robdylan

Swiel keeps options open


Written by Rob Otto (robdylan)

Posted in :Original Content on 4 Mar 2013 at 11:18
Tagged with : , , , ,

I wrote a piece last year about how a change to South Africa’s eligibility rules might influence the choices that young players make, relating to national under 20 selection. In short, SARU’s decision to designate the SA Under 20 side as the “second side”, meaning that any player who represents South Africa at under 20 level will thus immediately be barred from ever representing another country at senior level, might have the unintended consequence of player opting to keep their options open while they are still young.

According to Beeld’s Stephen Nell, that’s exactly what young WP flyhalf Timmo Swiel has opted to do. Swiel qualifies to play for England due to holding a British passport and is apparently loathe to forever tie himself to rugby in South Africa by playing for the Baby Boks at this year’s IRB Junior World Championship. He has thus withdrawn himself from contention for the side.

I wonder how many other young players might opt to do the same thing? Anyway, the writing appears to be on the wall here and knowing the fickle and often petty way in which players are selected for teams in the republic, Swiel may as well pack his bags tomorrow, since I doubt he’ll easily be selected in South Africa again.

Nell further reports that lock Quinn Roux, despite WP Rugby’s assurances to the contrary, will not return to the Cape this year and has instead opted to sign on for two more years in Dublin with Leinster.



75 Comments

  • If you don’t want to represent your country at junior rugby, you should leave right now..

    Seriously, who does he think he is to make that call?

    Pack your bags Tim, I won’t lose any sleep over a player with that sort of attitude..

  • Comment 1, posted at 04.03.13 11:26:41 by Richard Ferguson Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    Richard FergusonCoach
     
  • @Richard Ferguson (Comment 1) : I view this completely differently. I think it’s ridiculous to tie a player down for life after he’s played under 20 rugby for a country.

  • Comment 2, posted at 04.03.13 11:35:40 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • He clearly doesn’t want to play for SA then. Fair enough.
    Reckon this will be the rare exception rather than the rule.

    Would love Roux to have returned to WP. Oh well.

  • Comment 3, posted at 04.03.13 11:36:20 by McLovin Reply

    McLovinAssistant coach
     
  • @Richard Ferguson (Comment 1) :
    100%.

    We already screwed up by allowing foreign players to be selected. By contrast, NZ are willing to say cheers to players of the calibre of Thompson and Kahui.

  • Comment 4, posted at 04.03.13 11:37:18 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • @Richard Ferguson (Comment 1) : Why should he be expected to make a decision on patriotism alone? As any professional in the world must do, he should make the decision that best suits the future of his career.

  • Comment 5, posted at 04.03.13 11:49:14 by Seth101 Reply
    Valued Sharksworld Supporter Author
    NostrasethTeam captain
     
  • With our insistence on size over skill in SA, can’t blame Swiel, he’s a talented player with remarkable skills, our equivalent of James O’Connor if you ask me. He’s small though and I can understand why he has doubts over his future Test prospects

  • Comment 6, posted at 04.03.13 11:50:32 by Ludz Reply

    LudzSuper Rugby player
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 2) :

    Why?

    If you play for your country, you should be tied down. Why give the player the choice to go elsewhere? The time and money was spent on the player to represent his country at a young age, why let that go to waste by him turning out for England?

  • Comment 7, posted at 04.03.13 11:50:45 by Richard Ferguson Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    Richard FergusonCoach
     
  • I just look at the situation of Shaun Sowerby, got to play 1 test for South Africa and, never got picked again. The reality is that if he hadn’t played that one test, he would of probably played +- 50 tests for France imho.

  • Comment 8, posted at 04.03.13 11:55:03 by Bump Reply

    BumpSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Richard Ferguson (Comment 7) : you’re looking at this from a very parochial viewpoint, Rich.

  • Comment 9, posted at 04.03.13 12:00:20 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • I don’t think it’s fair to bind a player to a country for life based on a decision he makes when he’s 19….

