parlez vous Afrikaans?

[L'irlandais]

...What say you then?

"If its and buts were pots and pans..." No such player currently exists to my knowledge.

The ONLY reason the Winsors opted for jus soli over jus sanguinis is because their German family was an embarassment to them, at the turn of the last century. British culture may do as it pleases, but then so to may other cultures - do as they please.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

"If its and buts were pots and pans..." No such player currently exists to my knowledge.

The moving to France bit is the only supposition.

 

[Browner]

I would be OK for the residency to be reduced to 24 months.

Why not take that a step further, say 24 days !?!? :sarc: or maybe been there on holiday once.

So, abramovic decides to set up Russia rfc and buys in the best 'uncapped at senior level ' talent ..... No thanks.

 

[crossref]

if we agree that a player can qualify on residency (and surely we all do) then we agree the principle. The number of months needed is more a technical detail, given the shortness of playing careers, 36 months seems too long to me, and I'd rather see it shorter than longer.

So, abramovic decides to set up Russia rfc and buys in the best 'uncapped at senior level ' talent ..... No thanks.

yes, that sounds unattractive - but on the other hand a serious weakness of rugby - compared to football - is that we don't have enought countries
- only four countries capable of winning the world cup
- only eight tier 1 countries, three of which, ahem, happen to be different regions of the same country.

We desparately need more countries to play rugby. How is that going to happen? It may well involve some talented players moving to new countries...
Would it be such a bad thing if some talented players moved to - say - the USA, Italy, Georgia, other countries and helped build those teams?

I

 

[Browner]

- only four countries capable of winning the world cup
- only eight tier 1 countries, three of which, ahem, happen to be different regions of the same country.

We desparately need more countries to play rugby. How is that going to happen? It may well involve some talented players moving to new countries...
Would it be such a bad thing if some talented players moved to - say - the USA, Italy, Georgia, other countries and helped build those teams?

Who says we need more? ( those that earn from the code?) there's ample rugby being played IMO.

But now you mention it, England football squad would likely be in with a better chance at the footy world cup if we had the unselected Germans and Argentinians available to us!!!!!!

Ultimately Crossref, your loosening ends up with international franchise rugby, which IMO isn't a good thing.

 

[crossref]

Well, I am not really loosening much

- I would loosen the residency rule 36 months seems too long to me (perhaps to 24, perhaps to 30)

- but I would abandon qualification by grandparent - a tightening in other words.

- I wouldn't bring passports into the equation, aside from the British problem, it's too unpredictable: the IRB can't control who is given/not given a passport, sometimes passports are given very easily indeed, Sometimes they are denied for obscure reasons. Either way if passports are part of the test the IRB turns over control of who does/does not qualify away from rugby authroities and to the state. Recall Zola Budd? IIRC the reason she was allowed to compete for the olympics was because UK govt gave her a passport, which quailified her under the IOC rules. The IOC had ceded control of who qualified for GBR team to the UK Govt. who could give (or indeed deny) her a passport for political reasons.

 

[RobLev]

Well, I am not really loosening much

- I would loosen the residency rule 36 months seems too long to me (perhaps to 24, perhaps to 30)

36 months is if anything too loose; it's less than a RWC cycle.

I'd add passport; ie not residence or, but residence and, passport.

Qualification to play for a country not of your birth (or birth nationality) shouldn't be easy; that cheapens international sport. It should allow for children who move with their parents to another country and grow up, learning {$sport}, in that country; but I see no reason why an adult wishing to change the country for which they wish to play should not be required to show commitment to that country beyond the wish to play international sport for them, and to sacrifice more than a minimal part of his or her playing career to demonstrate that.

- but I would abandon qualification by grandparent - a tightening in other words.

Agreed.

- I wouldn't bring passports into the equation, aside from the British problem, it's too unpredictable: the IRB can't control who is given/not given a passport, sometimes passports are given very easily indeed, Sometimes they are denied for obscure reasons. Either way if passports are part of the test the IRB turns over control of who does/does not qualify away from rugby authroities and to the state. Recall Zola Budd? IIRC the reason she was allowed to compete for the olympics was because UK govt gave her a passport, which quailified her under the IOC rules. The IOC had ceded control of who qualified for GBR team to the UK Govt. who could give (or indeed deny) her a passport for political reasons.

I'd add it as an additional hurdle - see above.