Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Scubby

Aussies at it again - wanting their cake and eating it!

131 posts in this topic

I knew this was going to happen but am getting slowly more and more angry at the Aussie's apparent ignorance towards the World Cup and International RL and their so called 'holy grail' of Origin etc. There have been numerous examples of this recently here are a couple:

 

During a Cowboys game a couple of weeks where Tariq Sims was outstanding the commentator said something like "If he carries on in this form he will be putting himself forward for international contention" - Tariq Sims has 5 caps for Fiji as recently as 5 months ago and must be down to play on May 2 against Fiji.

 

On the Footy Show last night they were putting odds on the board for Origin outsiders and they had Anthony Milford (Samoa International) and James Segerayo (PNG International) on display. Does this mean Milford will conveniently pull out of the Fiji/Samoa test and Segerayo will dump PNG?

 

During a St George game 2 weeks ago, the commentators were saying that Tyson Frizell looks every bit a future Kangaroo - Frizell has been a Wales international for 3 years.

 

Origin is weeks and weeks away yet people are still starting to bang on about it. I haven't heard a single discussion on the Anzac Test and who will be in or out etc. It cannot be a co-incidence that there hasn't been a glut of tests announces for Tonga, PNG, Cook Islands, Wales et al. If they do play these internationals then all these players get cup-tied from Origin and the Kangaroos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you have us all judged by the comments of Eddie and Stevo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you have us all judged by the comments of Eddie and Stevo?

 

It is quite different from the UK where commentators in Australia are influential people in the game like Darren Lockyer, Wally Lewis, Phil Gould, Andrew Johns, Peter Sterling, Brad Fittler etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Milford was always going to play for Australia and Origin though. The problem is the switching, Milford would have never played for Samoa if you had one nation for life rule, same with Sims and Fiji and probably Frizell and Wales. I don't believe Segayaro has played for PNG, but he was going to play in the WC before withdrawing. That new Big Three + one other country rule is embarrassing and it won't surprise me if say Jarryd Hayne plays for Fiji in the 4 Nations qualifier and then plays for Australia in the Four Nations!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Milford was always going to play for Australia and Origin though. The problem is the switching, Milford would have never played for Samoa if you had one nation for life rule, same with Sims and Fiji and probably Frizell and Wales. I don't believe Segayaro has played for PNG, but he was going to play in the WC before withdrawing. That new Big Three + one other country rule is embarrassing and it won't surprise me if say Jarryd Hayne plays for Fiji in the 4 Nations qualifier and then plays for Australia in the Four Nations!

 

Segerayo has played for PNG against the Aussie PM XIII. They even refuse to call the team that goes to PNG the Kangaroos so it won't be a full international. That stinks, of course lots of the big guns are missing but this happens in every sport where weakened teams (Eng RU in Argentine, Eng cricket T20, England football friendlies) play international games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need dual-nationality for World Cups; otherwise it will always be a three-team competition.

 

You can bet your life that the South Sea Islanders being discussed were turned into the finished article at ANZAC expense.

 

Same goes for Craig Kopzak, Iestyn Harris etc in England.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that of the players the OP quotes, Anthony Milford, Tariq Sims and Tyson Frizell are all born and bred Aussies. They're only playing for Samoa, Fiji and Wales because of where their parents were born. I'm pretty sure if you asked any of those guys if they'd like to play for Australia, or in an Origin series, they'd say yes. In that respect, it's no different from English born Irish, Welsh or Scottish qualified lads being called up by England.

 

Take the heritage players out, and you make the smaller nations squads weaker - particularly noticeable during a World Cup. Conversely, when you let heritage players in, you end up with the nation hopping we get now. A 'one country for life' rule would simply see an end to the likes of Milford, Sims and Frizell even considering turning out for one of the smaller nations. Would that really help international RL?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Milford was always going to play for Australia and Origin though. The problem is the switching, Milford would have never played for Samoa if you had one nation for life rule, same with Sims and Fiji and probably Frizell and Wales. I don't believe Segayaro has played for PNG, but he was going to play in the WC before withdrawing. That new Big Three + one other country rule is embarrassing and it won't surprise me if say Jarryd Hayne plays for Fiji in the 4 Nations qualifier and then plays for Australia in the Four Nations!

Good call. Our fans talk as if RL is the only sport which does this. I don't blame Milford or any other player who takes this chance.

Once British RL can preach to the Aussies, this scenario will continue. Unfortunately, we have the so-called leaders who seem to have no interest in advancing the British game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've decided after the recent world cup that, whilst frustrating for all the reasons mentioned above, its the only way it will work given the strengths of each nation.