    How many of you can say with absolute certainty that the career decisions you made for yourself at 19 were the best ones you could possibly make?

  • Comment 10, posted at 04.03.13 12:02:56 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 10) :

    You have a point, but why should South African rugby let every other team benefit from our rugby resources? No other team in professional sport works like that? The Boks can’t use a player from another nation, so why give that nation our players as well?

  • Comment 11, posted at 04.03.13 12:07:23 by Richard Ferguson Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    Richard FergusonCoach
     
  • @Richard Ferguson (Comment 11) : ummm… Beast? Tonderai Chavanga? Brian Mujati?

  • Comment 12, posted at 04.03.13 12:19:49 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @Richard Ferguson (Comment 11) : we produce FAR more rugby players than we could ever use. I don’t see the point in rugby – as a global game – stagnating because all the talent is concentrated in just one or two countries.

    Remember, we’re not saying players should have carte blanche to chop and change teams and countries as they please… just that an under 20 cap shouldn’t tie you to that nation at senior level. No other country does it that way… they designate their “A Side” as their second side.

  • Comment 13, posted at 04.03.13 12:22:04 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 12) :

    They never played age group rugby for their countries..

    They were practically born in their country and then came here soon after..

    Look, its a touchy subject, peope in different situations will look at it differently. I accept that.

    I just wouldn’t want a player in my team who thinks only of himself rather than the team he could represent.

  • Comment 14, posted at 04.03.13 12:22:40 by Richard Ferguson Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    Richard FergusonCoach
     
  • @Richard Ferguson (Comment 11) : The Tjietas might want to argue with you :lol:

  • Comment 15, posted at 04.03.13 12:24:05 by FireTheLooser Reply

    Assistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 13) :

    At the end of the day, I couldn’t be bothered about the ruling, I have a problem with a player thinking the way Tim does.

    That’s all really..

  • Comment 16, posted at 04.03.13 12:25:58 by Richard Ferguson Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    Richard FergusonCoach
     
  • Quinn Roux was never going to come back to WP. That was just a nice bed time story from the union to avoid the fans having another go at them, also I fully agree with Rob, this is a stupid rule and Swiel won’t be the last kid to make this call.

  • Comment 17, posted at 04.03.13 12:29:14 by Clayton(PJLD) Reply
    Administrator
    Clayton(PJLD)Team captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 13) : As far as I know, a player would only be bound to a specific country if that country’s second team plays against another country’s second team. There was a similar issue a while back about a player representing Wales at u20 level against a French u20 team. Scotland then tried to call up this player, but the Welsh rugby union blocked the move, because both Wales u20 and France u20 are their designated second teams.

  • Comment 18, posted at 04.03.13 12:47:11 by Argex Reply

    ArgexUnder 21 player
     
  • @Argex (Comment 18) : if SA u20 play England u20 and England u20 are not England’s designated second team, Swiel will still be eligible for England or whoever. But if SA u20 play Wales u20, he would be tied to SA.

  • Comment 19, posted at 04.03.13 12:49:14 by Argex Reply

    ArgexUnder 21 player
     
  • I feel very strongly about this issue, as a lot of Argentine players have gone on to represent other countries like Italy and even Australia.

  • Comment 20, posted at 04.03.13 12:53:54 by Argex Reply

    ArgexUnder 21 player
     
  • @Argex (Comment 19) : so I think right there, you’ve just managed to sum up quite how bonkers this whole system is.

  • Comment 21, posted at 04.03.13 12:54:53 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @Argex (Comment 20) : and do you think it’s right or wrong that they should be able to do that?

