• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Six Nations

Smudge

Hall of Fame Member
Because Lauaki didn't come here on a scholarship for the purpose of playing rugby. He just came here with his family when he was young.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Voltman said:
Because Lauaki didn't come here on a scholarship for the purpose of playing rugby. He just came here with his family when he was young.
Fair enough then. Still leaves Steve Devine tho... :p
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
BoyBrumby said:
You may've noticed the refs saying things like "5 seconds" on Saturday when a maul ground to a halt; that's him telling the side use it in 5 or it's gone.
All well and good, but on one occasion he shouted 5 seconds then there was no real change and he let it run another 15.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Voltman said:
He's not from the Pacific Islands, is he? :p
Meh. It's a land mass in the Pacific surrounded by water. Island, continent, whatever; that's for the geologists to decide! :D
 

Smudge

Hall of Fame Member
If you're interested, here's quite a balanced read:

Van Gisbergen - not alone

Thursday September 22 2005

'Foreigners' playing for England

There is some excitement that New Zealand-born Mark van Gisbergen could soon be playing for England.

Some are excitedly welcoming such a talented player. Some are excitedly believing that a foreigner should not be playing for England. Some are excitedly saying, 'You are just like the Kiwis, poaching from everywhere'. Others grumble about mercenaries.

There is nothing new about having 'foreigners' in Test teams. After all, there are four players born in South Africa who have recently played for England - Michael Catt MBE, Stuart Abbott MBE, Fraser Waters and Matt Stevens. And they were not the first.

If birthplace alone is to count then Kyran Bracken MBE - who was born in Dublin - and Simon Shaw MBE - who was born in Nairobi - would not be eligible to play for England.

Obviously birthplace alone will not work - otherwise Shaw would have played for Kenya, Jamie Salmon for Hong Kong, Ronan O'Gara for the USA and George Gregan, Corné Krige and Dafydd James for Zambia.

Jeff Reynolds was born in China (which would not got him much of a game), Peter Howard in Lima, Andrew Hurst in Cairo, Ronald Lagden in Basutoland as Lesotho then was, John Palmer in Malta and William Tucker in Bermuda.

One could go on. Imagine how much poorer rugby lore would be if Prince Alexander Obolensky had not been allowed to play for England because he was a Russian?

Obviously place of birth should not determine the country for which a player should be playing. Otherwise Andrew Mehrtens would have played for South Africa, Malcolm O'Kelly and Ben Darwin for England, and Frankie Sheahan and Matt Dunning for Canada!

Birth plus education? Catt, Abbott and Stevens were all educated in South Africa. Amongst recent All Blacks, Jerry Collins, Rodney So'oialo and Mils Muliaina - who were born in Samoa - and Sitiveni Sivivatu and Joe Rokocoko - who were born in Fiji - were all educated in New Zealand, which would seem to suggest that they had a greater right to be playing for the national side that they have come to represent.

Country where playing? In that case, countries like Argentina, Georgia, Romania, Tonga and Samoa would field much weakened sides. Only three of the Tongan team at the 2003 Rugby World Cup played their rugby in Tonga.

On the 2003 World Cup sides, Samoa, often seen as the greatest providers of players to the All Blacks, had only two players playing in Samoa, but there were 14 playing in New Zealand!

All the All Blacks that year played their rugby in New Zealand - though Jerry Collins, Steve Devine, Mils Muliaina, Rodney So'oialo and Joe Rokocoko were born abroad. Devine was born and educated in Australia.

One could go on about players who were not born or educated and do not live or play their rugby in the countries they represent. It has happened to men like the Easterby brothers of Ireland, Tom Shanklin and Colin Charvis of Wales, and Ross Beattie and Tom Smith of Scotland.

But back to Van Gisbergen and England.

England have had 'foreign' players - the fashion now is to say 'New Zealand-born' or the like - from way back. The earliest one from the land of the Long White Cloud was Ernest Fookes.

Many of the overseas people who played for England were there to study. Many were Rhodes Scholars. South Africa had more Rhodes Scholarships available and so had more players playing for England than Australia and New Zealand.

Fookes was not a Rhodes Scholar. He went off to Manchester University to read medicine. He played ten times for England on the wing in three seasons, 1896, 1897 and 1898. He scored five tries.

In 1900 Fookes went home to New Zealand and was chosen for the first All Blacks in 1905 but declined as he could not be away from his practice for so long. Later he was the president of the Taranaki RU.

Playing in the same side as Fookes, by the way, was an Australian, Lyndhurst Giblin, who had a fascinating life as a gold miner, fruit grower and university professor, awarded a DSO and an MC in World War One.

