Jump to content

International eligibility discussion


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Has Dawn been in Ontario for three or five years? Has the new five year residency rule been ratified yet?

 

It's been more than five, certainly.

 

Has he played for USA?

 

Yes, he played for the Tomahawks as they were.  I don't know him personally, but as I understand it he played linebacker at college level in Texas, certainly likes his tackling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has Dawn been in Ontario for three or five years? Has the new five year residency rule been ratified yet?

5 years comes in to force at the start of October, I believe

Check out upcoming international fixtures and highlights of past matches at http://rlfixtures.weebly.com

 

St Albans Centurions International Liaison Officer and former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.

Moderator of the International board

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Akarika Dawn is not a name I was expecting to see.

Akarika has lived in Toronto for a number of years now, with is Wife who is Canadian. He relocated there from Texas more than 3 years ago, so meets current RLIF Residency Rules for sure. He has also been assisting with local teams and the recent games against touring sides that have come into Ontario. He has also not played RL in, or for, a USA team or USARL team within that 3 years.

I believe players who will have played for a nation on the 3 years rule prior to the October adoption of the 5 year rule, we will "grandfathered in".

Akarika played College football as a linebacker at the University of Colorado.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get how three years residency would let you play for a country, but surely not if you've played for another nation already? Once you play for a country that's who you play for right?

 

Yes the rules of RL allow for one change inside a World Cup Cycle providing residency is met. However let me ask you this; Who is more credible as a representative of a nation. 1) A guy who have moved there for a minimum of three years, is living and working there, is married to a spouse from there, and is helping develop the game domestically, or 2) A guy who lives in another country, has never played in the domestic competition, is not able to qualify for a passport, or a work visa, yet has ONE grandparent from that country? Both are eligible under international rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't spoken to Akarika yet, hopefully this weekend, but most of the Ontario guys I do know have only good things to say about him and are really glad to have the energy, passion and work ethic he brings.  He's suited up for Ontario as well as the Wolverines so as far as eligibility goes for a full test match he certainly has more moral 'rightness' to be on the squad than someone who potentially parachutes in purely for a World Cup cycle.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't spoken to Akarika yet, hopefully this weekend, but most of the Ontario guys I do know have only good things to say about him and are really glad to have the energy, passion and work ethic he brings.  He's suited up for Ontario as well as the Wolverines so as far as eligibility goes for a full test match he certainly has more moral 'rightness' to be on the squad than someone who potentially parachutes in purely for a World Cup cycle.  

 

 

I don't mean to question his passion or anything like that. I'm sure he's giving what he's got to his new home country, nothing wrong with that.

 

Yes the rules of RL allow for one change inside a World Cup Cycle providing residency is met. However let me ask you this; Who is more credible as a representative of a nation. 1) A guy who have moved there for a minimum of three years, is living and working there, is married to a spouse from there, and is helping develop the game domestically, or 2) A guy who lives in another country, has never played in the domestic competition, is not able to qualify for a passport, or a work visa, yet has ONE grandparent from that country? Both are eligible under international rules.

 

In that case I'd say that player 1 is more credible, on the principle of actually being part of that nation. I think the grandparent rule is pushing it, would prefer to see it reduced to parents.

 

Aside from either of those, I'm just surprised that after representing a country (however you qualify), you are allowed to then represent another. Seems like the type of thing that should be a commitment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from either of those, I'm just surprised that after representing a country (however you qualify), you are allowed to then represent another. Seems like the type of thing that should be a commitment.

Happens in plenty of sports including the Olympics. It's a big debate in RL but the justification is that if you could only stick to playing for one nation for life then every decent player in the Southern Hemisphere would only ever commit to playing for Australia, even those born and bred in another country like Aku Uate, because Australia pay a lot more money for appearances than the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happens in plenty of sports including the Olympics. It's a big debate in RL but the justification is that if you could only stick to playing for one nation for life then every decent player in the Southern Hemisphere would only ever commit to playing for Australia, even those born and bred in another country like Aku Uate, because Australia pay a lot more money for appearances than the rest.

