International eligibility discussion

[spinnerhowland]

South Africa want a cap on heritage players after Lebanon bailed on a series

 

http://www.sarugbyleague.co.za/news/lebanon-reaping-the-heritage-fruit

Very interesting indeed. 

[USRLFAN]

Interesting, I don't know on the legalities of that. It's not good for Lebanon to withdraw 1 year out from the World Cup, regardless of the reasons. They need as many games as they can

It probably would have been the Mediterranean cup squad(domestic players). They had all they could handle from Italy.  I think they were more worried about losing to Niue then SA.

[USRLFAN]

I guess for European countries 4 domestic players must be on each squad

 

http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/article/14850/italy-comply-with-domestic-quote

[Odsal Outlaw]

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.

Understand what you're saying, but for me player 2 has more credibility.

[DoubleD]

I guess for European countries 4 domestic players must be on each squad

http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/article/14850/italy-comply-with-domestic-quote

Didn't know that, a positive step

[Farmduck]

I guess for European countries 4 domestic players must be on each squad

 

http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/article/14850/italy-comply-with-domestic-quote

 

Only for this tournament or presumably, such tournaments as the RLEF decides. The requirements seem pretty minimal:

 

"A basic rule of thumb on the domestic quota rules is that to qualify a player they must have played in ten games in that nation at some point in their playing career, or have never played rugby league before."

 

Some countries might just throw in a couple of RU players to make up the numbers.

[USRLFAN]

Farmduck, on 12 Oct 2016 - 3:51 PM, said:Farmduck, on 12 Oct 2016 - 3:51 PM, said:

Only for this tournament or presumably, such tournaments as the RLEF decides. The requirements seem pretty minimal:

 

"A basic rule of thumb on the domestic quota rules is that to qualify a player they must have played in ten games in that nation at some point in their playing career, or have never played rugby league before."

 

Some countries might just throw in a couple of RU players to make up the numbers.

 

 

They also have to be in the 19 it says.  " The RLEF have also confirmed these four players must be named in every matchday 19-man squad in order to meet World Cup regulations. "

 

I think its a step in the right direction.  Italy has named a Union player.

[wackojacko]

They also have to be in the 19 it says.  " The RLEF have also confirmed these four players must be named in every matchday 19-man squad in order to meet World Cup regulations. "

 

I think its a step in the right direction.  Italy has named a Union player.

 

But a famous one that, with some effort from the Italian federation, could garner some column inches.

[DoubleD]

Ironically Scotland would struggle to meet that rule!

[brooza]

I guess for European countries 4 domestic players must be on each squad

 

http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/article/14850/italy-comply-with-domestic-quote

It says that's a tournament rule, but I wonder if that's only the European qualifiers or the whole RLWC qualification

[USRLFAN]

brooza, on 13 Oct 2016 - 04:34 AM, said:

It says that's a tournament rule, but I wonder if that's only the European qualifiers or the whole RLWC qualification

 

It wasn't true for the pacific qualifier.  But for the MEA qualifier both Lebanon and SA had four or more domestic players on the squad. 

[spinnerhowland]

RLEF rules require it for RLEF member nations up until and including qualifiers. The rule does not extend to the RLWC, and there is not rule for any nation who are under the APRLC. 

[spinnerhowland]

Understand what you're saying, but for me player 2 has more credibility.

So you'll be OK with Bennett filling the England team with Aussies then?

[USRLFAN]

RLEF rules require it for RLEF member nations up until and including qualifiers. The rule does not extend to the RLWC, and there is not rule for any nation who are under the APRLC.

 

I just checked and South Africa and Lebanon are RLEF members.  So that would explain the qualifier.

[Odsal Outlaw]

So you'll be OK with Bennett filling the England team with Aussies then?

Not at all, but the point was who has more credibility.

I am 100% fine with grandparent rule, it's pretty established in world sport. As much as I don't want Aussies playing for England, if they absolutely committed to it, in a one nation for life system, I'd be slightly more comfortable with it. the likes of Heighington who played for England after openly stating it was only so he could play test rugby is, I think, disgraceful.

[deluded pom?]

RLEF rules require it for RLEF member nations up until and including qualifiers. The rule does not extend to the RLWC, and there is not rule for any nation who are under the APRLC. 

What's the point of insisting on certain criteria regarding squad selection only on one section of the RLIF members i.e. the RLEF? The WC is a RLIF sanctioned tournament. You can't have rules for some and different rules for others.

[DoubleD]

What's the point of insisting on certain criteria regarding squad selection only on one section of the RLIF members i.e. the RLEF? The WC is a RLIF sanctioned tournament. You can't have rules for some and different rules for others.

