Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread III

Risteard

hahashake wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but under the terms of his contract he has to remain eligible for Ireland.

It would be monumentally stupid for the IRFU/Connacht to put that in writing in his contract.

Clubs can't stop players from representing their country and must release them during international windows.

Obviously I'm sure there's an unwritten "implication" that he would have to remain eligible for the 3 years but they wouldn't be able to have that has a binding term I would think.

In any case, the rules are a farce. I don't blame individual players for availing of them as players naturally want to test themselves at the highest level they feel they're capable of.

If you're a professional rugby player before you move country, then there's no way you should represent another. (I'm ignoring the tricky situation of grandparents etc. for this) People like Strauss, Payne, Stander all were playing pro rugby before they came to Ireland, they shouldn't be playing for Ireland under any circumstances IMO, no matter how good they are.

Again I'd reiterate that it's the rules I have a problem with, not the people who avail of them.

neilmulvey

Tox56 wrote: »

I would be stunned if this is true

why? It actually makes sense. If he is brought in as a project player, the IRFU would require some protection in case he decides in 33 months time to play for Samoa. There would be some sort of clause, however worded.

Risteard

neilmulvey wrote: »

why? It actually makes sense. If he is brought in as a project player, the IRFU would require some protection in case he decides in 33 months time to play for Samoa. There would be some sort of clause, however worded.

If it ever came to it it would be challenged and they'd be in for a world of **** from the IRB.

A quick Google reveals this:
http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/regulations/04/23/27/42327_pdf.pdf

9.2 A Union, Association, Rugby Body or Club is obliged to release a Player to the Union for which the Player is eligible when selected by such Union for a National Representative Team or National Squad in accordance with the provisions of this Regulation 9.

9.3 No Union, Association, Rugby Body or Club whether by contract, conduct or otherwise may inhibit, prevent, discourage, disincentivise or render unavailable any Player from selection, attendance and appearance in a National Representative Team or National Squad session when such request for selection, attendance and appearance is made in accordance with the provisions of this Regulation 9. Any agreement and/or arrangement between a Player and a Rugby Body or Club or between a Union or an Association and a Rugby Body or Club (and/or any proposal made and/or attempted to be made howsoever communicated) which is contrary to this Regulation 9.3 is prohibited, including, but not limited to any agreement and/or arrangement and/or proposal pursuant to which a Player is (or would be) unable to exercise the right to play for a Union.

9.31 If a Player is not released to attend and/or participate in a National Representative Team and/or National Squad Session contrary to the provisions of Regulation 9.3 then he shall not be entitled to play for any Rugby Body or Club for the period for which he has been or should have been in attendance with the National Representative Team or National Squad and an additional 10 days thereafter, unless the Player’s Union agrees otherwise in writing. Such agreement shall be granted in the absence of evidence of a breach of Regulation 9.3. For the avoidance of doubt, additional sanctions may also be imposed in accordance with Regulations 9.34 to 9.37.

Penalties

A Rugby Body or Club that refuses to allow a Player to be released in accordance with this Regulation 9 and/or otherwise breaches its provisions (including but not limited to any delayed release which impacts on the Player’s participation in, or his Union’s preparation for the relevant International Match or Squad session) renders itself liable to sanctions by the Union having jurisdiction to discipline such Rugby Body or Club. The applicable sanctions shall include, but not be limited to:
(a) Termination or suspension of membership of the Union and/or
withdrawal of other benefits of membership of the Union.
(b) A financial penalty.
(c) Deduction of league points.
(d) Relegation or exclusion or disqualification from any competition.
(e) Such other sanction as may be considered appropriate.
(f) Any combination of the sanctions set out in (a) to (e) above.

Tox56

Risteard wrote: »

If it ever came to it it would be challenged and they'd be in for a world of **** from the IRB.

A quick Google reveals this:
http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/regulations/04/23/27/42327_pdf.pdf





Penalties

I really think the IRFU's role in this whole Aki thing is being overplayed and I sincerely doubt they had much input at all, if any. Obviously the fact Aki can one day become IQ is a selling point, but considering just last season they OK'd the signing for the same team of a Chiefs starter who could never become IQ (Clarke) do you really think even if Aki was bound to Samoa/NZ the IRFU would have blocked Connacht's attempt to sign him? Not a chance

This was wholly orchestrated by Connacht imo. He's a good player in a position of need who can improve their team and doesn't appear to have any ambition to play internationally for his country (or selectors don't appear interested in him), that's like gold dust for any club

Risteard

Tox56 wrote: »

