Pick a country, any country!
This week we will mostly be concerning ourselves with the three-year rule, the need for a single global disciplinary body and the coming around of the gone around...
We are not entirely sure what has suddenly brought the issue to prominence as it's been a bugbear for some for yonks, but the issue of the three-year residency rule now needs to be looked at as a matter of urgency.
England's call-up of Mako Vunipola appears to have finally cracked the ring-pull on the can of worms, but there have been disgruntled utterings for donkey's years about New Zealand's tribal gathering, as well as Australia's.
The English would appear to have been the most brazen about it all, should the accusations levelled at them by Fiji coach Inoke Mali prove to be founded. The French are supposedly not far behind.
Most disturbing is the accusation that the unions and clubs are luring teenagers across the globe to their academies accusations levelled at them by Fiji coach Inoke Mali; and with the networks among the ranks of the pros, not to mention the money available, growing by the day, the whole process is not going to stop unless better regulated.
But the question always to be asked is not if the three-year rule could be altered to protect the interests of tier two - we know the answer to that one and always have - but how.
Well, we certainly think you could change the rule to only permit people allowed passports of their adopted country to play for that country. That way you stop people heading over in their early twenties - such as Mouritz Botha - and using up the spots in a national squad to which they simply have no right to, spots for which born citizens would give their eye teeth to be filling.
However, it would also allow the flexibility for someone like Toby Faletau, who has been in Wales since the age of seven and is now naturalised, to play for the country he has grown up in. Obviously there's a conflict of interest for people born in a country but who have never lived there, but maybe here you could invoke a three-year residency clause?
That's one suggestion. We are sure there are others. But one thing's for sure, when you have - as Male claims - people born to parents of country A, in country A, and growing up in country A all with realisable ambitions of playing for country B, you have a system which is doing nothing whatsoever to protect the interests of the smaller nations who work hard to.
You also have national identities for sale, naive teenagers being whisked across the world to a future far from certain and places in a national squad at the very highest level up for sale rather than for privilege. We don't think that is what international rugby should be all about...
Both Andy Hazell and Sisa Koyamaibole are going to be weighing up their actions this week after copping 14 and 12-week bans respectively for their transgressions in the Amlin Challenge Cup.
But it's barely imaginable that biting is given a lesser punishment than Hazell's furious assault on a Mont-de-Marsan player. Hazell lost control for sure, but biting someone is just savagery - surely given the dangers involved in a human bite, that's is almost as serious as gouging?
The disciplinary inconsistency problem is not going to go away until someone wakes up and realises that there needs to be some form of single independent body examining these cases globally. Admittedly, there would be logistical problems in getting players to hearings, but these are also the days of Skype and a myriad of other media creating conference calls.
In one fell swoop you rid the disciplinary verdicts of the obvious manoeuvres which frequently contrive to allow miscreants to be available for all their important games, you also let players know a precise and consistent precedent, something currently glaringly absent from the system...
It was amusing listening to the wailing from Premier Rugby Chief Mark McCafferty this week as he twigged that there had been a meeting of the nations and clubs involved in the ERC restructuring wrangle without his presence.
"It was a flawed attempt to divide and rule and it failed," said McCafferty.
And your television deal for a tournament not sanctioned by anyone present at this offensive secret meeting you are so upset about was what, precisely?
Loose pass compiled by Richard Anderson
Comments
new_j4a says...
@jontheref, please mate....did you even view those?
The first is the discredited Matty Williams tape....just watch the clock jump 6 ot 7 minutes in the middle of the first "sequence" he is trying to sell you.....the tape will go down in history as the shoddiest piece of propaganda since Joseph Goebels....it is a pack of lies....watch the tape along side the real footage
The second....did you even watch it? Or did you just google and post? In spite of the title, it's an innocuous piece about CJ.....nothing to do with the RWC
The third, Oz propaganda....NOTHING to do with the RWC....and if you really are a ref...which I doubt....you'd know that Gold 3 is binding on the arm and pulling it down.....have you played in the front row? Do you know the Laws? I didn't look further than the first sequence......what a waste of time your post turned out to be
Really mate, you need to decide whetehr you are a serious poster or just a troll.