Oh but we can, I'm still trying to remind myself what rules we'll be playing in 4 nations. No free play is obvious but can't remember the number of interchanges

[spinnerhowland]

Not at all, but the point was who has more credibility.

I am 100% fine with grandparent rule, it's pretty established in world sport. As much as I don't want Aussies playing for England, if they absolutely committed to it, in a one nation for life system, I'd be slightly more comfortable with it. the likes of Heighington who played for England after openly stating it was only so he could play test rugby is, I think, disgraceful

So you feel someone who cannot get a passport, cannot work, cannot live in anymore than a tourist, has more credibility to represent a nation because they have one grandparent from it, over someone who has lived in that country for at least 3 years, lives, works, and is actively helping in developing the sport domestically.

 

Heritage players using this rule, can represent a nation without actually having ever set foot in it.

 

What are your ideas of "committed to it?". 

[spinnerhowland]

What's the point of insisting on certain criteria regarding squad selection only on one section of the RLIF members i.e. the RLEF? The WC is a RLIF sanctioned tournament. You can't have rules for some and different rules for others.

Yep, pretty much sums up a sport that is so tiny, it has never had to worry about any countries other than AUS and ENG. And now its trying to go global, it is running into all sorts of issues.

 

I can tell you first hand, and not only from the USA, that the continued use of Grandparent Heritage players for Internationals is one of the biggest issues for our sport to grow. A LOT of players find RL after RU in new nations, and after getting on with selections, they go back to what they know, and what doesn't cost them dollars and sweat to grow. 

 

If the RLIF is not willing to protect a certain number of domestic players for their national teams, then why should they even bother.

[Allora]

The whole Heritage deal is just to fill out teams that have little or no domestic competition and pump them with heritage players to make them appear to be competitive when in fact its a manufactured team.

 

Does far more damage than good in my opinion.

[USRLFAN]

Oh but we can, I'm still trying to remind myself what rules we'll be playing in 4 nations. No free play is obvious but can't remember the number of interchanges

 

I'd like to know that as well.  I think it is ten.

[Odsal Outlaw]

So you feel someone who cannot get a passport, cannot work, cannot live in anymore than a tourist, has more credibility to represent a nation because they have one grandparent from it, over someone who has lived in that country for at least 3 years, lives, works, and is actively helping in developing the sport domestically.

Heritage players using this rule, can represent a nation without actually having ever set foot in it.

What are your ideas of "committed to it?".

Heritage players aren't so much of the issue in my opinion, it's more he fact you can swap nations. Remove that and you'll only get committed heritage players. By that I mean those who will turn up year in year over a long period and not just because there is a WC and Australia didn't pick them.

In terms of residency I also think 3 years is too short and 5 is much better.

Also, I think minimum standards should be in place for nations to qualify for tournaments, minimum domestic activity. That would stop situations like Scotland being in 4N over countries like Wales and France who have domestic infrastructure.

Do you agree with nation swapping where players can change team multiple times?

[spinnerhowland]

Heritage players aren't so much of the issue in my opinion, it's more he fact you can swap nations. Remove that and you'll only get committed heritage players. By that I mean those who will turn up year in year over a long period and not just because there is a WC and Australia didn't pick them.

In terms of residency I also think 3 years is too short and 5 is much better.

Also, I think minimum standards should be in place for nations to qualify for tournaments, minimum domestic activity. That would stop situations like Scotland being in 4N over countries like Wales and France who have domestic infrastructure.

Do you agree with nation swapping where players can change team multiple times?

Ideally one nation for life. BUT a maximum of 1 change, in 1 direction. 

 

So a change from home nation to new nation once, but NOT back again.

 

OR from residence nation back to home nation once, but NOT back again.

 

And never more than 2 nations. 

[yanto]

"Also, I think minimum standards should be in place for nations to qualify for tournaments, minimum domestic activity. That would stop situations like Scotland being in 4N over countries like Wales and France who have domestic infrastructure."

 

There is minimum requirement's to be a Full Member,Associate member or Observer of the RLEF,

Scotland don't seem to even meet the Affiliate Member status,

 

http://www.rlef.eu.com/rlef/membership

 

 

 

[deluded pom?]

"Also, I think minimum standards should be in place for nations to qualify for tournaments, minimum domestic activity. That would stop situations like Scotland being in 4N over countries like Wales and France who have domestic infrastructure."

 

There is minimum requirement's to be a Full Member,Associate member or Observer of the RLEF,

Scotland don't seem to even meet the Affiliate Member status,

 

http://www.rlef.eu.com/rlef/membership

And still the RLEF and the RLIF keep ignoring their own rules.