I really think the IRFU's role in this whole Aki thing is being overplayed and I sincerely doubt they had much input at all, if any. Obviously the fact Aki can one day become IQ is a selling point, but considering just last season they OK'd the signing for the same team of a Chiefs starter who could never become IQ (Clarke) do you really think even if Aki was bound to Samoa/NZ the IRFU would have blocked Connacht's attempt to sign him? Not a chance

This was wholly orchestrated by Connacht imo. He's a good player in a position of need who can improve their team and doesn't appear to have any ambition to play internationally for his country (or selectors don't appear interested in him), that's like gold dust for any club

I agree, Connacht are different from the other three in that their limit for NIQs is larger. I see this particular signing as Connacht getting a decent, young centre. (I haven't seen him so I'll trust the judgement of others.) There is the potential to become IQ but it doesn't necessarily mean that this has driven the signing.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Risteard wrote: »

I agree, Connacht are different from the other three in that their limit for NIQs is larger. I see this particular signing as Connacht getting a decent, young centre. (I haven't seen him so I'll trust the judgement of others.) There is the potential to become IQ but it doesn't necessarily mean that this has driven the signing.

I'd say that Connacht thought about him becoming IQ but more from the perspective of there not being a problem renewing his contract rather than seeing him as a future international.

Swiwi.

Tox56 wrote: »

I would be stunned if this is true

Proof will be in the RWC pudding Tox. Samoa has a competitive 1st 15, but not much depth so I reckon Aki would make their squad. Anyway I'm going radio sport in NZ and see if they will interview bundee. It's worth a punt, and if so I'll post it here.

Tox56

Swiwi. wrote: »

Proof will be in the RWC pudding Tox. Samoa has a competitive 1st 15, but not much depth so I reckon Aki would make their squad. Anyway I'm going radio sport in NZ and see if they will interview bundee. It's worth a punt, and if so I'll post it here.

The pudding that would prove that statement was if the IRFU were subjected to one of the following:

(a) Termination or suspension of membership of the Union and/or
withdrawal of other benefits of membership of the Union.
(b) A financial penalty.
(c) Deduction of league points.
(d) Relegation or exclusion or disqualification from any competition.
(e) Such other sanction as may be considered appropriate.
(f) Any combination of the sanctions set out in (a) to (e) above.

That's what the cost of such a clause in Aki's contract would be!

P.Walnuts

Swiwi. wrote: »

Which is my point that the IRFU are colluding on this, and artificially forcing him to become "Irish". Come to Galway son, we'll pay you lots...but you can forget about representing Samoa.

You are kind of alluding that Aki doesn't have a choice in this.....if the IRFU said exactly what you said above he could just say....no thanks.

So it's up to him really, who are we to decide another players career path?

BTW personally I don't like the residency rule at all, but there you go its a rule so obviously countries are going to take aadvantage of it. No more so than our neighbours across the water.

Swiwi.

P.Walnuts wrote: »

You are kind of alluding that Aki doesn't have a choice in this.....if the IRFU said exactly what you said above he could just say....no thanks.

So it's up to him really, who are we to decide another players career path?

BTW personally I don't like the residency rule at all, but there you go its a rule so obviously countries are going to take aadvantage of it. No more so than our neighbours across the water.

I agree. I'm just as intrigued as to why a 24 year old, with a potential AB future ahead of him...decides to give it up to play Pro 12 for Connacht (and if he's lucky the pool stages of the new HEC cup). Surely not the pull of the Green (as in Irish) jersey? I doubt Connacht are offering him Toulon-like wages. Anyway, I've done the deed, I've emailed Radio Sport and I hope they will interview him and ask those very questions. It's one thing when you're Craig Clarke, and you've given it a good lash back home, and want a change of scene, but Aki is not in that category yet. I guess he might feel at home in Connacht, plenty of Kiwi cuzzy-bros: Naoupu, Nikora, White, Heenan, Clarke, and Ah You. Might get a Powhiri on arrival :pac:

rockbeast

Swiwi. wrote: »

Might get a Powhiri on arrival :pac:

When do Connacht begin welcoming visiting teams with The Haka?!:)

WorldRugby99

IRB could do a few simple things to tighten up eligibility
- End the ridiculous grandparents rule-parents is surely enough?
- Make playing for all A sides,seven sides,U20 sides a commitment to that country
- Make residency longer (i think i read in english cricket they have made it 7 years for example)

We live in a globalised world so inevitably there will be a certain movement of people and players but personally I dont approve at all of 'project players' -southern hemisphere players who basically if they had been good enough would have stayed at home to play for NZ,SAF etc but have chosen to then move abroad and be offered a 'second chance' at international rugby.At least with players like manu tuilagi or toby faletau,their heritage may not be english/welsh but their rugby education and development has been,having been in the system from young ages.
The irish rugby union should be focused on the devlopment and coaching of irish youngsters not scouring the world looking for potential 'project' players.