Posted 10:25 06th November 2012
jontheref says...
new_j4a
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=PuIuXrwPCcc&feature=endscreen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVqu5Gwi9qE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8kGwNaRvik&feature=relmfu
Posted 07:46 06th November 2012
7ton says...
@pog_mahone
You are certainly entitled to your opinion but I am more inclined to believe the IRB then yours
Posted 23:58 05th November 2012
new_j4a says...
@pog_mahone, Fine. Is it just a feeling. Or do you have data, like a list of errors he made? (this is meant respectfully) As far as the OPINION vs. FACT argument goes, without getting into an epistemological debate, after very slow and careful analysis of the game and all of the claims made by detractors, I have concluded for myself that his superb performance is a fact......yes, I agree that that assertion is an opinion, but it is no less valid. Independently, the best refereeing minds in the world have concluded exactly the same thing. The history books will show a valid victory for NZ....and a lot of whinging mostly from people who are not qualified to judge the facts....on the video....or not able to put their bias to one side. BTW, i am not a kiwi (but I am a qualified ref). Peace.
Posted 19:32 05th November 2012
pog_mahone says...
Thanks for your OPINION new_j4a. In my OPINION, Joubert was not consciously biased, or acting under orders from his boss... but he felt the weight of history on his shoulders and crumbled.
Posted 14:24 05th November 2012
new_j4a says...
@jontheref who says "Have to disagree about Joubert being superb. " Fine mate, agree to disagree. This has been talked to death already. The IRB and ref bosses agree that he was superb...thus the reward in the RWC follow up assignments. I know of 2 errors: 4:32 pen goes wrong way and he was unsighted for an obstruction. Neither of these detracts from a superb performance. Would be interested in your list of errors, but not interested in a another slanging match...just a quiet discussion of the list of errors.
Thanks anyway for the Bevan reference. I must go and have a read....should be interesting.
Posted 13:12 05th November 2012
APV1 says...
@ pog_mahone - one of my favourite tomes.
Posted 10:27 05th November 2012
jontheref says...
new_j4a
Have to disagree about Joubert being superb.
Bevan did write a book, Derek Bevan, The Man in the Middle.
ISBN 1-85411-290-2
Great read, a ref from amateur days, who experienced professional rugby.
Great stories about quittendon, and about how Mexted was put back in his box!
Posted 09:57 05th November 2012
Rosbif says...
Not back in Rondebosch until mid December I'm afraid, so will have to endure a few more weeks of NH weather before a jolt of decent sunshine, maybe watching the RBHS or Bishops boys playing cricket.... nice part of the world!
PS. Bevan is/was one of my all time favourite refs. True legend :-)
Posted 08:38 04th November 2012
new_j4a says...
@Rosbif Good luck to you too for the autumn tests. Are you back in the Western Cape for the sun? I spent a week fishing last month with one of the Bok players from that 95 QF squad and could have asked his opinion....his nose was within a few feet of the French "try." Maybe I'll ask the next time I see him. Did Bevan ever write an autobiography? He seemed a decent man....at least decent enough to walk out when that sleazy bastard Luyt presented him with a watch after embarrassing himself and all right thinking South Africans with his drunken comments at the rewards dinner.
Posted 13:19 03rd November 2012
Rosbif says...
@jontheref, j4a, pog_mahone. Thanks chaps. I kind of thought this thread was dead, so I risked one of those classic old whinge moments... but got some empathy rather than the usual slapping down! I'm genuinely thrilled!!
For the record, I don't think there's ever been anything close to organised conspiracy. But I do get flashbacks to France in the 70s-80s when I see how some Pacific Island teams get reffed at RWCs. Ot Italian clubs in HCup. Or Argentina in RC. It's the incumbent vs newbie dynamic I guess. And it's nice that France don't have to go through that all again.
Good luck to all in these autumn tests :-)
Posted 09:34 03rd November 2012
new_j4a says...