 

I will just ignore the swapping and judge each tournament on its own merits, knowing that an international team turning up one year may be very different to the same international team the year after. That way, you just watch the country and whichever squad they turn up with that year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take the heritage players out, and you make the smaller nations squads weaker - particularly noticeable during a World Cup. Conversely, when you let heritage players in, you end up with the nation hopping we get now. A 'one country for life' rule would simply see an end to the likes of Milford, Sims and Frizell even considering turning out for one of the smaller nations. Would that really help international RL?

 

I suppose that's the problem, the quick fix example. I guess you have to question how a country can develop when they are full of heritage players who will switch at the next available opportunity? Milford playing for Samoa for example. As soon as he's 'good enough' to play origin and for Australia, he will. He's only playing for Samoa, because he isn't ready yet for Australia and how will Samoa improve when their best players are elsewhere? The same thing will happen with Italy, Tedesco will be switching to Australia too and what will happen to their WC squad? None of them will want to play outside of the WC and you have to question how they're supposed to develop the sport and the national team. IMO, you need to have at least 5 home grown developed players in your WC squad, it doesn't matter what league they play in, as long as they came through the system in that country. That will be the only way to develop and grow the national squad and also it benefits the countries who are working hard to develop the sport in the country, rather than filling the squads with Australians. I know Wales, France and PNG struggled at this WC due to having a homegrown squad, but they are the ones who will benefit in the long run, as will Fiji. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, let NSW and QLD choose who they like for Origin, but limit the number each state can supply to The Kangaroos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, let NSW and QLD choose who they like for Origin, but limit the number each state can supply to The Kangaroos.

 

But that still doesn't stop the problem of switching and you can't force an Australian born player to play for another country. At some point, the likes of Italy, Samoa, Tonga, Ireland etc will have to start producing their own players if they want to compete in WCs, especially when countries like Jamaica are missing out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that still doesn't stop the problem of switching and you can't force an Australian born player to play for another country. At some point, the likes of Italy, Samoa, Tonga, Ireland etc will have to start producing their own players if they want to compete in WCs, especially when countries like Jamaica are missing out. 

It would stop switching if only a certain number of places were available. But that would require the ARL to abide by such laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really know what to think about this to be honest. I don't like the idea of players swapping nations as and when it suits them to do so. The problem is that many do seem to consider Origin to be 'The Holy Grail' of Rugby League, and representing Australia the greatest international honour. If we take the four excellent players in question, Tariq Sims, Anthony Millford, James Segerayo and Tyson Frizell, and tell them that these lines of opportunity are now forever cut off to them as they've already represented other nations then would this not be a massive blow to their motivation to progress within the game? It may even tempt them to explore opportunities in rival codes.

 

It's a difficult one but I think I'm with Southstander, I'll simply ignore it. I want these guys to have the opportunity to play at the highest level (or at least what they consider to be the highest level), and if they can strengthen the other nations in the meantime then so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be perfectly honest, the commentators of the game in Aus mentioned are probably just completely ignorant to the facts of what International footballers aside from the players who have played consistently for Australia and NZ. They're ignorant, quite simply.

 

We're always going to have players swap nations until two things happen. Firstly, they (International fed.) produce a consistent, varied and long term fixture list for the likes of PNG, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa etc, and not just playing the hastily arranged token game between each other. Full tests against the likes of Aus, NZ, England and France.

 

And secondly, tighten the eligibility rules and enforce them. Don't look to bend them to suit certain countries whenever they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really know what to think about this to be honest. I don't like the idea of players swapping nations as and when it suits them to do so. The problem is that many do seem to consider Origin to be 'The Holy Grail' of Rugby League, and representing Australia the greatest international honour. If we take the four excellent players in question, Tariq Sims, Anthony Millford, James Segerayo and Tyson Frizell, and tell them that these lines of opportunity are now forever cut off to them as they've already represented other nations then would this not be a massive blow to their motivation to progress within the game? It may even tempt them to explore opportunities in rival codes.

 

It's a difficult one but I think I'm with Southstander, I'll simply ignore it. I want these guys to have the opportunity to play at the highest level (or at least what they consider to be the highest level), and if they can strengthen the other nations in the meantime then so be it.

 

Well, at the end of the day they're going to have to make that choice. It will either be: Choose to play for your heritage nation and miss out the chance of potentially playing Origin and for Australia or choose to play only for Australia/Origin and spend your whole career waiting for a chance and miss out on big tournaments in doing so. Just look at the Evans twins missing out on the Four Nations for Wales because they were hoping to play for England or Feleti Mateo missing the WC for a small chance of playing for NSW. Not everyone is going to be able to play Origin or for Australia, so they will have to make a decision. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need dual-nationality for World Cups; otherwise it will always be a three-team competition.