Tox56

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

The irish rugby union should be focused on the devlopment and coaching of irish youngsters not scouring the world looking for potential 'project' players.

That isn't remotely whats happening

WorldRugby99

Tox56 wrote: »

That isn't remotely whats happening

how on earth do you know? when the likes of strauss,payne etc sign for an irish province,controlled by the irish union,who is to say that part of their signing is not just to be a good overseas player,but to also potentially be a player eligible for ireland-a potential bonus?
Its just a coincidence that strauss,payne etc become eligible.
what about the ludicrous bent saga? that alone makes your point wrong.

shuffol

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

how on earth do you know? when the likes of strauss,payne etc sign for an irish province,controlled by the irish union,who is to say that part of their signing is not just to be a good overseas player,but to also potentially be a player eligible for ireland-a potential bonus?
Its just a coincidence that strauss,payne etc become eligible.
what about the ludicrous bent saga? that alone makes your point wrong.

Leinster signed Bent, had nothing to do with the IRFU.

Tox56

WorldRugby99 wrote: »

how on earth do you know? when the likes of strauss,payne etc sign for an irish province,controlled by the irish union,who is to say that part of their signing is not just to be a good overseas player,but to also potentially be a player eligible for ireland-a potential bonus?
Its just a coincidence that strauss,payne etc become eligible.
what about the ludicrous bent saga? that alone makes your point wrong.

This has been said so many times in the last few pages so I'll give one more explanation for your benefit:

Clubs want players not playing for their national team if at all possible. They get that in players like Gopperth, Nacewa, Du Preez, Parks, Clarke, Botha, Afoa, Muller, Laulala and many more. None of those players will ever play for Ireland. Even still there are a handful of regular internationals in Pienaar, Kirchner.

Now obviously there will be some players who aren't internationals and aren't bound to any nation like Heenan, Aki, Payne, Strauss, Stander.

No it's not a complete coincidence Strauss/Payne end up playing for Ireland (and in the case of the latter even that hasn't happened yet), but it is a by-product of the clubs signing players who aren't bound to any national union, it's not the reason they're signed. The IRFU aren't scouring the globe saying "Leinster sign X, he would be a good international in 3 years". 3 years is way too long to bank on anything

There are more NIQ signings who will never play for Ireland as there are those who will.

And as is said above, your Bent example demonstrates my point perfectly. Leinster signed him, not Ireland.

Swiwi.

shuffol wrote: »

Leinster signed Bent, had nothing to do with the IRFU.

I don't think the IRFU come out of this smelling of roses. Bent had a granny, so it's a different story, but when Connacht says they want to sign a 20 year old Kiwi to play flanker, surely they could say "hang on a second, Connacht, but we have a heap of promising 20 year olds, ye can have one of them. No need to go to the open market."

WorldRugby99

shuffol wrote: »

Leinster signed Bent, had nothing to do with the IRFU.

who controls the provinces?who says what foreign players they can have and how many? you trying to say provinces are totally independent? thats a nonsense.
-are you really trying to say that the provinces,totally independently sign whoever they wish and that the fact that player then becomes down the line eligible for ireland is just a total coincidence? I think its naive in the extreme to think that potential eligibility down the line isnt a factor when a signing is talked about.
The bent sage was ridiculous and an embarassment-throwing some kiwi an irish jersey who hadnt even played for the provinces(and wasnt even very good). Likewise i would rather not see players like stander,payne or strauss play for ireland.They arent irish,havent come through the irish system,merely foreigners benefiting from a stupid system.

Tox56

Swiwi. wrote: »

I don't think the IRFU come out of this smelling of roses. Bent had a granny, so it's a different story, but when Connacht says they want to sign a 20 year old Kiwi to play flanker, surely they could say "hang on a second, Connacht, but we have a heap of promising 20 year olds, ye can have one of them. No need to go to the open market."

There it is. This is the IRFU's role in all of this to a nutshell. They didn't go scouring the globe saying "Connacht sign this 20 year old flanker, he'd be a great international for us". Connacht come asking they be allowed this signing, and the IRFU are happy to see it because not only will he be a quality option to boost one of the provinces, he could one day play for Ireland.

They aren't blameless by any means, but they are not going out of their way demanding signings be made to boost the national team.

