Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Brett Gosper: 3 Year Residency Rule to be changed?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TRF_stormer2010" data-source="post: 723528" data-attributes="member: 39190"><p>Isn't that what Cmac is saying though?</p><p></p><p>---</p><p></p><p>My own views on the subject aren't very simple. While I am all for the principle of willing buyer(employer) / willing seller (player) as it applies to the case of "import" players in national teams the unions and selectors that pick these players up have to accept the fact that the supporters have some form of ownership of their national sides and I fully get the fact people prefer their sides to be representative of their nations. I don't really have a problem with many of these that have come up in the past though where there is some link between the "import" and the country he plays for like for instance Mtawarira for SA- neighboring country (porous boundaries) with a lot of similarities culturally/historically, played his pro rugby here, has been a resident for ages, Barrett for England as he is an "English" South African and as the cliche saying goes (from us 'Boere') 'they' ('Anglo Africans') have one foot in SA and one in England in any case. So too Pocock for Aussie as he would fit in culturally and there were political/social factors at play in Zimbabwe which means the move to Aussie (with his family) wasn't a purely financial one if at all which for me is a big 'mitigating factor' for allowing "imports"- acknowledging that the move is the person adopting a new nation/nationality as much as that is possible due to.. maybe even physical threat in his home country. This is almost based on the notion that white people don't belong in Africa to which I don't subscribe BUT at the same time it is difficult to deal with those that try to push that agenda and do so with violence and intimidation on a daily basis. This brings me to South Africans and while it's not all bad I'll admit there is any number of reasons for a white man to take his family and move off and that I've looked at what can only be called escape routes myself. We are of North Western European descent (mainly Dutch and French but people tend to forget that there were a lot of early Scottish settlers and that the British pushed for British emmigration to SA after the Boer war to "act as a counterweight to the Boer" so it's almost 60:40% Dutch/French/Scottish(Boere):Afrikaner'ized' British/Anglo English. If we are all but forced to leave SA due to social/political circumstances it's hard to see a fit other than the countries of origin or other former colonies of said countries. I guess I'd like to imagine us as welcome as I can see myself moving as well even if not to play pro rugby.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TRF_stormer2010, post: 723528, member: 39190"] Isn't that what Cmac is saying though? --- My own views on the subject aren't very simple. While I am all for the principle of willing buyer(employer) / willing seller (player) as it applies to the case of "import" players in national teams the unions and selectors that pick these players up have to accept the fact that the supporters have some form of ownership of their national sides and I fully get the fact people prefer their sides to be representative of their nations. I don't really have a problem with many of these that have come up in the past though where there is some link between the "import" and the country he plays for like for instance Mtawarira for SA- neighboring country (porous boundaries) with a lot of similarities culturally/historically, played his pro rugby here, has been a resident for ages, Barrett for England as he is an "English" South African and as the cliche saying goes (from us 'Boere') 'they' ('Anglo Africans') have one foot in SA and one in England in any case. So too Pocock for Aussie as he would fit in culturally and there were political/social factors at play in Zimbabwe which means the move to Aussie (with his family) wasn't a purely financial one if at all which for me is a big 'mitigating factor' for allowing "imports"- acknowledging that the move is the person adopting a new nation/nationality as much as that is possible due to.. maybe even physical threat in his home country. This is almost based on the notion that white people don't belong in Africa to which I don't subscribe BUT at the same time it is difficult to deal with those that try to push that agenda and do so with violence and intimidation on a daily basis. This brings me to South Africans and while it's not all bad I'll admit there is any number of reasons for a white man to take his family and move off and that I've looked at what can only be called escape routes myself. We are of North Western European descent (mainly Dutch and French but people tend to forget that there were a lot of early Scottish settlers and that the British pushed for British emmigration to SA after the Boer war to "act as a counterweight to the Boer" so it's almost 60:40% Dutch/French/Scottish(Boere):Afrikaner'ized' British/Anglo English. If we are all but forced to leave SA due to social/political circumstances it's hard to see a fit other than the countries of origin or other former colonies of said countries. I guess I'd like to imagine us as welcome as I can see myself moving as well even if not to play pro rugby. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Brett Gosper: 3 Year Residency Rule to be changed?
Top