Lancaster steps down

[SimonSmith]

has his work cut out but likes working with 2nd tier nations

yeah. Learned his stuff at that level with Australia

 

[crossref]

Hang on.. Mordor is part of Narnia. Is that table for real?

 

[The Fat]

Hang on.. Mordor is part of Narnia. Is that table for real?

No, of course not.
Winterfell just jumped up to position 96 last week.:wink:

 

[Ian_Cook]

Hang on.. Mordor is part of Narnia. Is that table for real?

No, Mordor is part of Middle Earth

 

[Ian_Cook]

Ian, in South Africa we don't contract players centrally; they are contracted by their Super Rugby franchise and/or the Currie Cup province.

Bok fans on other forums tell me that SARU pays for the Five (from 2016, Six) franchises with their share of the SANZAR deal with News Limited, so essentially, even if there is no actual contract between the players and SARU, since SARU hold the purse strings, they are for all intents and purposes, centrally contracted in every way but name.

 

[Rushforth]

No, Mordor is part of Middle Earth

Here's a picture of Mount Doom. https://www.google.nl/maps/place/To...i3584!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0xf00ef62249d5650!6m1!1e1

 

[RobLev]

Bok fans on other forums tell me that SARU pays for the Five (from 2016, Six) franchises with their share of the SANZAR deal with News Limited, so essentially, even if there is no actual contract between the players and SARU, since SARU hold the purse strings, they are for all intents and purposes, centrally contracted in every way but name.

That logic has players in the Premiership centrally contracted by Premiership Rugby.

 

[crossref]

Thinking it over, I reckon I might have I refereed Mordor earlier today.

 

[Ian_Cook]

That logic has players in the Premiership centrally contracted by Premiership Rugby.

Really?

Does PRL pay the player's wages?

Can PRL dictate selection policies of Premiership teams?

Does PRL select England quads?

Of course PRL does dictate player releases outside of Test Windows, so I'll give you that much.

 

[Ronald]

Bok fans on other forums tell me that SARU pays for the Five (from 2016, Six) franchises with their share of the SANZAR deal with News Limited, so essentially, even if there is no actual contract between the players and SARU, since SARU hold the purse strings, they are for all intents and purposes, centrally contracted in every way but name.

That might be true, problem is that, unlike NZ, franchises do not put Boks first. They will generally not rest top Bok players when they should, and you will not see them miss half of the Super Rugby season like a Richie or a Carter.

 

[RobLev]

Really?

Does PRL pay the player's wages?

Not directly, but nor does SARU. Indirectly, out of the central media income, yes, just like SARU.

Can PRL dictate selection policies of Premiership teams?

At a week by week detailed level, no; but nor can SARU (as Ronald points out). At a squad selection level. yes. There's a salary cap, which favours use of academy and home-grown players. Does SARU dictate squad selection policies?

Does PRL select England squads?

No; which isn't relevant to whether PRL holds premiership player contracts centrally, decides what position they play or can insist on them being rested, which I would think are three major features of central contracting.

Of course PRL does dictate player releases outside of Test Windows, so I'll give you that much.

Your claim was that the fact that SARU bankrolls the franchises from media income - "holds the purse strings" - makes SA players centrally contracted. That is also a feature of current English Premiership arrangements, but we agree that England players aren't centrally contracted.

 

[Crucial]

That might be true, problem is that, unlike NZ, franchises do not put Boks first. They will generally not rest top Bok players when they should, and you will not see them miss half of the Super Rugby season like a Richie or a Carter.

I think it is worth clarifying this. In NZ the Franchises do not work to some masterplan with the ABs. They are free to use the resources they have in whatever way they see fit to achieve their own objectives. You couldn't have it any other way or no one would want to coach at that level.
What can happen though, is that top level players have leave entitlements after their longer season that take them further into the off season before they start training again or re-join the franchise squad. They could also have minor injuries that the AB doctors want to see cleared up so don't give clearance on. If they come back to the franchise late then the coaches usually don't throw them straight back into action until they are up to speed.
We also saw this year that a group of high level players were given a week off during the Super Rugby comp at the time of choosing of the super rugby coach. This was a bit of a trial and I'm not sure whether it had any great effect, but it was an attempt to give RWC players a break from a week in week out grind.
Apart from these leave entitlements which are written into the collective agreement, coaches do what they want with the players and the AB coaches do not interfere.
The Crusaders, for example, continued to use Slade at 10 and Carter at 12 for a lot of the season despite it being obvious to onlookers that Carter was really needing a continued run in the 10 jersey to get some form back.
It can work the other way as well. Ben Smith played at fullback for the Highlanders when the ABs saw him as primarily a wing. When Dagg failed to show he still had the goods for the RWC, Smith was a ready replacement.

EDIT: I do agree that the NZ Franchise coaches are probably more willing to look at the big picture and the likely workload of the player for the whole year rather than just when they have them. That is more to do with the overall respect for the AB players than any control or rule within the structure. The franchise coaches want to see both their own team AND the national side succeed.

 

[Ian_Cook]

At a week by week detailed level, no; but nor can SARU (as Ronald points out). At a squad selection level. yes. There's a salary cap, which favours use of academy and home-grown players. Does SARU dictate squad selection policies?

Yes, they do (race quotas) but only as dictated to them by the South African government.

Race quotas really do affect more than just the particular colour of a particular player selected. It has ongoing effects as coaches and selectors have to jockey players around to reach their minimum black player quota in their playing squads.

Overall, I think that SARU has more say in the way SA Provinces use their players than the RFU does, on the basis that any say is more than no say at all.