 

You can bet your life that the South Sea Islanders being discussed were turned into the finished article at ANZAC expense.

 

Same goes for Craig Kopzak, Iestyn Harris etc in England.

a friendly FYI .

 

South Sea Islanders are a specific group of people of pacific islander descent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Sea_Islander

 

Many pacific islanders and those who are of pacific island descent are not south sea islanders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, at the end of the day they're going to have to make that choice. It will either be: Choose to play for your heritage nation and miss out the chance of potentially playing Origin and for Australia or choose to play only for Australia/Origin and spend your whole career waiting for a chance and miss out on big tournaments in doing so. Just look at the Evans twins missing out on the Four Nations for Wales because they were hoping to play for England or Feleti Mateo missing the WC for a small chance of playing for NSW. Not everyone is going to be able to play Origin or for Australia, so they will have to make a decision. 

I do kind of agree. But the issue then of course is that a lot of players will inevitably make the choice to risk reaching Origin level, and that in turn will weaken the other nations and reduce the chance of us having future international tournaments of the same excellent standard as last year's World Cup. There's no easy solution to this.

 

I guess it also works the other way with older players no longer in contention for Australia and Origin playing for their heritage / birth nations. It was great to see Civoniceva captaining Fiji. I was also very glad to see Minichello play live again in Cardiff, in what will surely be his last UK appearance before retirement (though I hoped we'd beat Italy of course).   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go for a 4 way approach:

1 Well defined eligibility inc parents (not grandparents), residency for perhaps 4 years or native born. Just because you weren't born somewhere doesn't make you not part of that nation, but to go back to GPs or short term residency doesn't make sense to me.

2 I would allow a player to represent one country only within a 4 year cycle, but could switch subject to the eligibility above but only once. Some people do consider themselves dual nationality after all.

3 Perhaps each team has a limit on the number of non-native players in each 17 man squad. Scotland at a Commonwealth Games a few years ago went for pretty much all native competitors. Get the balance right and you've got incentives to develop your own, encourage countries which actually do have their own leagues, and maintain some competitiveness.

4 All players who play origin have to be eligible for Australia (hence have a legitimate link to NSW or QLD) based on my criteria above but aren't instantly ineligible for another country. Similarly, if you play for Samoa you can also play for NSW if you are eligible for both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could we look at it another way? That with players like Millard, Tariq and Ashton Sims, Uate, Naguama, Randradra, Bukuya etc. Fiji have the making of cementing a top 4 international side over the next 2-3 years. Perhaps a side that can be touring the UK, France and NZ playing competitive tests.

 

What they need are 2-3 years of fixtures and a strong international body! Then they can compare their aspirations for Origin against what else is on offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule should be. Once you have played for country at senior level you shouldn't be allowed to switch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could we look at it another way? That with players like Millard, Tariq and Ashton Sims, Uate, Naguama, Randradra, Bukuya etc. Fiji have the making of cementing a top 4 international side over the next 2-3 years. Perhaps a side that can be touring the UK, France and NZ playing competitive tests.

 

What they need are 2-3 years of fixtures and a strong international body! Then they can compare their aspirations for Origin against what else is on offer.

I like the sound of that. I'm not sure if it could ever be seen as preferable or even equal to Origin given the hype surrounding that in Australia, but we won't know unless it's tried. 

 

The rule should be. Once you have played for country at senior level you shouldn't be allowed to switch.

Maybe it should, but it hasn't been up to now. If such a rule was ever implemented then as far as I'm concerned it should only apply from the moment it came into effect, hence all previous international appearances wouldn't be taken into account. Therefore all of the players mentioned in this thread would still have the right to play for Australia and in Origin in the future if they so wished. It would of course stop players switching in the future.

 

I personally think that's too rigid a stance to take. I'm probably in a minority but I don't really have a problem with things the way that they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could we look at it another way? That with players like Millard, Tariq and Ashton Sims, Uate, Naguama, Randradra, Bukuya etc. Fiji have the making of cementing a top 4 international side over the next 2-3 years. Perhaps a side that can be touring the UK, France and NZ playing competitive tests.

 

What they need are 2-3 years of fixtures and a strong international body! Then they can compare their aspirations for Origin against what else is on offer.

 

That's why it's important to build a squad and why developing your own players will help, rather than just going for the quick fix. The problem for me is though Radradra could continue his form and become the best winger in the NRL, but say Australia are weak in that position and they could just pick him in their squad and then Fiji lose a home developed player and a genuine superstar. That's why I'm in favour of a one nation for life rule. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017