"Equally, non-Irish qualified players have delivered much value and support to the success of the provincial teams and development of Irish players over the last number of years. The intention is that this will continue, but not to the detriment of the progress of Irish-qualified players in key positions.

"The refinements continue to allow the provinces to sign overseas players who will not alone play for the province but critically allow young Irish players to learn from these players and put this knowledge into practice by taking over the position once that player's contract is completed."

He added: "The aspirations for the IRFU are that in any single year, we would want to win the RBS 6 Nations Championship, but also have our provincial teams winning the Heineken Cup and the RaboDirect PRO12.

"The key is finding the balance to allow this to happen, but not disadvantage one over the other and always remembering that a successful Ireland team is the catalyst for success at all levels below that.

"This new strategy is essential to put Irish rugby in the best position to reach that."

With the news this season re Botha, Williams and now Pienaar - is it time for the IRFU to admit these rules, supposedly to be fully implemented this season...are an absolute flop and destined for the bin?

bilston

athtrasna wrote: »

http://www.irishrugby.ie/news/25137.php On 21 December 2011



With the news this season re Botha, Williams and now Pienaar - is it time for the IRFU to admit these rules, supposedly to be fully implemented this season...are an absolute flop and destined for the bin?

They were well intentioned but I always felt unnecessary. I dont think having black and white rules are a good idea in this instance as there are so many unknown variables at work.

thomond2006

Yup, in the bosca bruscar they go. Unrealistic for many reasons.

Fireball07

I assume the 4+1 rule is still there...and each individual case has to be approved by the IRFU.


A case-by-case approach is much better anyway.

athtrasna

I can't imagine Penney will be impressed. Among the positions he was annoyed not to be able to sign at this summer was scrum half. The light at the end of the tunnel would have been Pienaar's expected departure freeing the spot. I just hope the IRFU give Murray a central contract sooner rather than later!

bilston

athtrasna wrote: »

I can't imagine Penney will be impressed. Among the positions he was annoyed not to be able to sign at this summer was scrum half. The light at the end of the tunnel would have been Pienaar's expected departure freeing the spot. I just hope the IRFU give Murray a central contract sooner rather than later!

Well again this is why black and white rules dont work. A case by case approach is far better. Of course maybe Paul Marshall may be an option for Munster.

Mahatma Geansai

It will be interesting to see if the guidelines are scrapped entirely, or if Ulster are just being given a bit of leeway. It was clear that they wouldn't have been able to remain competitive beyond this season had the guidelines been enforced as intended. Penney definitely won't be rapt about Ulster being able to extend their NIEs anyway.

jamiedav2011

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

It will be interesting to see if the guidelines are scrapped entirely, or if Ulster are just being given a bit of leeway. It was clear that they wouldn't have been able to remain competitive beyond this season had the guidelines been enforced as intended. Penney definitely won't be rapt about Ulster being able to extend their NIEs anyway.

Does every one of your posts have to have a snide undertone?!

I'd say Penny was pretty 'rapt' about Botha being allowed to extend his contract though.

Mahatma Geansai

jamiedav2011 wrote: »

Does every one of your posts have to have a snide undertone?!

I'd say Penny was pretty 'rapt' about Botha being allowed to extend his contract though.

Read into it what ever way you like, but you're not disputing what was said. Ulster are producing the best young talent in the country, but they could have stagnated along with Ulster had the guidelines been enforced. The IRFU have stepped in to stop that happening.

Foxtrol

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

It will be interesting to see if the guidelines are scrapped entirely, or if Ulster are just being given a bit of leeway. It was clear that they wouldn't have been able to remain competitive beyond this season had the guidelines been enforced as intended. Penney definitely won't be rapt about Ulster being able to extend their NIEs anyway.

It’s not as if Penney hasn’t gotten dispensation for his first choice South African TH and scrum coach or anything…

It’s obvious that the guidelines aren’t going to be strictly enforced and rather taken on a case to case basis, with deals made, which clearly makes more sense but will lead to a hell of a lot of moaning round here.

Mahatma Geansai

Foxtrol wrote: »

It’s not as if Penney hasn’t gotten dispensation for his first choice South African TH and scrum coach or anything…

Munster let their scrum coach go and WdP was let go to facilitate Botha's extension. On the other hand, Muller, Nacewa (who was forced into early retirement), Williams, and Pienaar, have all signed since the guidelines came into force. I'm not positive about the Nacewa and Muller situations though.

