melkdave says...

I have to say the Murphy situation seems pretty farcial ,he is an Australian citazen after all.,and im sure he thinks of himself as such In these modern times your place of birth can be totally accidental.,given surviabilty rates of premature babies today and fast air traval.God knows both Australia and Ireland need good props ,and im sure he will be playing for Australia before 2014.

Posted 14:41 08th August 2012

jamesliveinhope says...

@APV1 I guess my answer to your thought is why? - I used the Fiona May example because it has nothing to do with Rugby. I agree that there needs to be a set of rules (the athletics example should be considered along with a few gulf states "Paying" Sudanese and Ethiopian athletes to represent them). But why should Fiona May (who's shift appears to be purely an emotional one) not be allowed to represent her new country.

Every world cup there is a spate of autobiographies and one feature of all of the players concerned is their desire to represent their country from a very early age, but an overriding desire is to be the very best and the impression I get is that that latter would override the former if the 2 came into conflict. (I wonder if Rupert Moon would have played for Wales were it nor for Hill and Morris, ironically a Welshman, occupying the England 1 and 2 positions).

Like I said, the rules are there to prevent the mercenaries from stopping domestic talent being stifled quite rightly but, on a shrinking planet, we have to make allowances for the player that chooses a new home.

Posted 19:37 17th July 2012

jonesy2 says...

APV1-- cheers, didnt know all that. it seems pretty clear cut but like i say i dont really have a problemo with it to honest i dont care who plays for who but those rules seems alright to me. im a fan of the playing in the country for a certain amount of time aspect.

heathy -- APV1 is on the money its a jealousy thing i wish england werent so dominant when it comes to sport particularly rugby because its boring i mean cmon (you like that APV1? it was taken straight from your book of sarcasm) ;)

jameslivesinhope-- england a top 4 side- hmmm verrrrrry highly debatable but thats neither here nor there

Posted 16:43 17th July 2012

jamesliveinhope says...

@APV1 the rules are fine, if they are tightened they will prevent more legitimate applications than they will stop the more mercenary ones.

I understand your point about representing another country but even then I don't see that becoming a barrier to someone switching. Look at Fiona May in athletics, represented Great Britain, married an Italian, represented Italy. No reason for her not to continue as a British athlete, no benefit in representing Italy, it was purely a matter of choice.

@jonesy - completely disagree, Tuilagi has lived in the UK since he was 13 and was subject of quite lengthy legal action to prevent his deportation due to the wrong visa. He has had most (if not all) of his education in England and I'm sure that most of his friends are English. He also (I am sure) had the choice of playing for either country and chose that of his home. IMO he is morally much more qualified to play for play for England than Murphy who seems to be hedging his bets anyway.

I think that what should also be remembered is that, to use England as an example, they are a top 4 side irrespective of their recent challenges, if you are good enough to play for them one would assume that a "heart not really in it" would be found out fairly quickly.

Posted 09:54 17th July 2012

APV1 says...

@ jonesy2 - the IRB set the rules, not the individual nation. Regulation 8:

http://tiny.cc/bipjhw

Hape was capped by NZ in League and I feel that he should be excluded from representing another nation in any sport.

Flutey played for the NZ Maori and, although they are not the National side, one could argue that they're more NZ than NZ..! Again, I think that should exclude him.

Thomas The Tank was planning to move over here and wait until he qualified by residency. That was until his mother (I think) told him about his English grandparent. As such, he qualified immediately.

Personally I feel that if you have earned a "cap" at any National level (including age-grade), that should be you setting out your stall and making a commitment. But the IRB have made their view very clear in the Shingler case and if I had my way, Martin Johnson wouldn't have played for England and we probably wouldn't have won the RWC! I also think that, perhaps, 5 years would be better than 3 for residency. But that's how I feel and one has to live within the rules and accept the consequences.

But the rules are basicially:

1 Place of birth

2 Grandparents

3 3 years' Residency.

And we can't change them by whinging on a rugby forum. If you don't like them, petition the IRB:

irb@irb.com

Posted 16:48 16th July 2012

NHsaints says...

I say let him play for either...he's as good as should qualify for both, ironically both Oz and Ireland need class props and he aint half bad so he's in demand and the choice should be his...no doubt he wants the starting gold jersey and that would be an easier (albeit longer) route than to the starting green jersey...however he should have to abide by IRB rules same as everyone.

Posted 19:30 15th July 2012

GoWalesGo says...

atg77

What on earth are you on about?

He went to school in Ireland and then went on to further honours in Ireland that way. How is that aspiring to be an Irish international? More like just trying to make it as a pro rugby player, which is the goal for most youngsters who play rugby to a high standard.

He's no back in Australia and has perhaps fallen in love with the country. Why can't he represent them imo, he has a passport afterall and has lived in Perth when he was younger.

Jeezus christ, give the lad a break son...

Posted 18:24 13th July 2012

Norm says...

Norm

Taking into account the current state of Irish propping reserves, the cynic in me would be thinking that if this guy couldnt make into the IRFU's reckoning after his years over here then how good could he be?

Posted 12:56 13th July 2012

jonesy2 says...

its a pretty moot point fellas. hes a good player but he isnt close to the wallabies squad at this point in time.

APV1- i think the difference in most cases anyway is that england pick up players who have no association or affiliation with england anyway i for one dont care in the slightest who plays for england

Posted 07:07 13th July 2012

atg77 says...

I think this guy has some identity issues. Why did he spend all that time in Europe, supposedly aspiring to play for the Irish national team, then go back to OZ and join the brumbies? On the subject of Quade Cooper, I would hardly say he grew up in OZ. He moved there at the age of 13, so does that mean those years spent in NZ mean nothing?

Posted 15:48 12th July 2012