Dan Leo on PI players representing adopted Countries

[goodNumber10]

This is a great article by Dan Leo on Island players who play for their adoptive country - really well written, emotive and a superb perspective on it.


http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/feat...islanders-who-switch-nations-earn-our-praise/

 

[nickdnz]

Disagree with his final point in terms of not locking eligibility (however lenient), but otherwise a very good and sensible article.

 

[goodNumber10]

Disagree with his final point in terms of not locking eligibility (however lenient), but otherwise a very good and sensible article.

yeah, i do as well, but i understand where he's coming from.

 

[smartcooky]

I agree Nick, it is a well written article that shows great understanding of the Pacific Islands' rugby heritage and outlook on life.

My only criticism is that he needed to get a few of his facts straight

[TEXTAREA]"While the idea of Lomu storming down the touchline in a red jersey is certainly romantic, who is to say he would have become the superstar he did had he played for Tonga?" [/TEXTAREA]
Well, Jonah was actually born in Auckland, New Zealand, not Nukualofa, so he would have needed to invoke the parentage clause to play for Tonga!!

[TEXTAREA]"There is no doubt Samoa would certainly have liked to keep such as Jones, Frank Bunce and Vai’iga Tuigamala out of New Zealand’s clutches. Losing them, however, proves that rugby’s eligibility issue is in fact a double-edged sword for Pacific nations."[/TEXTAREA]
A fine sentiment, and he's certainly right about Tuigamala (who was indeed born in Faleasiu, Samoa) but not the other two. Michael Jones and Frank Bunce were both born in New Zealand. Bunce had to invoke the grandfather clause to play for Western Samoa back in 1991 because his parents are Niueian!!

 

[goodNumber10]

My only criticism is that he needed to get a few of his facts straight

his facts aren't incorrect.

 

[Blackdevil]

While the idea of Lomu storming down the touchline in a red jersey is certainly romantic, who is to say he would have become the superstar he did had he played for Tonga?

Replace "Lomu" by "Rupeni Caucau" and you got your answer.
But i understand his points about helping families, money... and there is a strong samoan, tongian community in nz so i can understand there are "close countries" even australia but playing for france, england or wales instead of your country/countries 3years and you feel more french/english/italian than samoan/fijian what does it make you? i guess we have a big gap between our mentalities, that's the kind of thing i never understand with PI players

 

[goodNumber10]

Replace "Lomu" by "Rupeni Caucau" and you got your answer.
But i understand his points about helping families, money... and there is a strong samoan, tongian community in nz so i can understand there are "close countries" even australia but playing for france, england or wales instead of your country/countries 3years and you feel more french/english/italian than samoan/fijian what does it make you? i guess we have a big gap between our mentalities, that's the kind of thing i never understand with PI players

But he doesn't say they feel more French/English/whatever.

He says that they feel a sense of loyalty, and want to give back to the people/country that has given them an opportunity whilst never losing sight of their heritage.

 

[smartcooky]

his facts aren't incorrect.

Technically you are right as they were theoretically allowed to play for Tonga/Samoa through parentage/grand parentage. (George Gregan and Corne Krige were both qualified to play for Zambia, and Simon Shaw to play for Kenya, and Alex Corbisiero to play for USA)

Nonetheless, he IS implying with those statements that Lomu was Tongan by birth, and Bunce and Jones were Samoan by birth. Its a common assumption, and it is wrong!

I'm just setting the record staight!

 

[goodNumber10]

Technically you are right as they were theoretically allowed to play for Tonga/Samoa through parentage/grand parentage. (George Gregan and Corne Krige were both qualified to play for Zambia, and Simon Shaw to play for Kenya, and Alex Corbisiero to play for USA)

Nonetheless, he IS implying with those statements that Lomu was Tongan by birth, and Bunce and Jones were Samoan by birth. Its a common assumption, and it is wrong!

I'm just setting the record staight!

At the risk of this turning into another barny, the way i read it was that Jones and Bunce were both Samoan players who swapped sides to play for the AB's - which they were. Along with Steven Bachop, Alama Ieremia, Pat Lam, Dylan Mika, Ofisa Tonu'u, Bryan Williams who all played for Samoa before they played for the All Blacks.


Out of interest, and not having a go, why did you not include them in your "Debunking The Myth" article? Surely the fact they represented Samoa first should have been taken into account when talking about talent stripping?

 

[psychic duck]

At the risk of this turning into another barny, the way i read it was that Jones and Bunce were both Samoan players who swapped sides to play for the AB's - which they were. Along with Steven Bachop, Alama Ieremia, Pat Lam, Dylan Mika, Ofisa Tonu'u, Bryan Williams who all played for Samoa before they played for the All Blacks.


Out of interest, and not having a go, why did you not include them in your "Debunking The Myth" article? Surely the fact they represented Samoa first should have been taken into account when talking about talent stripping?

No, because pretty much all those names are players who grew up in New Zealand, and came through the New Zealand system. If New Zealand really wanted they could have blocked them all playing for Samoa, and now none of them would under the current rules.