TheGoldenAges

Really annoys me that Nathan Hines couldn't sign a new deal with Leinster before he went to Clermont. The player himself even admitted he wanted to stay yet because of these "supposed" rules at the time he couldn't.

awec

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Munster let their scrum coach go and WdP was let go to facilitate Botha's extension. On the other hand, Muller, Nacewa (who was forced into early retirement), Williams, and Pienaar, have all signed since the guidelines came into force. I'm not positive about the Nacewa and Muller situations though.

And I suspect that we would be rejected out of hand if we wanted to extend Muller or Afoa.

And I may be mistaken, but I think Afoa is involved in scrum coaching at Ulster.

Foxtrol

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Munster let their scrum coach go and WdP was let go to facilitate Botha's extension. On the other hand, Muller, Nacewa (who was forced into early retirement), Williams, and Pienaar, have all signed since the guidelines came into force. I'm not positive about the Nacewa and Muller situations though.

Ulster are probably going to be letting Afoa and Muller go this year but you still had a pot shot at how Penney wouldn’t be happy about this signing as if he hasn’t received any sort of dispensation previously. Leinster had to let Hines and HVM go but will probably now get a NIE medical joker to cover Strauss even though that’s supposedly against guidelines.

Every team is going to have its gripes when they don’t get it their own way and that’s why I said the non-concrete rules is going to lead to lots of moaning round here but taking it case by case makes sense. WdP and HVM going, Munster not being allowed sign a SH or OH, Botha and Pienaar signing on again all fall into the category of making sense in the grander scheme of things.

awec

Foxtrol wrote: »

It’s not as if Penney hasn’t gotten dispensation for his first choice South African TH and scrum coach or anything…

It’s obvious that the guidelines aren’t going to be strictly enforced and rather taken on a case to case basis, with deals made, which clearly makes more sense but will lead to a hell of a lot of moaning round here.

The thing that actually surprises me most here is that we were able to keep a player despite supposed strong interest from France.

The fact that the IRFU allowed the extension doesn't surprise me at all - there is logic there in allowing it and Pienaar was one of the NIQs who I suspected we would be allowed to keep, even if I felt we would have difficulty in doing so given interest from elsewhere.

Sure, the length of the contract is a surprise, but given that he's not going to be holding back any genuine Irish 9 contenders right now means I don't see an issue.

We have been allowed to keep Pienaar and Williams and won't be allowed to keep Afoa or Muller. The two players we are keeping are beneficial to rugby in Ireland IMO. And that's why case-by-case decisions are what make the most sense.

Foxtrol

TheGoldenAges wrote: »

Really annoys me that Nathan Hines couldn't sign a new deal with Leinster before he went to Clermont. The player himself even admitted he wanted to stay yet because of these "supposed" rules at the time he couldn't.

Yeah, some mistakes will be made but if Hines hadn’t retired from Scotland, started to slow down or if Sykes had become the player Leinster hoped he would be then it could be looked a very differently. It grates me too as I loved watching him niggle his was around the park but this process is never going to be a perfect science and to be fair to the IRFU most of the judgments have been proved right.

jamiedav2011

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Read into it what ever way you like, but you're not disputing what was said. Ulster are producing the best young talent in the country, but they could have stagnated along with Ulster had the guidelines been enforced. The IRFU have stepped in to stop that happening.

Oh I am disputing what was said alright, because it's nonsense.

First of all the above does not compute with:

It was clear that they wouldn't have been able to remain competitive beyond this season.

Secondly, I could turn that very same argument around and say that the IRFU stepped in to stop Munster stagnating by allowing them to keep Botha.

You say WDP and the scrum coach (that's a new one btw) had to leave to allow this, I say Muller and Afoa will likely leave and that's why Pienaar is staying.

You're trying to make it sound as if Ulster are getting some sort of special treatment in keeping Pienaar.

former legend

It's very simple to me anyway.

Pienaar is being allowed to stay because his presence isn't going to hinder the development of anyone who's in or likely to be in the Ireland frame any time soon.

Munster or Leinster signing a foreign nine would do exactly that.

If Ulster tried to sign a foreign centre that would hold Marshall or Olding back, then I'm sure they'd be told to pfo.

athtrasna

Isn't Pienaar potentially holding Paddy Jackson back though? His goal kicking is not international 10 standard but while Pienaar is first choice kicker for Ulster, Jackson can't improve sufficiently.

former legend

athtrasna wrote: »

Isn't Pienaar potentially holding Paddy Jackson back though? His goal kicking is not international 10 standard but while Pienaar is first choice kicker for Ulster, Jackson can't improve sufficiently.

Naaaah.

Goal-kicking is almost the one aspect of the game which you can accurately practice outside a game situation.

