goodNumber10
International
The current New Zealand U20's squad has 3 players who were the standout players when representing Samoa U20's last year.
Lovely!
Lovely!
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
U20 Eligability Rules
- Thread starter goodNumber10
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2011
- Messages
- 12,281
- Reaction score
- 2,264
Regularly happens. NZ generally pick guys in their last year of eligibility so guys who aren't picked and are eligble for other countries tend to just play for them instead.
Also there's a JWRC thread already:http://www.therugbyforum.com/threads/35474-Jwrc-2015
Also there's a JWRC thread already:http://www.therugbyforum.com/threads/35474-Jwrc-2015
goodNumber10
International
not sure how i missed that thread...
i know it happens regularly, but i think it's wrong, i think if they play u20's for one country they should be cup tied until they are out that age group
i know it happens regularly, but i think it's wrong, i think if they play u20's for one country they should be cup tied until they are out that age group
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Reaction score
- 796
If you do that there will be a bunch of NZ based players who Samoa and Tonga wont be able to pick.
goodNumber10
International
***shrugs***
that's just the way it is.... better than the jumping around to make a super team at the moment, they'll become eligible when they Graduate from U20's.
goodNumber10
International
i'd feel exactly the same if they were moving within the same age group.
They played U18, swapped the next age group up, iirc.
To be honest i wouldn't be adverse to age group's being locked off... so u16-u20.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Reaction score
- 796
Not advocating it btw, just stating the obvious.
So what's so bad about swapping while in the same age group that isn't about swapping when progressing between age groups?
goodNumber10
International
yeah, i got that mate
- - - Updated - - -
i said after the edit i'd be happy if they locke doff u16-u20's, as that's essentially the progression of a team though to the U20 JWC, would stop this kind of thing going on.
William18
First XV
I should point out for the record that all 3 played for New Zealand School Boys before playing for Samoa last year. Having Samoa U-20's function as NZ U-19's doesn't seem to be fair. The likely result of such a rule would just be that these players just have to wait another year to play in the tournament.
Yep. We rarely select outside of the last year of eligibility for our U20s. The players mentioned were all part of the NZ system who weren't selected last year and therefore chose to represent another country. Charles Piatau did the same thing. I personally am not a fan of it, and would agree that it should be closed off. But it's not NZ disadvantaging anyone - it's lending players they developed to other teams...
Last edited by a moderator:
goodNumber10
International
Then taking them back when they are good enough to play for them... Just let them play through, it's not like NZ is short of quality players.
Last edited:
Kieran Brookes played age grade for Ireland
Why? They didn't develop the players. It's not like NZ U20s have won all that much in recent years that they can afford to lose them either. And then when the All Blacks select them we'll get "they didn't even play for their U20 team". Not sure why we shouldn't be allowed to select whoever we develop to be honest. The reality is that if we make a policy not to select those players who played for other teams, then they simply would wait another year..
Last edited by a moderator:
goodNumber10
International
Did he represent two countries in the exact same tournament?
He played for both Ireland and England u20s so I'm presuming he played in the 6 Nations for Ireland, then the next year for England.
goodNumber10
International
Then as I said, I don't think he should have.
- Joined
- May 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,708
- Reaction score
- 772
A sort of agree, so long as you wouldn't apply your "lock off" when they graduate adult rugby. No 16 year old should be forced to make their permanent international representative decision at such a young age.
Do keep mind however, that these players don't live in the islands, they live in NZ, and they are almost all NZ born and NZ citizens who have grown up here. If those players thought they were going to be locked out of NZ age group representation if they turn out for Samoa, they won't make themselves available,. Samoa would then have to pick a team primarily from players who live in Samoa. Now this is no slight on Samoan resident age group players, but such a team would be in no way competitive at that level.
Sometimes these things that seem on the face of it to be wrong, are actually the best thing for those players' development.
Fair enough - I'm of the same thought, tbh.
Think that u20s should lock a player to that country regardless of 2nd side status and all that gubbins.
Also I've cleaned this thread up a bit because it was getting a bit messy and off topic.
Think that u20s should lock a player to that country regardless of 2nd side status and all that gubbins.
Also I've cleaned this thread up a bit because it was getting a bit messy and off topic.
