SHOULD PLAYERS BE ALLOWED TO PLAY ANYWHERE??
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ค. 2024
- The old club versus country debate rears its head again. Wales cap limit for players playing abroad has been in the news and now England players look to be demanding the same. Which countries have the balance right? What are the opposing forces at play and what, if anything, should be done?
- กีฬา
Yet another well reasoned, well argued video from Tim. I don't have any high hopes of a sensible decision from the clubs as they will argue from a point of self interest and pretend it's a point of principle. Any chance Tim could become commissioner of the Premiership?
A fascinating video and very insightful! I agree with you that the national team and the development of English qualified talent needs to be put first. I could see option working to enable that so let’s hope there’s some proper change happens now for the better!
If players are restricted by the RFU then you have to apply a system like the French JIFF Quota System. I saw the video you did on English qualified 12s, so at present players aren’t allowed overseas but clubs can still bring in foreign players which can crowd out the up and coming English player, who cannot get game time.
Great video Tim ,
Let’s say overnight every player from every country can play where the want ..
Where do they go ?
Clubs have budget’s ,
Some countries only allow a certain percentage of foreign born players to play ?
Yes a handful will do better , but the vast majority will still be at the same club next season .
100% agree. Make the same point in fact. Which is why I'd go for it. The perception that there will be a mass exodus just wont be the reality.
From an Irish point of view it has helped the Provinces also IRFU looks after their players i think its like you said when you talked about the set ups of the countries it is different for each country not one solution does not fit all.
If players are permitted to play club/franchise rugby anywhere there needs to be a clause that gives the national team first option on the player. We don't want clubs telling players they can't have leave to play internationals, as we saw with French clubs not releasing Pacifica players.
Why is this rule not subject to normal employment law; specifically not restricting someone's ability to earn a living?
love these videos. Remind me of more in-depth journalism more typical of NFL than rugby.
It sounds like, to let players play abroad they would also have to incentivise players to actually want to stay in England and for the clubs to play English players. Which would necessitate the RFU being able to offer more? Or, to keep more players in the prem, the RFU will again have to offer more?
Would the RFU be willing able to do this?
I like the 30 international cap or 100 domestic cap rule for England. If you've put the time in you should be able to go and experience Rugby elsewhere, and earn a fat stack.
Also pair it with minimum EQP match day number to encourage english teams to invest in english players.
Yeah...maybe years served in Prem rather than caps. Could get on board there.
Very interesting. Jack Willis is one of your star players. As a Kiwi, I see our boys popping up playing in nearly every country and good on them trying to make money. Many star players try to go to Japan and France
The way NZ have done it is perfect. Realistic enough to know players need to make bank while they can, so help that in a way letting them off to Japan when it works best (or least worst) for the national team.
@@EggchasersRugby it seems to me that good old Johnny England is too wrapped up in red tape and doesn’t trust it’s players to come back to England if they allow them freedom. Would this be true? Also I love Marcus Smith - he is your most exciting back for me.
You really answered this yourself. You said Jake Willis was improving playing with experienced players in France. If we let our experienced players play overseas how are English up and coming players going to improve. Surely this would weaken Englands pool of players in the long term.
The second point I’d make is that when rugby went professional the RFU left it to the clubs to take the risk which is why we do not have central contracts. Why should the clubs now risk losing the appeal of the domestic league by agreeing to let their top players move overseas. I am a club rugby supporter and do not see Premiership clubs as feeder clubs for the national team anymore than clubs like Manchester United and Liverpool do in football.
Perhaps the solution here is for the RFU to pay players more for playing for England and agreeing, as the clubs have to, to pay their salary if they are injured.
I'm totally open to multiple solutions. Just think the current setup wont work. You raise some good suggestions. I'd favour a quota on foreign players if you demand England internationals play in England. Seems only right. Or else...let them go if they wish.
I think a minimum cap threshold, potentially premiership cap threshold too, would be the right move to make. I would, however, limit selection eligibility to players playing in 6 Nations countries, purely from a travel time perspective. Maybe you could include SA, but that would likely be the limit. League salary caps/financial power will change with time, so this would be a sensible and sustainable approach.
Feyi from Exeter is Welsh unfortunetly too for us
Great video Tim. I’m pretty sure Feyi-Waboso is Welsh (Cardiff) not English?
I knew he came from Wasps so assumed he was from Midlands. You may well be right...proper player there!
@@EggchasersRugby yes think he went to Wasps as he didn’t get into Cardiff med school. Nigerian parents but he was born/brought up in Cardiff. Looks a great prospect.
no because all the best players would play in one league and every other country would suffer, just like football.
Arguably England is suffering because it takes all comers?
@@EggchasersRugby yes but countries like Ireland have no chance to compete in club football as all players leave at 16. therefore there will be less money because the standard would be lower. England still get to finals and semi finals in football. Ireland and Scotland hardly ever even qualify
He explained quite clearly in the video why that wouldn't happen.
@@888young2 it would happen though, the best Irish players would not play in Ireland
@@laoch5658 the Irish have always left ireland, they can’t wait to get away from the second they’re born.
Sport is professional now and I cannot see why players cannot ply their trade where ever they want. Globalise the rugby season with various competitions and people will still watch all the games. By allowing our Boks to play where they wanted to contributed immensely with improving our rugby and we do not fear the northern conditions anymore and in fact excel when they play there.
Absolutely! South Africa have crazy amounts of talent all over the world...which they could never afford to keep in SA.
Players can play anywhere but they for go opportunity to play international .SA have so many players there isn't enough opportunities for all to play in SA plus wage disparity also very pronounced so their system suits them, this wouldn't work for ireland
They need to relax the rules, but in a way the RFU can maintain control.