On a separate note, Samoa who should be thankful to New Zealand. Most people will be used to Samoa as the strongest Pacific Island nation, yet it was only up until 1990's when they started finding they could rely on NZ to develop and train their eligible players to make up for deficiencies and corruption in their own system that they became any good. Before they started picking teams of 70% NZ raised players, they were actually the weakest of the Pacific Islands, and Fiji were strongest by a margin.

 

[goodNumber10]

No, because pretty much all those names are players who grew up in New Zealand, and came through the New Zealand system. If New Zealand really wanted they could have blocked them all playing for Samoa, and now none of them would under the current rules.

Surely the point is they played for Samoa and then turned out for New Zealand? That is where the vast bulk of the Poaching/talent stripping for decades stuff comes from imo. People seeing players such as Jones and Bunce swapping allegiance overnight and rightly or wrongly thinking "poach".

So if we're talking about talent stripping you have to represent the whole picture not just pick part of it, not that it makes a huge difference to smartcookies point, but it is a very relevant piece of information.

***Edit: within SC's article he claims only 32 of 1133 Ab's so the % is very low - 2.8 %, but the vast bulk of those players were capped in the 90's and 00's, which i presume raises the % a bit when compared to All Blacks within that period of time (roughly 16-17% give or take).

that's quite a difference.

Of course as he says most of them came as kids and came through the NZ system.

 

[smartcooky]

At the risk of this turning into another barny, the way i read it was that Jones and Bunce were both Samoan players who swapped sides to play for the AB's - which they were.

I read it differently

Along with Steven Bachop, Alama Ieremia, Pat Lam, Dylan Mika, Ofisa Tonu'u, Bryan Williams who all played for Samoa before they played for the All Blacks.

Out of interest, and not having a go, why did you not include them in your "Debunking The Myth" article? Surely the fact they represented Samoa first should have been taken into account when talking about talent stripping?

The article was about players that were BORN IN THE PACIFIC ISLANDS who moved to New Zealand as children, refutung accusations that these players were poached. None of the players you mention fit that criteria except for Alama Ieremia, who I DID include (para 2)

Steven Bachop was born in New Zealand
Bryan Williams was born in New Zealand and he never played for Samoa
Dylan Mika was born in New Zealand
Ofisa Tonu'u was born in New Zealand
Pat Lam was born in New Zealand and played for Samoa but never played a test for New Zealand. He did play for the All Blacks against Sydney in 1992, but that match did not capture his eligibility and he went on to play another 32 matches for Samoa until retiring in 1999.



NOTE: I would really appreciate it if, when you are posting something that questions what I am saying, you would please do some research first to make sure your criticisms are fact based. The History of Rugby and New Zealand Rugby in particular is a specialist area of mine. That article was well researched and accurate at the time I wrote it.

 

[psychic duck]

Surely the point is they played for Samoa and then turned out for New Zealand? That is where the bulk of the vast bulk Poaching/talent stripping for decades stuff comes from imo people seeing players such as Jones and Bunce swapping allegiance overnight and rightly or wrongly thinking "poach".

So if we're talking about talent stripping you have to represent the whole picture not just pick part of it, not that it makes a huge difference to smartcookies point, but it is a very relevent piece of information.

Nobody has switched from Samoa to the All Blacks for just under two decades now, and many adult rugby fans in their early 20's now will have no real memory of watching a player play for two nations. Yet the myth still lives on thanks to a combination of the Pacific Island nations playing up a narrative of being the victims all the time (some justified, some just rather aggressive whining), British journalists who have a grudge against the All Blacks, and ignorant fans who but into that.

 

[goodNumber10]

I read it differently





The article was about players that were BORN IN THE PACIFIC ISLANDS who moved to New Zealand as children, refutung accusations that these players were poached. None of the players you mention fit that criteria except for Alama Ieremia, who I DID include (para 2)

Steven Bachop was born in New Zealand
Bryan Williams was born in New Zealand and he never played for Samoa
Dylan Mika was born in New Zealand
Ofisa Tonu'u was born in New Zealand
Pat Lam was born in New Zealand and played for Samoa but never played a test for New Zealand. He did play for the All Blacks against Sydney in 1992, but that match did not capture his eligibility and he went on to play another 32 matches for Samoa until retiring in 1999.



NOTE: I would really appreciate it if, when you are posting something that questions what I am saying, you would please do some research first to make sure your criticisms are fact based. The History of Rugby and New Zealand Rugby in particular is a specialist area of mine. That article was well researched and accurate at the time I wrote it.

Fair enough, you're dead right about Pat Lam and Brian Williams (he coached Samoa) I am wrong.

However your article is clearly about poaching, it can be read here: http://www.therugbyforum.com/thread...rn-NZ-Herald-Article?highlight=debunking+myth

DEBUNKING THE POACHING MYTH
There is a perception in Europe, particularly in Britain, that New Zealand "talent strips" the Pacific Islands of rugby players, stocking their own competitions for the benefit of their own teams, and that the All Blacks are overflowing with this stolen talent. This is a complete falsehood, perpetrated mostly by the English Media (a bit rich coming from them, given the number of South Africans, Rhodesians and West Indians that have played cricket for England over the last 40 years).