There were not many followers after Fookes. In fact, there were more England players born in India in the days of the Raj than in New Zealand - Freddie Brooks, Charles Cleveland, William Collins, Stanley Considine, James Bush, Robert Henderson, Norman McLeod, Arthur Young, Stephen Smith, Harold Day, Evan Hardy, Chris Butcher, Nick Jeavons and the great Richard Sharp.

The next New Zealander to play for England, Alexander Palmer OBE, played twice on the wing when a medical student at London Hospital. Just after him came Alan Adams, also a medical student, a centre in 1910.

Ernest Parsons DFC, played fullback for England in 1939, the last Test before World War Two. He was killed over Northern Italy in 1940 when he was a member of Bomber Command.

The first one after the war was Martin Donnelly, better known as a cricketer but once a centre for England while at Oxford.

Indeed, two actually All Blacks have played for England.

Ian Botting, born in New Zealand, became an All Black in 1949 when he toured South Africa with Fred Allen's ill-fated side. He did not play a Test, but the next year he played twice on the wing for England while up at Oxford. He went back to New Zealand and became a clergyman.

The other All Black who played for England did play in Tests - for both countries, though he was born in neither. Jamie Salmon was born in Hong Kong and educated at the Oratory in Reading and Wellington College. For a while he played in New Zealand and played three times in the centre in 1981. He went back to England and in 1985 played in two tests for England against New Zealand in New Zealand, and then two more in 1986.

Here are just some foreign-born players (by birth) in World Cup teams in 2003, which suggest that - contrary to popular perceptions - the Samoans may be greater beneficiaries than donors:

Australia: Ben Darwin, Matt Dunning, George Gregan, Jeremy Paul, Lote Tuqiri, Daniel Vickerman

Canada: Quintin Fyffe, Ed Knaggs, James Protchard, Jeff Reid

England: Stuart Abbott, Kyran Bracken, Mike Catt, Simon Shaw, Dorian West

Fiji: Nicky Little, Vula Maimuri, Greg Smith

France: Serge Betsen, Brian Liebenberg, Tony Marsh

Ireland: Guy Easterby, Simon Easterby, Kevin Maggs, Ronan O'Gara, Frank Sheahan

Italy: Gonzalo Canale, Santiago Dellapè, Ramiro Martinez, Scott Palmer, Gert Peens, Aaron Persico, Matthews Philips, Cristian Stoica, Rima Wakarua

Japan: George Konia, Andrew Miller, Adam Parker, Reuben Parkinson

New Zealand: Jerry Collins, Steve Devine, Mils Muliaina, Joe Rokocoko, Rodney So'oialo

Samoa: Lome Fa'atau, Dominic Feaunati, Fa'atonu Fili, Kas Lealamanua, Leo Lafaiali'i, Tamato Leupolu, Peter Poulos, Dale Rasmussen, Romi Ropati, Patrick Segi, Saolosi Tagicakibau, Jeremy Tomuli, Earl Va'a, Tanner Vili, Kitiona Viliam, Michael von Dincklage

Scotland: Ross Beattie, Andy Craig, Nathan Hines, Ben Hinshelwood, Gavin Kerr, Martin Leslie, Glenn Metcalfe, Andrews Mower, Rob Russell, Tom Smith

South Africa: Corné Krige, Christo Bezuidenhout

Tonga: Stanley Afeaki, Edward Langi, Gus Leger, Sililo Martens, Nisifolo Naufahu, Milton Ngauamo, David Palu, John Payne, Sateki Tu'ipolotu

Wales: Colin Charvis, Brent ****bain, Iestyn Harris, Sonny Parker, Tom Shanklin

USA: Kain Cross, Kevin Dalzell, Phillip Eloff, Oloseti Fifita, Jurie Gouws, Mike Hercus, Jason Keyter, Gerhard Klerck, Richard Liddington, Salesi Sika, Riaan van Zyl
 

steds

Hall of Fame Member
Indeed. Very interesting article.


For what it's worth, I think place of birth is pretty irrelevant when I comes to nationality. Blood and education is far more important, imo.
 

Tim

Cricketer Of The Year
Kinda puts things into perspective there...NZ are certainly not the worst. Well back in 2003 anyway.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
A lot of it's down to economics, I think. We have a fair few Saffies of English extraction playing for us (you can add Michael Horak & Geoff Appleford to Volts's list in the article). I think they're simply taking advantage of the UK passport their antecedents entitle them too. Sterling is far stronger than the rand.
 

ohtani's jacket

State Vice-Captain
BoyBrumby said:
A lot of it's down to economics, I think.
In New Zealand the trend is for players to head to the Northern Hemisphere or Japan either because of higher salaries or due to limited representative opportunities. For some players it's a pay-off after a long representative career, but for others they've either reached the glass ceiling in terms of how far they can go in New Zealand rugby, are no longer a consideration for the All Blacks or they're too injured/banged up/fed-up to endure the rigours of a ridiculously long rugby season (the Super 12 now a Super 14, NPC/Air NZ Cup, an ever increasing number of Test matches, including an expanded Tri-Nations and even Sevens rugby in some cases.)