@pog_mahone says.." The French were on the receiving end in the 2011 RWC Final, no?" No. Discussed to death already. Extremely close, yes! Extremely deserving, Yes! Extremely unlucky not to have pulled off what would have been the greatest upset in rugby, Yes! Deprived by a biased ref, NO! Craig Joubert was superb, FACT!
Posted 08:35 03rd November 2012
new_j4a says...
@Rosbif, Hmmm I see what you mean....hugely disappointing. The disallowed try in the last few minutes looks absolutely rock solid to me from the field of play side....I was certain that it was a try. BUT from the in goal camera angle there is doubt: the French player looks to be on his back with the ball off the ground? I cannot be sure from what I can see over and over in slow motion. But Bevan was the most experienced ref in the world at that time (and Welsh not Anglo Saxon ASFAIK?) and he called it held up....so I have to go with that although it must be tough to be a French supporter and have to swallow that disappointment. I thought Bevan was very good and fair for the rest of the game. I would be interested to know what the other 3 biased decisions are that Patrick Robin talks about.
Posted 00:17 03rd November 2012
pog_mahone says...
LOL APV1, a lot better than eats, shoots and leaves! Do I need quotes around that?
Rosbif - you've gone a long way back there, mon ami. The French were on the receiving end in the 2011 RWC Final, no?
Posted 19:59 02nd November 2012
pog_mahone says...
jmanngod - thanks for Michael Bent, by the way. Apparently he qualifies for Ireland because his sister can play the tin whistle and entered the Rose of Tralee once (this is true, according to the warblings of the Irish team manager at a press conference this week). Oh, and his granny is Irish.
Posted 19:45 02nd November 2012
jontheref says...
Rosbif,
I am Welsh, but whilst I don't believe there is a conspiracy against you, certainly no Anglo Saxon pre-determination of the games, I do have memories of games, where I can see where some of your suuporters are supported in their paranoia!
You mention QF 1991, I thought you had the worst of some poor decisions, but did not help yourselves as a team.
Once the ref saw your tactics, I think the game swung the way of the English.
Semi 1995, again, I thought you were hard done by, as one try was given to SA, when what appeared to be a similar one for France was not. Once again, no conspiracy.
You do not mention first game 2007, when I thought the ref allowed Argentina far more leniency, as they have been granted many times over the years, than the French.Once you were playing catch up, it was too late.
RWC 2011, much has been said, but truly the way you played in the earlier games, the luck of defeating a 14 man Wales, who could not get the kick away at the end!(Boo hoo!), I was amazed at how close you came to winning the final.
This is not said to inflame, but I'll put my fire fighting gear on now!
I do think individual refs do treat you harshly, but some of them treat other teams the same way.
I do love the way you can play, and hope you keep it for teams other than Wales!
Be nice to share a wine sometime! Next time I am in Biarritz maybe?
Posted 18:40 02nd November 2012
new_j4a says...
@Sincero, Welcome back to the fold. That's the most sensible post we've seen from you in a long time. Shall we keep it rugby from now on? (Okay rugby and sheep?)
Posted 15:45 02nd November 2012
new_j4a says...
@Rosbif, You have a valid point. I have been remiss (and even more so with Oz whom I also secretly admire). I tried to download both games but only found the '95 SF in the archives. I confess that I don't recall any indignation at the time, but that may reflect by own bias towards the Boks. The 91 QF, I don't recall at all and may never have seen it as I was in the "rugby-deprived bubble of America" with only VHS tapes posted and viewed many weeks after the game to keep me sane. (Thank God for the internet and bit torrent today). Just for fun, I will review the '95 SF this weekend, but of course the Laws have shifted, but we should still be able to see biased reffing if it exists?
Posted 15:40 02nd November 2012
APV1 says...
Grammar is the difference between knowing you're sh!t and knowing your sh!t.
Capital letters are the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse.
;-)
Posted 15:21 02nd November 2012
Sincero says...
j4a... Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Posted 15:10 02nd November 2012