You focus only on players place of birth late in the article, with the first half of the article focusing on poaching as represented by British journo's - and in doing so completely brush over two important pieces of information:
the first is you exclude players who first played for another country and changed allegiance - which is important.
the second is that you spread the time line - if you focus the timeline down to when the vast bulk of those players actually played then the results are quite different.

Look, i'm not having a go, i'm not particularly bothered by people changing allegiance, i'm just saying I think your article misrepresents the situation somewhat and i think that is deliberate.

- - - Updated - - -

Nobody has switched from Samoa to the All Blacks for just under two decades now, and many adult rugby fans in their early 20's now will have no real memory of watching a player play for two nations. Yet the myth still lives on thanks to a combination of the Pacific Island nations playing up a narrative of being the victims all the time (some justified, some just rather aggressive whining), British journalists who have a grudge against the All Blacks, and ignorant fans who but into that.

I agree, but i think if you're going to do a whole article about debunking the poaching myth then you should include the players who were actually poached.

 

[psychic duck]

I agree, but i think if you're going to do a whole article about debunking the poaching myth then you should include the players who were actually poached.

I think the point is they weren't 'poached' in the way people think, as they weren't born & bred products of the Samoan system and NZ just come in and cherry pick them.

They are players who all wanted to play for NZ, most were born & bred in NZ, came through the ranks in NZ, and only played for Samoa through the loose laws, and none of them would have if it stopped them from playing for NZ ever.

In the same way when Ronan O'Gara was offered to play for the USA in 1999, if he accepted, then I don't think 'poaching' would be the right term if he played for Ireland later.

 

[smartcooky]

You're a laugh a minute mate. You even have the sheer arrogance to tell the person who WROTE the bloody article what their article about. What an effing cheek!

If you think it just about poaching then you have entirely missed the point.

 

[goodNumber10]

I think the point is they weren't 'poached' in the way people think, as they weren't born & bred products of the Samoan system and NZ just come in and cherry pick them.

They are players who all wanted to play for NZ, most were born & bred in NZ, came through the ranks in NZ, and only played for Samoa through the loose laws, and none of them would have if it stopped them from playing for NZ ever.

In the same way when Ronan O'Gara was offered to play for the USA in 1999, if he accepted, then I don't think 'poaching' would be the right term if he played for Ireland later.

Quite possibly, and i agree they are certainly products of the NZ systems, but the changing allegiance is certainly something that has added fuel to the "poaching" myth - which is really my fundamental point, not to pick at SC's article.

NZ are not exclusive in that, Ireland, Wales, France (I think), England and Scotland (again i think) have all done exactly the same thing.

 

[psychic duck]

Quite possibly, and i agree they are certainly products of the NZ systems, but the changing allegiance is certainly something that has added fuel to the "poaching" myth - which is really my fundamental point, not to pick at SC's article.

NZ are not exclusive in that, Ireland, Wales, France (I think), England and Scotland (again i think) have all done exactly the same thing.

People would put forward the myth regardless. There are people who put forward players like Keven Mealamu, Ma'a Nonu or Tana Umaga as poaches. They've convinced themselves into looking for outrage so much that I doubt it would make a difference.

What annoys me is while NZ get 'poaching', and talk of how they 'owe' certain teams thrown at them, it's rarely put in context of how Samoa basically rely so heavily on NZ for their players. If NZ changed their second team from Junior All Blacks who haven't played for about 8 years now, to their U20 team like SA have, then Tonga would be without 7 or 8 players of their RWC squad.

 

[smartcooky]

People would put forward the myth regardless. There are people who put forward players like Keven Mealamu, Ma'a Nonu or Tana Umaga as poaches. They've convinced themselves into looking for outrage so much that I doubt it would make a difference.

100%. Piri Weepu is another one, and he's a Maori FFS!!!

What annoys me is while NZ get 'poaching', and talk of how they 'owe' certain teams thrown at them, it's rarely put in context of how Samoa basically rely so heavily on NZ for their players. If NZ changed their second team from Junior All Blacks who haven't played for about 8 years now, to their U20 team like SA have, then Tonga would be without 7 or 8 players of their RWC squad.

That would make a good article in its own right, and THAT is where the players GN10 mentioned, like Bunce and Michael Jones would be relevant. The rise and rise of Pacific Island rugby really has been on the back of player development in other countries; first New Zealand and Australia, then later with professionalism, devlopment through the clubs systems in Europe and Britain.

 

[Mcfadden]

Nobody has switched from Samoa to the All Blacks for just under two decades now, and many adult rugby fans in their early 20's now will have no real memory of watching a player play for two nations. Yet the myth still lives on thanks to a combination of the Pacific Island nations playing up a narrative of being the victims all the time (some justified, some just rather aggressive whining), British journalists who have a grudge against the All Blacks, and ignorant fans who but into that.

Stephen Jones use to be the absolute worst for it. I think that guy kept a photo of New Zealand hanging and threw flaming darts at it. The attitude could be typified with "if they look brown, they clearly weren't born in NZ, so therefore they have been poached."

Haven't heard much out of him for a few years now (not that I bother to look). But my god he use to spout some crap.