Some of them have come back from overseas and been re-selected for Super 12/14 teams (Troy Flavell is a recent case). In Leon McDonald's case, he became an All Black again after a year in Japan. Thankfully, the lure of the jersey keeps most of our best players here, though we may lose prospects in the future.

As for countries like Samoa, the reality is that there are more Samoans living outside of the islands than there are living in Samoa, and I imagine that when Pacific Islanders immigrate to a country like NZ that in time they consider themselves Pacific Island-New Zealanders. I'm sure that Mils Muliaina (who moved here when he was 3) and Joe Rokocoko (who was 5) are proud of their heritage, but also proud to be New Zealanders & part of a mixed culture. These players have spent their entire rugby playing lives in New Zealand & are entitled to represent New Zealand -- is it a shame that the best Pacific Island players choose to play for NZ rather than their countries of birth, or swap such as Michael Jones or Frank Bunce did? In some ways it is. But it's understandable. If you're good enough to play for the All Blacks, then you'll aspire to that goal -- it's an aspiration of many a rugby player in New Zealand regardless of ethnicity.

Really, the onus is on the IRB and the richer rugby unions to create more fixtures for countries like Samoa, Fiji and Tonga instead of rolling them out for one-off Test dates and events like the World Cup. The talent is ALWAYS going to be cultivated overseas, but through proper tours, those Island nations would become far more adept at Test rugby instead of giving the big teams a shock every four years. And maybe some of those games would turn into genuine upsets, instead of inevitable heartbreakers.
 
Last edited:

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
It's quite a similar state to Cricket in one way then.

A "big 9" or so then smaller countries who don't get as many chances.

Of course the big difference is that some of the "smaller" countries can actually beat some of the "big 9"
 

simmy

International Regular
Fixtures for Saturday, 11 February 2006

FRANCE v IRELAND 1.30pm
ITALY v ENGLAND 4pm

Fixtures for Sunday, 12 February 2006

WALES v SCOTLAND 3pm

Predictions anyone?

Im going for France / England / Wales...

Scotland could easily cause another upset though, and I feel that France are certain for a comeback.
 

open365

International Vice-Captain
I think Wales Scotland will be a close game,that i see the Scots winning,but only just.

I think France's depth of players will give them the advantage over Ireland,but i don't think it'll be a very entertaining game.

And Tom Varndell wil score 5 tries against Italy.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
simmy said:
Fixtures for Saturday, 11 February 2006

FRANCE v IRELAND 1.30pm
ITALY v ENGLAND 4pm

Fixtures for Sunday, 12 February 2006

WALES v SCOTLAND 3pm

Predictions anyone?

Im going for France / England / Wales...

Scotland could easily cause another upset though, and I feel that France are certain for a comeback.
I think we may've had our big shock for the tournament with yer Sweaties beating yer Frogs. It'll be interesting to see how both teams react. France name their team tomorrow & the beeb website suggested a possible 7(!!!) changes from last Sunday. I think that may be a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. One dodgy result doesn't necessarily mean it's suddenly a bad team.

Predictions wise I agree absolutely with you. I'll try to guess the winning margins to keep myself honest:

France by 10-15
England by 30-40
Wales by 15-20.
 

open365

International Vice-Captain
I'm suprised you've both predicted Wales over Scotland,i thought everyone would be backing the Scots after that win over France...

IMO,Wales style of rugby is too fragile,it looks great when it;s working,but it doesn't take much for it to go off the rails.

They suprised everyone last year,but i can't see lightening striking twice,teams will work them out and they won't be able to change.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
open365 said:
I'm suprised you've both predicted Wales over Scotland,i thought everyone would be backing the Scots after that win over France...

IMO,Wales style of rugby is too fragile,it looks great when it;s working,but it doesn't take much for it to go off the rails.

They suprised everyone last year,but i can't see lightening striking twice,teams will work them out and they won't be able to change.
Scotland seriously lack pace in their backs, they got away with it against France because they kicked intelligently & Michalak was having one of his sulky days. What Wales have (& their were hints of it against us) is two genuinely nippy wingers & a reliable source of points in Stephen Jones. They won't have our pack to contend with either, so should get more ball.
 

Top