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
CJ Stander to retire at the end of the season
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="Cruz_del_Sur" data-source="post: 1032952" data-attributes="member: 55747"><p>Pfff. Born in England to a Welsh parent. Educated and learned to play in Wales. He took a shot with England but when he saw the competition he realized he had a better shot with Wales so he switched sides. He played for West Wales schools, then for England u18, then Wales. He is a textbook example of what i am against. Pretty sure i am not alone on this. The main reason why this continues is because the people who run the show actually benefit from this. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Ok, that's quite the definition of discrimination you've got there. </p><p>Let's see. </p><p></p><p>Discriminate (verb): make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people...</p><p>The unjust part is a judgement call from you which i disagree with, and it is absolutely not prejudicial as i am looking at the fact before i pass judgement. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is precisely the problem. You make it sound as if both a player and a union want to work together, well, then that should be good enough. I do not. Sugarcoat it the way you want, but that is basically a carte blanche for richer unions to take talent from poorer unions and it destroys the ideal on which these competitions were built on. You are just legalizing a way to make good players want to play for teams other than their own. If Unions are allowed to purchase players, what's the difference between this and club rugby? If that's the case, let's call a spade a spade, remove flags, anthems, stop calling a national team and just call it "The best team Nation X could afford". At least that'd be honest. We can even use the sponsor's names. Tesco faces Carrefour! Ryanair vs Drambuie at the Aviva this weekend! </p><p>At least that'd have a shred of integrity. </p><p></p><p></p><p>The fundamental difference between clubs and national teams facing each other originated from that principle: clubs can cherry-pick it's members, the other cannot. That gave poorer nations a fair chance. </p><p>What the union or the player want should be (maybe not 100% in all cases but certainly to a high degree in most) irrelevant. That's the entire bloody point. </p><p></p><p>As things stand right now, you've got national european tier 2/3 teams where players not only cant even sing the anthem, they cant even speak any of the country's official languages. The reasons why this is non-existent at tier 1 is </p><p></p><p>a) More exposure so people in charge, knowing how bad this looks takes precautions. </p><p>b) English is rugby's lingua franca and it also happens to be the language most people speak as a second language. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's my entire bloody point. If your rugby union doesn't suit you your wants you shouldn't be able to turn around and play for another country. What Stander wanted should be irrelevant. This is not a charity called "let's-grant-a-wish-for-elite-players-who-couldn't-make-it-to-the-national-team-of-their-choosing-foundation".</p><p></p><p>I want to play for Argentina and score a last-minute try to win the world cup? That's what i want and what i need. </p><p>Rugby player's careers are short enough and i haven't seen a single cent from my national team's union. NOT A CENT.</p><p>Should everyone adjust the rules so that can happen if i want it hard enough? </p><p>Jesus christ no. </p><p></p><p>You think it is not only ok, but desirable if a player wanted to play flank for South Africa but didn't have what it takes, to go nation shopping. I do not. I think it destroys the game. </p><p></p><p>I am willing to tolerate some of the players' wishes in some very specific circumstances for practical purposes. </p><p></p><p></p><p>@munstemuffin</p><p></p><p>A couple of things before i answer that. Let's make on thing crystal clear. My point is based on principle, a principle that I've outlaid already. A principle about what national rugby should be about. I then look at the evidence and if it fits the principle I'm ok with it, otherwise, i am not. In Beast's case i actually looked at the national teams box on wiki before i posted and since it didn't mention things other than South Africa, i made the call based on incomplete information. You want to call that wrong, fine, let's call it wrong. For me the key parts here are the principle and the logic applied. My principle stands and the logic is sound. If new evidence changes the outcome I'm actually happy about that. I've learned something and my position on a specific case is now a more informed one. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Now, back to your post. A straight question deserves a straight answer: against DD playing for Italy. </p><p>I have no problem whatsoever with Parisse playing for Italy though. As far as i understand, he ended up in Italy because his father's job landed him there, spoke Italian at home, and never wore an Argentine Jersey. If this last is false I'll change my opinion, not a problem. Again, the important here is the principle and the logic applied to see if the evidence stands for such principle or not. The result is circumstantial.