Fiji coach Inoke Male has slammed England, France, Australia and New Zealand for "poaching" youngsters from the Pacific Island nations.
Male comments come in the wake of England naming New Zealand-born Saracens prop Mako Vunipola, the son of former Tongan international Fe'ao Vunipola, in their squad for the November internationals where he will join Manu Tuilagi, whose elder brothers have played for Samoa.
"There are several players not available to us for this tour because they want to play for other countries," Male told the Times ahead of Fiji's clash with England at Twickenham on November 10.
"Young players now want to pursue options for other countries rather than coming on tour which is not a good sign.
"We have got a lot of problems caused by European countries, especially France and England, who have taken some of our players through their academies when they were young.
"England and France have got a lot of players to pick from already and, as a small country, for our players to be poached from us is not acceptable.
"There is one very talented player we wanted to select who went to an English academy and he is now 16-years-old and has opted to play for England.
"It is very obvious what is happening. If you go to the secondary school championships you will see scouts from Australia, New Zealand and England trying to find your players who want to go overseas. They are taking our young players like vultures.
"I will not tell you the specific players but I know of players who get invited to the UK when they are 14," added the Fiji coach.
"Now as 17-year-olds they are opting to play for England. That means everybody here who is young wants to play for England.
"As a good player that's what they choose and we respect that but it is mainly because of the money. That's what happened when boys are given the option. We need the IRB to stop this rule or change it."
Comments
Chubbylugs says...
Is this not the fault of the private schools in England / nz / aus / where ever bringing in overseas players with a view to enhancing the school 1st xv?
Posted 22:32 27th October 2012
Chubbylugs says...
Given the unlikeliness of getting a cap in my native country, I'd happily have played for any other country given the chance if an international cap. I'm sure most rugby players would, even if just to say you had
Posted 22:29 27th October 2012
three6three6 says...
Once rugby union became professional there were always going to be allegations regarding pacific islanders (Samoans, Tongans & Fijians) being poached by 'first tier' nations. In the Samoan team that played in the 1991 RWC - all but three of the players in the squad were playing their rugby in New Zealand. There have been long historical economic and social links between some of the pacific islands and New Zealand.
Where one country is able to offer more attractive development prospects to a player because of greater resources, then this is simply 'market forces' at work.
Second tier nations are always in danger of becoming 'feeder nations' for some of the first tier nations..... with these first tier nations having the ability to cherry pick the best talent. Let us imagine for one moment that a well known Public School in England wants the best performing rugby team - would it not be sensible to recruit the most talented players possible? How far should this recruitment programme extend? Locally, nationally or even internationally? With rugby union now becoming a higher profile sport with age grade international rugby being played at say U16 level, is it not unreasonable to contemplate that U16 players would be recruited through targeted campaigns? If New Zealand and Australian schools were going to recruit internationally from the Pacific Island - is this acceptable? What about schools promoting sporting excellence through sporting scholarships? There surely is no problem with this until the balance of the team changes (e.g. more of the First XV are on scholarships than are not).
I would suggest that economic migration is a fact of life these days. With most of the wealth being located in the Northern Hemisphere and the quality rugby production lines being located in the Southern Hemisphere, there will always be incentives for the drift northwards.
Posted 18:26 27th October 2012
northandsouth says...
Waz4before - a Pasifika S15 team is a lovely idea, but it makes no financial sense. It loses literally millions of dollars a year in associated costs, as well as making life more expensive for other sides. In a competition that is not financially sustainable in the first place and needs to be propped up by lucrative extra tests and endorsements, it just doesn't work - as much as me, you and a lot of other people would like it to
Posted 17:40 27th October 2012
Ramage says...
tagi the All Blacks arent full of Pacific Islanders those guys are NEw Zealanders and I defy you to name any of the AllBlacks in the current squad of Pacific Island heritage who did not come here before the age of 15. Onyour definition you are calling me a Scotsman because I am descended frae a Scotsman, I wish to inform you that no way am I a Scotsman, I am a proud New Zealander,
@fozza no it is not complex if you look at what I suggested it was a pro rata payment obviously more for a player who has had super rugby experience not as much for ITM umm U20 NZ worth a bit NZ secondary not as much secondary level something for the high school. Younger nothing. So someone like Tuilagi may or not pay anything depending on how he was recruited to England. It is this academy area that needs investigation.
@Trinuts there you go again totslly overstating the issue and putting out your usual misrepresentations. one day you might stick to facts instead of fantasies
Posted 14:58 27th October 2012
hellovanite says...
England = Desperate = Poaching
Top Brass Q.Why are NZ so good?
RFU Rugbyheads A.Oh it must be those pacific island lads.
Top Brass. Well we just can't beat them with our limey lot, so get down there in a jiffy and start throwing cash about, there's a good chap!
Posted 13:26 27th October 2012
pierredelot1 says...
The fact that these players opt to play in the larger Rugby Nations is due to the quality of coaching and training available ((Sure in England that debatable as they probably arrive with exciting pootential and end up boring, overmuscled plodding and predictable). So maybe for the smaller nations the rules should be changed that they can play for their birth nation with a minimum requalification. That way they can take their new talents and help bring on the home nation more constructively. Lets face it in all other occupations people are looking to better themselves and nations don't complain, however with sport there has to be a compromise, to quicken the development of emerging nations. Lets face it, when in doubt blame England, why waste the habits of a lifetime. Water off a ducks back.