Look at Madigan; spent his first few seasons as a professional not taking the goal kicks. He was behind Sexton, McFadden and Nacewa in the pecking order. Now he's probably the best goal-kicker around.

And if it helps Irish rugby wean itself off its obsession that the OH must take the goal kicks, then all the better.

former legend

Anyhoo, as was blatantly obvious at the time, these rules were introduced to solve the propping situation in the aftermath of Twickenham 2011 and the World Cup. We now have a decent crop of youngsters coming through (well, hopefully anyway) so strict enforcement would seem to be less of an issue.

.ak

awec wrote: »

The thing that actually surprises me most here is that we were able to keep a player despite supposed strong interest from France.

The fact that the IRFU allowed the extension doesn't surprise me at all - there is logic there in allowing it and Pienaar was one of the NIQs who I suspected we would be allowed to keep, even if I felt we would have difficulty in doing so given interest from elsewhere.

Sure, the length of the contract is a surprise, but given that he's not going to be holding back any genuine Irish 9 contenders right now means I don't see an issue.

We have been allowed to keep Pienaar and Williams and won't be allowed to keep Afoa or Muller. The two players we are keeping are beneficial to rugby in Ireland IMO. And that's why case-by-case decisions are what make the most sense.

Well, the elephant in the room is religion. Pienaar made the move to come here because of religious reasons mostly. I don't think Toulon would be so attractive to a man who's view is to bring his family up in rugby culture who support the same religious views as he does. I don't think he made the decision based on money, anyway.

LostArt

TheGoldenAges wrote: »

Really annoys me that Nathan Hines couldn't sign a new deal with Leinster before he went to Clermont. The player himself even admitted he wanted to stay yet because of these "supposed" rules at the time he couldn't.

He was offered a new deal, it just wasn't as long as what Clermont offered.

Howard Juneau

Well, the way the game is going, and if the new BT competition goes ahead, the club's will have a little more independence from the IRFU & will implement their own player guidelines imo

.ak

Howard Juneau wrote: »

Well, the way the game is going, and if the new BT competition goes ahead, the club's will have a little more independence from the IRFU & will implement their own player guidelines imo

We don't have clubs.

Howard Juneau

.ak wrote: »

We don't have clubs.

I always refer to my province as my club.
If the BT deal goes ahead, the provinces will negotiate their own deals for tv rights. I'm sure the IRFU will stamp their feet, but, I think the comments from Cockerill last week were very telling in the English clubs way of thinking

former legend

PLEEEEEEEEEEASE don't ruin this thread with the 'demise of the Heineken Cup' arguments

.ak

Howard Juneau wrote: »

I always refer to my province as my club.
If the BT deal goes ahead, the provinces will negotiate their own deals for tv rights. I'm sure the IRFU will stamp their feet, but, I think the comments from Cockerill last week were very telling in the English clubs way of thinking

Yeah, what I meant is the provinces will remain branches of the IRFU. Said branches will have no more power of what rules are imposed within the provinces than they do know, regardless of what competition they play in.

Howard Juneau

.ak wrote: »

Yeah, what I meant is the provinces will remain branches of the IRFU. Said branches will have no more power of what rules are imposed within the provinces than they do know, regardless of what competition they play in.

I'm not so sure. I think a lot of people believe the IRFU dictate to the provinces far too much as it is, and there may be a little independence wanted. To negotiate tv rights, have a larger say in how the money is divided etc.
If the BT deal goes ahead, I think we will see some changes

irishbucsfan

.ak wrote: »

We don't have clubs.

Just as a point of information, the provinces are clubs by a few different definitions.

I don't think they'll ever be autonomus though and Irish rugby needs the provinces fielding ~10 Irish players a week at a minimum

Foxtrol

LostArt wrote: »

He was offered a new deal, it just wasn't as long as what Clermont offered.

No, I'm not quite sure how this got into peoples heads but the IRFU wouldn't allow for him to be signed for even one exta year.

bilston

Howard Juneau wrote: »

I'm not so sure. I think a lot of people believe the IRFU dictate to the provinces far too much as it is, and there may be a little independence wanted. To negotiate tv rights, have a larger say in how the money is divided etc.
If the BT deal goes ahead, I think we will see some changes

I know you aren't necessarily talking about total financial independence but could the provinces survive without the IRFU though?

Surely Connacht wouldn't have a hope. Are Munster not in a lot of debt? Ulster have only been able to re-develop Ravenhill on the back on tax payers money. Leinster might be ok, but then they have the potential support of a city over one million inhabitants to fall back on plus the rest of the province. You'd need rich benefactors to come in and take over the provinces and we've seen in England that they can quickly lose the run of themselves.