• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

WR Reviewing international eligibility

Yeah - but why the inverted commas?

I don't think he's given a false name.
 
I'd guess they'll say the rules change for anyone who moves country from now on, and those who've already started a period of eligibility can finish it and play - to avoid rocking the boat too much.

Which would leave Nathan "Hughes" in the clear, unfortunately.
 
I'd guess they'll say the rules change for anyone who moves country from now on, and those who've already started a period of eligibility can finish it and play - to avoid rocking the boat too much.

Which would leave Nathan "Hughes" in the clear, unfortunately.

If that's the case. When does it start from and more so what if a guy genuinely comes and lasts a long time. Will he ever be eligible?
My example is say a guy like Paul Warwick. I know he was always ineligible due to previous Aus 7s.
But when he came it was never with a thought about Ireland. He lasted here many years and basically was only moved on as he's an NIQ player. But should guys like that (if he was eligible) should be excluded?

Its hard to discount the residency rule in general like if people come to a country for a certain amount of time they can get citizenship.
 
Its hard to discount the residency rule in general like if people come to a country for a certain amount of time they can get citizenship.

The residency regulation is designed to discourage National Unions from enticing established adult professional rugby players in other countries to immigrate to their country and become available.

Things have become so brazen in the NH now that the Scottish Rugby Union (for example) have specialist staff whose job it is to push forward their "Project Signings" strategy, a campaign to find and entice players to move to Scotland to play for Glasgow or Edinburgh so that they become eligible to play for Scotland.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/rugby-union/18307303

This sort of outright theft of the development programmes of other countries needs to be stopped, or International Rugby Union will become the farce that it is in Rugby League.

IMO eligibility should be determined by:

► place of birth or nationality of either parent (get rid of the grandparent rule)
► place of residence with a minimum of six years continuous residence (with a small abatement for younger players)
► a "WR Eligibility Committee" whose job it is to resolve eligibility disputes and to hear special cases on a case-by-case basis and with a "no precedence" philosophy.
 
There is an issue that in most countries you can gain citizenship through residency in certain circumstances. Personally I don't consider residency as an adult sufficient to qualify, but can a country really consider someone worthy of a passport but not worthy of representing their national sports team.

Additionally, once you add central contracts into the mix, does it potentially become a legal issue? Denying a citizen equal rights to work?
 
There is an issue that in most countries you can gain citizenship through residency in certain circumstances. Personally I don't consider residency as an adult sufficient to qualify, but can a country really consider someone worthy of a passport but not worthy of representing their national sports team.

Additionally, once you add central contracts into the mix, does it potentially become a legal issue? Denying a citizen equal rights to work?

That last bit is my point. If someone can get a passport for that country in 4 years then they can't be denied or it will be a human right law issue. But the issue now is every country is different in laws of citizenship.
Like I don't disagree with what ye are saying but World Rugby have to be very careful in the approach as there can be legal issues and all that.
 
That last bit is my point. If someone can get a passport for that country in 4 years then they can't be denied or it will be a human right law issue. But the issue now is every country is different in laws of citizenship.
Like I don't disagree with what ye are saying but World Rugby have to be very careful in the approach as there can be legal issues and all that.

But would that really be applicable here? The player's civil rights isn't being violated. He is still allowed to play rugby for the clubs, where he is employed. He is just being denied the opportunity to play for that nation. In other words, he can still play for his nation of birth, even though he doesn't stay there anymore.

All that this is going to do is make coaches overlook these potential players for international selection. It's not going to do anything for clubs.
 
But would that really be applicable here? The player's civil rights isn't being violated. He is still allowed to play rugby for the clubs, where he is employed. He is just being denied the opportunity to play for that nation. In other words, he can still play for his nation of birth, even though he doesn't stay there anymore.

All that this is going to do is make coaches overlook these potential players for international selection. It's not going to do anything for clubs.

he is paid to play for his national side, so i presume it's a restraint of trade/bosman law ruling type stuff?
 
he is paid to play for his national side, so i presume it's a restraint of trade/bosman law ruling type stuff?

Perhaps, but it's going to take a lot to convince the Human Rights Commission of that. The issue is that the player isn't being denied the opportunity to play for his country of birth, like South Africa for instance, even though he plays for Saracens in England. As soon as his eligibility kicks in for England, he could possibly still play for SA... Just not both
 
There is an issue that in most countries you can gain citizenship through residency in certain circumstances. Personally I don't consider residency as an adult sufficient to qualify, but can a country really consider someone worthy of a passport but not worthy of representing their national sports team.

Naturalised Citizenship of a country does not automatically entitle a person to all the rights of a born citizen

Additionally, once you add central contracts into the mix, does it potentially become a legal issue? Denying a citizen equal rights to work?


Playing for a your club is a right. Playing for your country is a privilege!
 
Perhaps, but it's going to take a lot to convince the Human Rights Commission of that. The issue is that the player isn't being denied the opportunity to play for his country of birth, like South Africa for instance, even though he plays for Saracens in England. As soon as his eligibility kicks in for England, he could possibly still play for SA... Just not both

no, but he IS being denied his right to work where he chooses and is legally able to.
 
All this business about the right to work as it relates to national eligibility for sports teams is just BS. It doesn't arise, because the Labour Laws simply do not apply, period. And before someone, brings up the old chestnut of the Bosman & Kolpak rulings, they do not apply to International Sports teams.

Playing for your country is not a job or a right...its a privilege!

WR determines the eligibility of players for National Teams not the European Court or any other court for that matter. Same goes for FIFA regarding football, the ICC for cricket etc, FIBA for basketball etc etc.
 
The residency regulation is designed to discourage National Unions from enticing established adult professional rugby players in other countries to immigrate to their country and become available.

Things have become so brazen in the NH now that the Scottish Rugby Union (for example) have specialist staff whose job it is to push forward their "Project Signings" strategy, a campaign to find and entice players to move to Scotland to play for Glasgow or Edinburgh so that they become eligible to play for Scotland.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/rugby-union/18307303

This sort of outright theft of the development programmes of other countries needs to be stopped, or International Rugby Union will become the farce that it is in Rugby League.

IMO eligibility should be determined by:

► place of birth or nationality of either parent (get rid of the grandparent rule)
► place of residence with a minimum of six years continuous residence (with a small abatement for younger players)
► a "WR Eligibility Committee" whose job it is to resolve eligibility disputes and to hear special cases on a case-by-case basis and with a "no precedence" philosophy.

That sounds sensible and fair enough to both the individual and the test game's credibility. Have you sent your proposal to World Rugby?

I think it'd be a good thing if the administrators get some feedback on rugby issues from long time involved rugby supporters.
 

Latest posts

Top