  • Comment 22, posted at 04.03.13 12:55:26 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • The whole issue is fuzzy. (See IRB Regulation 8)

    1. If he is selected for the senior, next senior or national 7s side and is present either as player or substitute he is tied. (8.2)

    2. If he is selected for a team, even if it’s not the senior, next senior or national 7s side of his country, to play the senior, next senior or national 7s side of another country, he is tied (8.3)

    3. If he is selected to tour and plays in ANY match on tour he is tied. (8.3.b)

    The only way he can get out of it is if he hadn’t turned 18 yet (not reached majority)

  • Comment 23, posted at 04.03.13 13:08:26 by Baylion Reply

    BaylionSuper Rugby player
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 22) : I think I still have a very old school view about this. I would understand if you were born in SA for example, but at a very young age moved to England and then go on to represent England. But if you’ve grown up in SA and spent your whole life here, and then decide to move on to another country just because you don’t get picked at that stage for the national side, is not on in my opinion.I don’t think national sides should be governed at the same level as club sides. I understand a lot of things are involved, but national pride and loyalty should be stronger than anything else. You are not representing yourself, but your country, your people. You play for them internationally. I know this is a very ideological viewpoint and that a lot of people might not agree with me. And I’m open to debate. But it saddens me to no end when I see guys play for other countries, that were born and bred in my own.

  • Comment 24, posted at 04.03.13 13:08:39 by Argex Reply

    ArgexUnder 21 player
     
  • Well done Tim Swiel!! He’s taking a stand against a ridiculous system!

    @robdylan (Comment 21) : @Bump (Comment 8) : Shawn Sowerby is thew example I always use when arguing against the “one country for life” rule. If the coach doesn’t like you then (even if you’re the best eighthman in the world) you don’t ever get to play for your country again.

    Players should have to stand down for 3 years before representing another country. We could have seen Jerry Collins and Chris Masoe playing for Samoa. Imagine the difference they’d make!!

    Representing your country’s “A-Team” i.e. the second senior XV for the group, means that you’re close to national selection and that should be what ties you to a country, not the U20 side.

  • Comment 25, posted at 04.03.13 13:14:48 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisSSuper Rugby player
     
  • @ChrisS (Comment 25) : so if a coach doesnt like you, you change allegiances? Does playing for one’s country mean that little? Shaun could have come back from France at any time during the years that followed. There have been quite a few coaches from then to now. Surely they would not have the same viewpoint as all the others. The Samoans who played for the All Blacks all made a choice to play for that team. With the knowledge that they would never be allowed to play for their original country ever again. Why allow them now?

  • Comment 26, posted at 04.03.13 13:51:07 by Argex Reply

    ArgexUnder 21 player
     
  • @ChrisS (Comment 25) : I agree with you… but then again, I don’t get this “patriotism” stuff quite as much as most other people do.

  • Comment 27, posted at 04.03.13 14:00:21 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @Argex (Comment 26) : Any of the coaches (White and de Villiers) could have selected Shaun but didn’t. Instead of getting to play international rugby he was stuck at club level in France.

    I’m not saying switch allegiance at the drop of a hat but 3 years is a long time in the career of a player.

    I’d allow the Samoans to play as it would make their national team stronger and would make rugby far more competitive internationally.

  • Comment 28, posted at 04.03.13 14:02:23 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisSSuper Rugby player
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 9) :
    Making the ex-pat tint on a bit for you Rob?

    Everyone should be free to play for whom they want to, but I see no issue in limiting a person to representing just one country. And why should age come into it? What has England done for this kid’s development to be part of this discussion?

    The last thing the world needs more of is mercenary national teams or individuals. I was appalled when Qatar tried to lure S.A. swimmers to represent them with big bonuses, and Wilson Kipketer was always an odd case for me.

  • Comment 29, posted at 04.03.13 14:07:55 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • @ChrisS (Comment 28) : His chances for a call up would have been much greater had he returned to SA. Where the coaches could have seen him play all the time. But he didn’t. For whatever reason he decided to stay in France. I know it would make Samoa stronger, but if the players themselves wanted to make them stronger, they should have committed then instead of pursuing NZ honours.

  • Comment 30, posted at 04.03.13 14:31:17 by Argex Reply

    ArgexUnder 21 player
     
  • I agree with ChrisS. Why not allow a player to move after three years. You could allow the tongan, fijiian and samoan players to go back to their native teams.

