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
White warns of Bok time bomb
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: 587926" data-attributes="member: 39190"><p>That in essence is the major concern, yes. The thing for me is that line of thinking makes 1 big assumption; that these players or at least most of them wouldn't have gone in any case. The difference in payment is just that big that it is more than likely only a fraction of them would have stayed if SARU limited or ttally excluded overseas based players.</p><p></p><p>There is a big upside in having the players overseas as well; it allows fr younger guys to come through IE maybe if Spies and Andries Bekker had gone overseas earlier we would have seen CJ Stander and Quinn Roux for the Bulls and Stormers, if Bakkies Botha was still playing for the Bulls would Etzebeth have settled in yet? Same with Jaque Fourie, Olivier with Serfonteinn and Engelbrecht looking good for us at test level or at least looking promising. Then if there is need we have stars overseas to call on while we aren't paying their salaries at club level. In that case there is of course soome administrative and logistical hurdles to overcome. I would be quite happy with such an arangement BUT then we need to give local players a big priority IMO and that is where subjectivity comes in and where grey areas start to form. </p><p></p><p>I don't think SA will suffer in the sub-test level simply because we have lost so many quality players since 2007ish years in any case (so many of them before they even really started to shine) while some have come back to play crucial roles like John Smit and Montgomery.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TRF_stormer2010, post: 587926, member: 39190"] That in essence is the major concern, yes. The thing for me is that line of thinking makes 1 big assumption; that these players or at least most of them wouldn't have gone in any case. The difference in payment is just that big that it is more than likely only a fraction of them would have stayed if SARU limited or ttally excluded overseas based players. There is a big upside in having the players overseas as well; it allows fr younger guys to come through IE maybe if Spies and Andries Bekker had gone overseas earlier we would have seen CJ Stander and Quinn Roux for the Bulls and Stormers, if Bakkies Botha was still playing for the Bulls would Etzebeth have settled in yet? Same with Jaque Fourie, Olivier with Serfonteinn and Engelbrecht looking good for us at test level or at least looking promising. Then if there is need we have stars overseas to call on while we aren't paying their salaries at club level. In that case there is of course soome administrative and logistical hurdles to overcome. I would be quite happy with such an arangement BUT then we need to give local players a big priority IMO and that is where subjectivity comes in and where grey areas start to form. I don't think SA will suffer in the sub-test level simply because we have lost so many quality players since 2007ish years in any case (so many of them before they even really started to shine) while some have come back to play crucial roles like John Smit and Montgomery. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
White warns of Bok time bomb
Top