As you say better in this scenario would have been the IRFU saying "Take Conor Gilsenan from Leinster instead" but then the IRFU aren't going to do that, first they can't force a player to move anywhere, and second they'd rather chose between both Heenan and Gilsenan than just one of them. And it's hard to see them behaving differently in the future unless a rule change is forced upon them. Which I would be in favour of.

WorldRugby99

Tox56 wrote: »

This has been said so many times in the last few pages so I'll give one more explanation for your benefit:

Clubs want players not playing for their national team if at all possible. They get that in players like Gopperth, Nacewa, Du Preez, Parks, Clarke, Botha, Afoa, Muller, Laulala and many more. None of those players will ever play for Ireland. Even still there are a handful of regular internationals in Pienaar, Kirchner.

Now obviously there will be some players who aren't internationals and aren't bound to any nation like Heenan, Aki, Payne, Strauss, Stander.

No it's not a complete coincidence Strauss/Payne end up playing for Ireland (and in the case of the latter even that hasn't happened yet), but it is a by-product of the clubs signing players who aren't bound to any national union, it's not the reason they're signed. The IRFU aren't scouring the globe saying "Leinster sign X, he would be a good international in 3 years". 3 years is way too long to bank on anything

There are more NIQ signings who will never play for Ireland as there are those who will.

And as is said above, your Bent example demonstrates my point perfectly. Leinster signed him, not Ireland.

Im not disgreeing too much with your words .I have no problems with good quality overseas signings.I just personally dont want to see them ending up playing for ireland. Of course most wont end up playing for ireland,but there does seem with a few of the non-capped ones,they are earmaked and labelled 'project' from day one-stander a clear example. Is that earkmarking done when they arrrived ,or before they have arrived-that is my point-im suspicious that it is,you think otherwise-thats fine. None of us knows what goe son behind the scenes.

WorldRugby99

Tox56 wrote: »

This has been said so many times in the last few pages so I'll give one more explanation for your benefit:

Clubs want players not playing for their national team if at all possible. They get that in players like Gopperth, Nacewa, Du Preez, Parks, Clarke, Botha, Afoa, Muller, Laulala and many more. None of those players will ever play for Ireland. Even still there are a handful of regular internationals in Pienaar, Kirchner.

Now obviously there will be some players who aren't internationals and aren't bound to any nation like Heenan, Aki, Payne, Strauss, Stander.

No it's not a complete coincidence Strauss/Payne end up playing for Ireland (and in the case of the latter even that hasn't happened yet), but it is a by-product of the clubs signing players who aren't bound to any national union, it's not the reason they're signed. The IRFU aren't scouring the globe saying "Leinster sign X, he would be a good international in 3 years". 3 years is way too long to bank on anything

There are more NIQ signings who will never play for Ireland as there are those who will.

And as is said above, your Bent example demonstrates my point perfectly. Leinster signed him, not Ireland.

Im not disgreeing too much with your words .I have no problems with good quality overseas signings.I just personally dont want to see them ending up playing for ireland. Of course most wont end up playing for ireland,but there does seem with a few of the non-capped ones,they are earmaked and labelled 'project' from day one-stander a clear example. Is that earkmarking done when they arrrived ,or before they have arrived-that is my point-im suspicious that it is,you think otherwise-thats fine. None of us knows what goe son behind the scenes.

its_phil

Swiwi. wrote: »

I don't think the IRFU come out of this smelling of roses. Bent had a granny, so it's a different story, but when Connacht says they want to sign a 20 year old Kiwi to play flanker, surely they could say "hang on a second, Connacht, but we have a heap of promising 20 year olds, ye can have one of them. No need to go to the open market."

That's fine and well from the IRFU but we had a NIQ spot open and we signed him. Too many young Irish players are ignorant to moving out here and don't want to leave which is fine and their prerogative. Connacht fans don't want to develop players for other province, that is not our job anymore. If they have to be forced to come out West, best of luck we don't want them. Heenan wanted to come and I much prefer having him than some young lad forced out here.

Heenan wasn't signed to a Super XV team, only development side IIRC, and all of the spade work for the signing was done by Lam, who knew him from Auckland and a former underage Connacht player in NZ who sold Galway to him. Heenan started out the season as backup with Faloon as our number one 7 too, so he wasn't signed as a project player. He only got his chance through injury. The crying about it a year later just stinks of the benefit of hindsight.