    The experience and coaching they have received would only help to make these island teams stronger.

    That being said I do hear the arguments Argex and Rich have made. Maybe each case on its merits is needed here.

  • Comment 31, posted at 04.03.13 14:33:43 by StevieS Reply
    Author
    StevieSSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Argex (Comment 30) : Where can they earn more? I think that’s the pertinent issue when deciding who to play for.

  • Comment 32, posted at 04.03.13 14:34:53 by StevieS Reply
    Author
    StevieSSuper Rugby player
     
  • I reckon a cooling of period should do. Perhaps on a sliding scale. U/20 one year, whatever team.is the next level up 2 years. And if you have played a test, 3 years.

  • Comment 33, posted at 04.03.13 14:36:23 by McLovin Reply

    McLovinAssistant coach
     
  • @McLovin (Comment 33) : I agree. 3 years is a long time in international terms.

  • Comment 34, posted at 04.03.13 14:41:13 by ChrisS Reply
    Author
    ChrisSSuper Rugby player
     
  • @Richard Ferguson (Comment 14) : All three were schooled in Zimbabwe and represented the national schools team. This needs to be looked at from a player’s perspective with the term professionalism at the forefront of your mind. The sad truth in modern Rugby is that once you have chosen a career in the game, decisions on your professional future need to be placed ahead of your love for your country or the Springbok jersey. The fact that we are so blessed in the talent department means players realise the odds of having a sustained Springbok career are minute. To completely condemn a player who feels his best shot at international Rugby-purely because we have more talented players-lies abroad, is quite simply…absurd.

  • Comment 35, posted at 04.03.13 14:44:56 by JKsports Reply

    JKsports
     
  • @Argex (Comment 24) :

    Argex,

    Arguably more players would stay in Argentina if the UAR pulled its head out of its *ss and became professional.
    The days of amateurs being able to hold their own against profesisonals are long gone. This is a carre and if your employers dont treat it as such you’ll mvoe away and ply your trade elsewhere.

    As much as I love Argentinian rugby and have many Argentinian friends, your administrators have been stuck in the dark ages whilst the rest of the world has moved on.

  • Comment 36, posted at 04.03.13 18:40:48 by VinChainSaw Reply
    Author
    VinChainSawTeam captain
     
  • Richie, the world we live in, and the world in which rugby resides, is fully professional.

    To expect a kid to decide where he wants to spend the next 10 – 12 years of his career at the age of 18 is ridiculous.

    Even more ridiculous than that – how can you be forbidden from playing for somebody else if you’re not even capped?

    Are these u/20 players getting capped? Of course not.
    If you’re not capping the player, how can you impose a restraint of trade on him?

    Like so many other things in safferland, rules like this mean we’re over-extending and taking more than is our due.

  • Comment 37, posted at 04.03.13 18:44:33 by VinChainSaw Reply
    Author
    VinChainSawTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 27) : @Richard Ferguson (Comment 16) : @Argex (Comment 30) : Sorry to say guys but don’t tell me if any of you can go work in another country do the same work but get 2-3 times more to do so you would not think about going.
    Next thing having a 0/20 player commit to a country is as silly as having that same player commit to one team for life if he plaus for them.
    Rugby and sport is profesional and these players get a chance to make as much of it as they can upto the age of 30-35. If their own country don’t think they’re good enough let them go play for some other team/country.
    I do agree with a player only being allowed to play senior rugby for one country as some of the poor countries like Samoa, Tonga and the like will be stripped of all their good players after showing what they can do in international rugby by other teams we know so well.
    Well that is just how I feel about this. Go Brad Barrit, Kevin Pietersen, Clyde Rathbone and all the others that was not deemed good enough to play for SA but show that were good enough to play at the highest level of sport!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Comment 38, posted at 04.03.13 19:28:37 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    JDAssistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 27) : Hey Rob do I get my next star at 2500 or 5000 points. Please tell me it’s at 2500!!!!! :cry:

  • Comment 39, posted at 04.03.13 19:33:40 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    JDAssistant coach
     
  • @JD (Comment 39) : ok, it’s 2500…

    Actually, it isn’t but you asked so nicely I hated to disappoint you :)

  • Comment 40, posted at 04.03.13 19:50:35 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 40) : thanx for for feeling bad but your not feeling nearly as bad as what I’m feeling cause now I only need 2900 point for my next star.
    Only about 580 posts to go.