They wouldn't because only 17 can play for Australia so most wouldn't get a look

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They wouldn't because only 17 can play for Australia so most wouldn't get a look

So a 20 year old kid at the start of his career is offered the chance to play in the Pacific test for Samoa. And he knows that if he does that then he's locked into playing for Samoa for life, meaning he will potentially be missing out on tens of thousands of dollars in international appearance fees, missing out on contractual bonuses for SOO, missing out on playing in major tournaments, is he going to decide to play in that test match for Samoa? Of course he's ###### not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So a 20 year old kid at the start of his career is offered the chance to play in the Pacific test for Samoa. And he knows that if he does that then he's locked into playing for Samoa for life, meaning he will potentially be missing out on tens of thousands of dollars in international appearance fees, missing out on contractual bonuses for SOO, missing out on playing in major tournaments, is he going to decide to play in that test match for Samoa? Of course he's ###### not.

You're talking the odd one in reality

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're talking the odd one in reality

I don't think you're quite getting it, only 17 players can play for Australia at any one time, that doesn't mean only 17 players can play for Australia ever, anyone who is in the top 50-60 players in the game and is qualified to play for Australia isn't going to throw away the possibility of playing at the top level and earning potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars through international payments, Origin payments, sponsorships, contractual bonuses etc just so they can play a one-off match for Fiji or Samoa at age 20. We've seen PNG born and bred players sitting out international matches so they can play in City v Country FFS because it pays more than playing for PNG, and because the Aussie brand has so much prestige in their country.

 

What about the likes of Zeb Taia, who has been a loyal servant to Cook Islands but wouldn't have ever been allowed to play for them due to the fact that he made one appearance for NZ early in his career?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do get it but it forces players to show where their loyalties lie. Yes it will weaken some heritage packed teams but it will benefit those that do genuine development. Obviously the key is having a proper international schedule to allow these '2nd tier' nations regular fixtures and the ability to earn revenue.

Nation swapping does more harm than good and damages the credibility of the international game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you're quite getting it, only 17 players can play for Australia at any one time, that doesn't mean only 17 players can play for Australia ever, anyone who is in the top 50-60 players in the game and is qualified to play for Australia isn't going to throw away the possibility of playing at the top level and earning potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars through international payments, Origin payments, sponsorships, contractual bonuses etc just so they can play a one-off match for Fiji or Samoa at age 20. We've seen PNG born and bred players sitting out international matches so they can play in City v Country FFS because it pays more than playing for PNG, and because the Aussie brand has so much prestige in their country.

 

What about the likes of Zeb Taia, who has been a loyal servant to Cook Islands but wouldn't have ever been allowed to play for them due to the fact that he made one appearance for NZ early in his career?

The problem is you get a 20 year old play for, say, the Cooks after a few games in the NRL. A year or so later he's picked for New Zealand and goes to them for a couple of years. Then maybe back to the Cooks, then back to the Kiwis. Not only does it look bad for the sport but it means none of the Tier Two Nations (ugly phrase) has the chance to build a squad or a culture that can be sustained because their squad literally changes every year or so.

 

Now, if we had 'one nation for life' you're right to suggest that the 20 year old would probably turn down the Cooks in the first place in the hope of making the Kiwis at some point and earning some serious cash. But, and this is the key bit, by the age of 23/24/25 if he hasn't made the Kiwis then he'll know he's unlikely to ever do so and therefore make himself available for the Cooks. The Cookies now have a talented player who they know is theirs until he retires, and both he and they - and more importantly the sport as a whole - can build on that certainty. It's what happens in every other sport.

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's ridiculous to compare the situation of professional NRL players switching countries to a guy who probably moved to Canada from the USA for work! We have to be realistic about the level these guys are at. He's clearly settled in Canada and it's unlikely to be feasible for him to travel to the USA for internationals so should we just lose this obviously committed player to international Rugby League because we're holding him to the same standards as a full time professional?

 

As a fan of one of the fake international teams (Ireland) I would be far more supportive of an English guy who lives here, is married to an Irish girl and develops the sport here, playing for us than some lad who great grandfather owned an Irish wolfhound and who will run out the door the second Wayne Bennett gives him a ring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.