Posted 13:11 27th October 2012
Waz4before says...
@ramage - would England get paid for George North under your system?
Posted 13:05 27th October 2012
Waz4before says...
@ramage - would England get paid for George North under your system?
Posted 13:05 27th October 2012
Waz4before says...
The only answer (or at least help) will come when there is a Super Rugby team dedicated to the Pacific Nations that (a) keeps them close to home, (b) pays them well and (c) keeps them out of residency qualification to any other country ..
Posted 13:02 27th October 2012
kybone says...
jonesy2-'other sports dont have these ridiculous rules'- I think you'll find they do. Cricket has similar issues, as does rugby league, in football there are teams all over the world that have a Brazilian or 2 in their ranks, even the mighty Germany. The french football team have built their team around players from various countries in Africa. The amount of nation swapping that goes on in athletics is ridiculous. In fact there was a case a few years ago where some long distance runner had decided to represent a particular nation in europe, it was later revealed that this nation would be the THIRD one that this athlete had represented in international competition. So there you go. It goes on all the time in all manner of sports. In this particular case i just don't think his claims are substantiated. I can't speak for other areas but there is only one Fijian playing international rugby for a major European nation, and that is Manoa Vosawai of Italy.
Obviously England have Tuilagi and now Vunipola, but they both had the opportunity to play for their country of birth, or rather their country of birth had the opportunity to pick them, befor they were ever recognised by England. They were by no means quaranteed an international career with England and Vunipola has said how shocked he was to recieve a call up to the England squad Which sounds to me like he would probably have acepted a call from Tonga before now if they'd have approached him. It seems to me that they haven't, so their look out.
Posted 12:41 27th October 2012
Uglea says...
Allow nations to choose who they want to play for. Ensure club contracts allow players to play internationals. If players hop between nations, ala the kiwis for Japan a few world cups back, then that is what it is.
It's a professional sport and if you qualify through residency or passport, them good luck to you. As an Aussie, happy to see later year players wanting to trot out in the green and gold , we might need em down the track.
Posted 11:37 27th October 2012
StunTheMullet says...
@ tagi83 - hey slow coach, New Zealand is a Pacific Island.
Posted 10:49 27th October 2012
fozza says...
@ramage I initially loved your idea of a fee being paid to the country for any players who were born in other countries but then I thought about it a bit more and I'm not sure how it would work.
For Example, how would you judge the amount to be paid? For example, Manu Tuilagi has leaved here since he was 14 I believe so how does he compare to say, Brad Barritt who played provisional rugby in South Africa? How much is due to each country?
Also, what about the players who will play for a country who would have no chance of making their county of Birth's national team? I'm thinking of Richard Strauss for Ireland etc. How much would we pay there? Somne of the lesser countries who utilise the rule like Hong Kong, Japan etc could be set back by any large costs involved with paying ex-pats.
Finally, what if Manu Tuilagi had decided to play for Samoa after all? Considering the amount of time and effort put in through the schools academies and clubs he was involved in, would Samoa be due us any money?
As I say i thought this was a great idea but it proves how complex this situation is that there is no easy way to answer the above questions.
Posted 10:04 27th October 2012
passtheball says...
tagi83 - some news for you maybe! Most of the Tongan, Samoan and Cook Islands teams at the World Cup were born in NZ and learned their skills there too. So who should they have to play for then?
There needs to a differentiation made between top tier nations and other nations and who they can recruit. This would help some nations develop and stop bare faced poaching by the top tier with more money.
Posted 09:42 27th October 2012
kybone says...
So where are all these Fijians that are playing for England and France. I can't think of one between them. If it is true that school aged lads are being scouted and brought over here with the intention of making them eligable for England, then that would be worrying. But, i say again, where are they. There are not that many Fijians playing in England, and the ones that do come over here are usually already capped at international level. In any case, you cannot force anyone to represent the country of their birth as not everyone has the priveledge of being born in a democratic society where they have the opportunity to maximise their potential.
Posted 09:23 27th October 2012
Trinats2 says...
I totally agree with him.
Bloody Poms, Kiwis and Aussie Rugby League stealing these young kids.
I see he mentions nothing of the NZ 7s team full of Fijians, maybe it's because Fiji beat them.
Posted 08:24 27th October 2012
jonesy2 says...
simple. IRB need to change the rule to simply you play for whatever passport/citizenship you have. and if you have dual then you can choose or get chosen. other sports dont have these ridiculous rules like if you grandmother once watched a french film you can play for said country.
Posted 07:20 27th October 2012
tagi83 says...
whos the best team in the world?......the all blacks.....a team filled with pacific islanders.......now other countries are following in there footsteps.....anywayz money always wins in the end and thats the only reason the islanders put on a different color jersey and its not because they want too.....lol....why do u think the irb keeps rejecting a pacific island team for the rugby championship or super rugby....they are going to take over those competitions thats wats going to happen.....lol
Posted 05:47 27th October 2012
TVaddict says...
@sharkscage
Have you even tried to think that through? Even a little bit?
Posted 01:45 27th October 2012