  • Comment 41, posted at 04.03.13 20:30:23 by JD Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Administrator
    JDAssistant coach
     
  • @VinChainSaw (Comment 36) : I will concede that we have many challenges facing us. And things we have to get right. But money brings with it sometimes more problems. You would be hard pressed to find any other team who plays with so much passion and spirit than the Argentines do. Yes of course they need to be paid for their efforts, but as the late Danie Craven said, it should be about playing for your country and not about the funds available. And that for me is the essence of rugby, and sport in general.

  • Comment 42, posted at 05.03.13 08:24:46 by Argex Reply

    ArgexUnder 21 player
     
  • Nowadays playing for a club / province is a job in the professional era. So I get annoyed with some supporters calling the Sharks mercenaries, etc, etc.

    Representing your country is a privilege and not a right. I agree you should not be able to represent more than one country – end of story.

    I do have a problem with SA using the u/20 team as the second team, but more from rugby reasons than for eligibility reasons. The step up from u/20 to even Currie cup is huge – let alone to Bok level. It annoys me that we do not have any A team setup to speak of in this country. Pretty much all the big test nations have A teams of sorts, and let these play in some competitions (e.g. Six Nations A teams, etc). I think we are loosing out on giving promising newcomers a change to shine at a higher level – getting used to playing with guys who may join them in the Bok team at some stage.

  • Comment 43, posted at 05.03.13 08:52:05 by Bokhoring Reply
    Administrator
    BokhoringAssistant coach
     
  • @Bokhoring (Comment 43) :
    Agreed.

    Seems a lot of people are mixing up freedom to play for any club, anywhere, with freedom to choose which country(ies) to play for.

  • Comment 44, posted at 05.03.13 10:11:48 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 44) : just want to check something…. does the game cease being professional at national level? Must have missed that announcement…

  • Comment 45, posted at 05.03.13 10:27:34 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • Let them play for who they want. It’s their jobs. Being able to compete on the international stage gives exposure, which may well lead to more money.

  • Comment 46, posted at 05.03.13 10:32:12 by McLovin Reply

    McLovinAssistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 45) : Do players choose which country they play for based on income?

  • Comment 47, posted at 05.03.13 10:38:25 by FireTheLooser Reply

    Assistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 45) :
    Seriously Rob? You used to be smarter than that.

    Just to clarify, you don’t see a difference between club rugby and national rugby as far as eligibility is concerned? Let’s start with motivation. National rugby versus club. Are both monetary decisions in your eyes?

    Lest I needlessly offend any ex-pats, let me be clear that I respect the right of players to play for any club they wish too. Same for Swiel. Some needless emotion here. Why, some misguided soul even spouted some Hollywood “based on a true story” version about Rathbone and Pietersen not being deemed good enough for S.A. rugby and hence leaving. Far from the truth.

  • Comment 48, posted at 05.03.13 10:39:46 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • Some useless info.

    When Eng & NZ take the field later today for the 1st test (cricket) there could be 6 SA born players on the field.

  • Comment 49, posted at 05.03.13 10:53:14 by McLovin Reply

    McLovinAssistant coach
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 48) : no, I think you are the one who is missing the point here.

    Would you agree that in a career that lasts, on average, a little over 12 years, that it is in a player’s best interests to advance to the highest level of the game that they are able to, as quickly as possible?

  • Comment 50, posted at 05.03.13 10:56:00 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • Yes, I agree that is usually the case.