There isn't even a guarantee he will play for Ireland, he could easily go home at the end of his three years and if he does best of luck to him.

former legend

Swiwi. wrote: »

I don't think the IRFU come out of this smelling of roses. Bent had a granny, so it's a different story, but when Connacht says they want to sign a 20 year old Kiwi to play flanker, surely they could say "hang on a second, Connacht, but we have a heap of promising 20 year olds, ye can have one of them. No need to go to the open market."

We have plenty of promising 20-year olds, that's true. But we have very few who could have slotted straight into a side this season and had the impact that Heenan had.

The provinces are already at a huge disadvantage to their European rivals in terms of signing foreign players; any more restrictions would make it even more difficult to compete.

Swiwi.

its_phil wrote: »

That's fine and well from the IRFU but we had a NIQ spot open and we signed him. Too many young Irish players are ignorant to moving out here and don't want to leave which is fine and their prerogative. Connacht fans don't want to develop players for other province, that is not our job anymore. If they have to be forced to come out West, best of luck we don't want them. Heenan wanted to come and I much prefer having him than some young lad forced out here.

Heenan wasn't signed to a Super XV team, only development side IIRC, and all of the spade work for the signing was done by Lam, who knew him from Auckland and a former underage Connacht player in NZ who sold Galway to him. Heenan started out the season as backup with Faloon as our number one 7 too, so he wasn't signed as a project player. He only got his chance through injury. The crying about it a year later just stinks of the benefit of hindsight.

There isn't even a guarantee he will play for Ireland, he could easily go home at the end of his three years and if he does best of luck to him.

Irony would be Heenan being capped for Ireland and promptly doing a McCarthy or Cronin. Bet that would go down a treat out west. Anyway I will be watching this space re Kiwis in Ireland.

its_phil

Swiwi. wrote: »

Irony would be Heenan being capped for Ireland and promptly doing a McCarthy or Cronin. Bet that would go down a treat out west. Anyway I will be watching this space re Kiwis in Ireland.

McCarthy is a completely separate situation. He would have loved to stayed I imagine and showed massive loyalty before turning down the European champions but he is in his thirty's now and he hasn't won anything. No Connacht fans, in the majority, had a go at him for leaving. It was the debacle behind it that is now in the past.

freyners

Swiwi. wrote: »

Irony would be Heenan being capped for Ireland and promptly doing a McCarthy or Cronin. Bet that would go down a treat out west. Anyway I will be watching this space re Kiwis in Ireland.

Macca demonstrated a lot of loyalty to us for along time and I dont think you will find many fans who are aggrieved over him, he was playing fantastically and deserved the chance to win something before he retires. Cronin was another who took a punt on us with his career and reaped the benefits and I felt no ire over it. The only transfer that ever annoyed me was Hagan's and that was because he had initially committed to us.

Heenan took a chance and we are grateful for that. Whatever he chooses to do after his contract is his decision.

Swiwi.

'tis the lure of the green jersey after all...

Bundee Aki targets Irish jersey as he quits NZ

"Family is everything for me," he said. While he does not expect anything to be handed to him on a platter, the lure of the Irish jersey is now a clear motivator.

"That's a big part of my decision to move," he said. "Hopefully when the time is right and if I'm playing good footy, hopefully I can play for the Ireland international team.

"I've got to play well before that though. I'm eligible for Samoa.

"That was another big decision for myself – to see if I would play for them or not. If I play three years over there and it doesn't go well, I can always go back to Samoa.



I must admit, it does make me admire the guys like Alapati Leiua, who turn down the NZ jersey...well...for Samoa.

Anyway, from a purely objective point of view, Aki has real potential, and could well turn out to be gold in the Green 12 shirt.

Buer

While I've no problem massively with the project concept in terms of someone coming here, playing for a few years and then being eligible to play for us if they are good enough, I don't like seeing comments like the above. Steven Sykes made similar comments upon signing for Leinster. While I'm sure they don't mean to, I get the impression they expect to be selected for Ireland if they're talking openly about it 3 years out.

Mahatma Geansai

He wants to play international rugby for the best team he can, but he knows he'll never be good enough to be a Kiwi. Hopefully he never plays for Ireland. I'd like to think we put more value on those we deem suitable to represent the country, but I don't think that's the case.

ScissorPaperRock

Buer wrote: »

While I've no problem massively with the project concept in terms of someone coming here, playing for a few years and then being eligible to play for us if they are good enough, I don't like seeing comments like the above. Steven Sykes made similar comments upon signing for Leinster. While I'm sure they don't mean to, I get the impression they expect to be selected for Ireland if they're talking openly about it 3 years out.

Pretty sure Stander said something similar when he signed for Munster