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cruz_del_Sur, post: 1032952, member: 55747"] Pfff. Born in England to a Welsh parent. Educated and learned to play in Wales. He took a shot with England but when he saw the competition he realized he had a better shot with Wales so he switched sides. He played for West Wales schools, then for England u18, then Wales. He is a textbook example of what i am against. Pretty sure i am not alone on this. The main reason why this continues is because the people who run the show actually benefit from this. Ok, that's quite the definition of discrimination you've got there. Let's see. Discriminate (verb): make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people... The unjust part is a judgement call from you which i disagree with, and it is absolutely not prejudicial as i am looking at the fact before i pass judgement. This is precisely the problem. You make it sound as if both a player and a union want to work together, well, then that should be good enough. I do not. Sugarcoat it the way you want, but that is basically a carte blanche for richer unions to take talent from poorer unions and it destroys the ideal on which these competitions were built on. You are just legalizing a way to make good players want to play for teams other than their own. If Unions are allowed to purchase players, what's the difference between this and club rugby? If that's the case, let's call a spade a spade, remove flags, anthems, stop calling a national team and just call it "The best team Nation X could afford". At least that'd be honest. We can even use the sponsor's names. Tesco faces Carrefour! Ryanair vs Drambuie at the Aviva this weekend! At least that'd have a shred of integrity. The fundamental difference between clubs and national teams facing each other originated from that principle: clubs can cherry-pick it's members, the other cannot. That gave poorer nations a fair chance. What the union or the player want should be (maybe not 100% in all cases but certainly to a high degree in most) irrelevant. That's the entire bloody point. As things stand right now, you've got national european tier 2/3 teams where players not only cant even sing the anthem, they cant even speak any of the country's official languages. The reasons why this is non-existent at tier 1 is a) More exposure so people in charge, knowing how bad this looks takes precautions. b) English is rugby's lingua franca and it also happens to be the language most people speak as a second language. That's my entire bloody point. If your rugby union doesn't suit you your wants you shouldn't be able to turn around and play for another country. What Stander wanted should be irrelevant. This is not a charity called "let's-grant-a-wish-for-elite-players-who-couldn't-make-it-to-the-national-team-of-their-choosing-foundation". I want to play for Argentina and score a last-minute try to win the world cup? That's what i want and what i need. Rugby player's careers are short enough and i haven't seen a single cent from my national team's union. NOT A CENT. Should everyone adjust the rules so that can happen if i want it hard enough? Jesus christ no. You think it is not only ok, but desirable if a player wanted to play flank for South Africa but didn't have what it takes, to go nation shopping. I do not. I think it destroys the game. I am willing to tolerate some of the players' wishes in some very specific circumstances for practical purposes. @munstemuffin A couple of things before i answer that. Let's make on thing crystal clear. My point is based on principle, a principle that I've outlaid already. A principle about what national rugby should be about. I then look at the evidence and if it fits the principle I'm ok with it, otherwise, i am not. In Beast's case i actually looked at the national teams box on wiki before i posted and since it didn't mention things other than South Africa, i made the call based on incomplete information. You want to call that wrong, fine, let's call it wrong. For me the key parts here are the principle and the logic applied. My principle stands and the logic is sound. If new evidence changes the outcome I'm actually happy about that. I've learned something and my position on a specific case is now a more informed one. Now, back to your post. A straight question deserves a straight answer: against DD playing for Italy. I have no problem whatsoever with Parisse playing for Italy though. As far as i understand, he ended up in Italy because his father's job landed him there, spoke Italian at home, and never wore an Argentine Jersey. If this last is false I'll change my opinion, not a problem. Again, the important here is the principle and the logic applied to see if the evidence stands for such principle or not. The result is circumstantial. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
CJ Stander to retire at the end of the season
Top