  • Comment 51, posted at 05.03.13 11:07:04 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 51) : ok, so let’s assume that as a 20-year-old, you are asked to commit your international playing future to a country where you probably have a less than 5% chance of every making the national senior side. Do you do it?

  • Comment 52, posted at 05.03.13 11:12:29 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • because let’s be honest here, in blinkered South Africa, it doesn’t matter how badly Johan Goosen plays, he’s still “the future of South African flyhalf play”.

    And if it’s not him, it’s Pollard. And so on and so on. If a guy like Lambie has to play out of his socks just to sneak in via the back door as an injury substitute for Goosen, what chance does Swiel have, regardless of talent?

  • Comment 53, posted at 05.03.13 11:14:22 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • Until the concept of the nation state disappears and we can all freely go live anywhere we want, I think that representing national sides means something different than representing clubs.

    I prefer having someone play for the national side who identifies with the country – not some guy who joins the side purely out of personal ambition (because he could not make it elsewhere).

    That said if Swiel decides to become an Englishman and play for England, I have no problem with that. I have all the respect for players like Mouritz Botha who moved from SA and went on to represent England in the end.

  • Comment 54, posted at 05.03.13 11:23:29 by Bokhoring Reply
    Administrator
    BokhoringAssistant coach
     
  • @Bokhoring (Comment 54) : we’ve got to bear in mind that, in terms of all the rules that matter, Swiel is “already English”…. as was Barritt.

  • Comment 55, posted at 05.03.13 11:31:59 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • But your biggest earning potential isn’t international rugby anyway. So using your logic, that fictional 20-year old should do one of 2 things; either join the highest paying league he can as soon as he can, or join a high paying league which places less physical toll on him, thus allowing him to play longer.

    Now let’s ignore for a minute that this whole story is impoverished by ignoring all the other personal motives constantly at play (which is why the above scenarios seldom play out with young players); at which point does choosing your national allegiance come into it?

    International rugby has never been primarily about money – it’s much more about patriotism and the right to pit yourself against the best in the world, on the biggest stages in the world.

    So let’s not mix up the issues here.

  • Comment 56, posted at 05.03.13 11:33:55 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 55) : They are / were both South Africans who are / were also eligible for England, i.e. they could make the choice with less hassle.

    Either could have stuck around and tried to become Boks – their choice.

  • Comment 57, posted at 05.03.13 11:36:44 by Bokhoring Reply
    Administrator
    BokhoringAssistant coach
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 56) : you don’t get the big-money French or Japanese pay-day if you haven’t first built up your “name” via test rugby.

  • Comment 58, posted at 05.03.13 11:56:05 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 58) :
    Patently not true. Plenty of uncapped players milking it in those leagues. Would they have earned more if they were capped? Probably. But would this have been because they were capped or would it have been because they were better (good enough to be capped)? The cap is the symptom of their attractiveness to clubs, not the cause.

    In any event, I think you’re chasing your tail on this one. Cause I really hope that you aren’t suggesting that the earning ceilings of players should be the basis for national team eligibility criteria.

  • Comment 59, posted at 05.03.13 12:12:01 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 59) : I think you’re the one who’s taking an intentionally blinkered view on it, purely to wind me up :)

  • Comment 60, posted at 05.03.13 12:16:11 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 60) :
    I won’t deny the dual desire to both creep closer to my platinum star and wind you up, but I do also believe that national representation is a badge of honour – not just another negotiable instrument in the quest for filthy lucre.

    And if any countryman does see a cap as just another pay-cheque, then I struggle to mourn if he chooses to play for another country.

  • Comment 61, posted at 05.03.13 12:29:03 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 61) : it’s not always that black and white, though. And without being dismissive of your perspective here, I think that you need to have spent some time living in another country to realise just how shallow this “patriotism” concept is sometimes.

  • Comment 62, posted at 05.03.13 12:32:18 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 62) :
    Everything is subjective Rob. That’s a whole rabbit hole of its own. You well know that I chose to stay in S.A. rather than take an assignment abroad. But that isn’t to say I might not choose differently next time. There is no morally superior answer there.

    Fact is, you are also clearly driven by emotion being someone who chose to move abroad yourself.

    My perspective on this is rather simple. Accept that both you and I are biased by our circumstances. Be that as it may, the national team is a national brand and decisions affecting it must be taken in the brand’s best interest, not individual players.

    And understand this too Rob, loyalty to the national team is of course patriotism in its most superficial form. Many Bok supporters are not patriotic in any other way. So even if you take volk and vaderland out of it, the national team needs to stay strong to maintain its support base. And that leaves little place for investing in players with mixed emotions.

  • Comment 63, posted at 05.03.13 12:49:00 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 60) : Did anyone pick up on the story of SBW possibly playing for either Tonga or Samoa at the next world cup.Rather strange seeing that he has already been capped by the All Blacks?

  • Comment 64, posted at 05.03.13 12:59:25 by CLASSIC SHARK Reply

    CLASSIC SHARKUnder 21 player
     
  • @CLASSIC SHARK (Comment 64) : first I’ve heard of that – and impossible under the current rules

  • Comment 65, posted at 05.03.13 13:00:18 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @Big Fish (Comment 63) : let’s move on… when are you coming back to Diablo? :)

  • Comment 66, posted at 05.03.13 13:01:06 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 62) : “I think that you need to have spent some time living in another country to realise just how shallow this “patriotism” concept is sometimes.”…..hmmm, so how patriotic a Shark supporter are you ACTUALLY, then. :twisted:

  • Comment 67, posted at 05.03.13 13:04:13 by Salmonoid Reply
    Friend of Sharksworld
    Salmonoid the SubtleAssistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 65) : Worth a google im sure..

  • Comment 68, posted at 05.03.13 13:05:05 by CLASSIC SHARK Reply

    CLASSIC SHARKUnder 21 player
     
  • Simply put, we put out a u/20 side every year.
    That means 22 individuals every year , of which one or two will eventually play Bokke.

    But now none of the other 20 or 21 players will be able to play international rugby.

    This is restraint of trade.

  • Comment 69, posted at 05.03.13 13:10:49 by VinChainSaw Reply
    Author
    VinChainSawTeam captain
     
  • @Argex (Comment 42) :

    Argex,

    I agree that that is more important and I would love the international rugby scene to work that way. But it doesnt.

  • Comment 70, posted at 05.03.13 13:11:32 by VinChainSaw Reply
    Author
    VinChainSawTeam captain
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 66) :
    Cool.

    Soon as I get my 3G router. Until I buy a new place, I am not getting a fixed line. I just hope 3G is stable enough in my area.

  • Comment 71, posted at 05.03.13 13:15:01 by Big Fish Reply
    Author
    Big FishAssistant coach
     
  • @CLASSIC SHARK (Comment 68) : Seems like it refers to rugby league.

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/sonny-bill-williams-and-co-set-to-star-for-samoa/story-e6frexnr-1226585773672

  • Comment 72, posted at 05.03.13 13:22:24 by Pokkel Reply
    Friend of SharksworldCompetition Winner Author
    Assistant coach
     
  • @robdylan (Comment 62) :

    I couldn’t agree more.
    When you’re removed from the everyday humdrum and accepted wisdom, your perspective inevitably changes as you’re not too close to the subject.

  • Comment 73, posted at 05.03.13 13:28:45 by VinChainSaw Reply
    Author
    VinChainSawTeam captain
     
  • @Pokkel (Comment 72) : that’s not even a sport

  • Comment 74, posted at 05.03.13 14:18:20 by robdylan Reply
    Competition Winner Administrator
    robdylanHead Coach
     
  • @Pokkel (Comment 72) : Cheers P…

  • Comment 75, posted at 05.03.13 14:37:27 by CLASSIC SHARK Reply

    CLASSIC SHARKUnder 21 player
     

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.