RFU demands that any overseas player who wants to represent England must have a clause in their contract which give them the same time as England based player dedicated to the national team, so no Jack Willis scenario.
There should be a minimum cap requirement for foreign based players, maybe 30, which would work out as say 3-4 years as an England player before moving abroad.
There should be Salary min and max.
The rfu need to sort it out thier are rich and can help the premship as for picking players from abroad that's a tough one but then the young players to step up
I agree. Tough on travelling players but national teams objective has ot be pivotal in the whole picture...that is the one part of the system making money (in England anyway).
Yeah you're right I just don't think the playing abroad thing would work in Ireland and I doubt the IRFU would ever buy into it. Every rugby player knows that if they choose to play abroad they automatically give up any chance of ever playing for the national side. That's just the way it is and I don't see any change to that, at least for now.
Arguably, the 3 best international teams over the last 2 years are each taking a very different view, as you ably described.
Unfortunately, there is nothing brave or far-sighted about English rugby at either National or Club level. The RFU in particular resembles an extended Village Fete Committee - but without the same aspiration towards professional outcomes! - and always has been.
If England as a national team are to compete with Ireland, France and SA, then they must develop a structure which allows their developing players to flourish, as each of those ‘Top Three’ does.
Since the Gallagher Prem is not now - and likely will never be - as strong as the French/Japanese Leagues, the ONLY realistic strategy is to allow all elite players to ply their club trade wherever.
This appears to do the SA squad no harm whatsoever, despite having an impoverished domestic club structure. Chances are that NZ Rugby will no soon be forced to accept that situation too.
With overall active Rugby participation in England at a generationally low level, we cannot afford to just “let things drift” or we will end up with the Welsh dilemma - which now seems tragically irreversible (certainly in the short term).
Simmonds, Mercer and Willis should all be automatic inclusions within England squads on current form, as should Dave Ribbands. Yet the Blazers refuse (as always) to face the long-term systemic issues, and use platitudes in place of structural strategy.
IMO it should be age related. Caps should not be the criteria. A national coach may or may not pick you but the next national coach sees something in you. So someone could earn 30 caps by the age of 23/24 whereas another the same age may have given as much service to his club. So pick an age.... 28yrs maybe. The season after you turn 28 you should be free to look abroad. Something like that.
Another solution to the two you mentioned in the video is to have a more refined hybrid system in place. Depending on the national team and the quality of clubs in the domestic league, I think that the National Union should impose a minimum cap limit OR minimum time spent in domestic league. This is to protect the national teams interests but make it fair to players. I believe national players should have other criteria to meet other than fulfilling cap quotas as if a player has an injury, a bad spell or goes of form they’re progress haults. The wales 60 cap limit was far too high in my opinion with a bad level of rugby being offered at domestic level. For wales I think the requirement for playing outside of the home league should be fulfilling 25 caps for the national team or playing in the domestic league for a minimum of 4 years. If you say that an average rugby players career is 12 years, then a maximum of 4 years in the domestic league is 1/3 of their career dedicated to country. If a national team plays 11 games a year then for an average player who makes and appearance in the majority of them then this also roughly equates to 4 years of playing time. I think this is fair, respects the country and player. I also think there should be a clause in the contracts with club that if there is a clash between Country and club games then country get priority and the club player forfeits those wages.
Lots of other points but don’t want to make this comment to long. Also these are just my thoughts, thanks for another great video!
I think paradoxically this would drive down wages in the big money leagues with more players competing for finite amount contracts
Limits on foreign players would be good for England and make clubs be more selective of foreign players. This would help develop the younger crop of English players. Having said this with Bill Sweeney as RFU CEO I doubt the right decision will be made, when it is, it will be forced upon the RFU.
I do think we.. and the media are panicking a little bit this time. We see this in every year prior to the RWC. People leave if they're too old for the next one, or they take a 3 year deal and come back just prior to the new RWC. Personally for England I think this has to stay, we need the quality in the league, and also the control of our players for training and fallow weeks.
England should also allow Willis one further year in France, as his situation, and the financal situation of clubs wont allow a fair deal just yet.
Sexton played a few years in France. He was throwing up from concussions. The French messed him up.
Contrast that to now. Sexton doesn't even play away games in the URC.
🎯
Premiership club owners have too much power under the current system, a joined up process that benefits everybody is required, but that requires out of the box thinking.... not possible from the RFU
The biggest problem of course, Tim, is that to achieve any of these outcomes would take the decision makers at the RFU and Prem rugby to have a combined IQ greater than ten.
We can live in hope
Makes sense but from a spectators point of view when I pay good money for tickets I want to see the very best of English talent
Yep. I guess the issue is club fans say the same thing about their team.
If players negotiate a release for the international windows, then I don't see a problem. Players need to take ownership of their decisions, and make sure the contract allows them time to play for their country.
It's alright saying let the high earners go and get the money.
But those are the guys that interest alot of people to start following club rugby in the first place and get people though the gates also those players inspire the next generation to come through.
casual supporters usually watch the six nations get interested in those players and start watching them at club level.
also having those top players staying at those clubs and there effect on the younger players to play with and learn from can not be understated,
It's a master/apprenticeship system.
for example I've seen plenty of players say how much of an impact the older players had on their careers,
For example
Sean O'Brien has talked about how much he learned from rocky Elsom and now the younger back rows talk about how much they learned from O'Brien,
Same with Sexton and contepomi and the younger backs at Leinster.
this is not a one off it's why the big clubs seem to always bring through the next generation.
When this cycle is broke is the problem.
At the end of the day, a rugby players career, if they are lucky, will go until their mid thirties there will be more and more players who weigh the benefits of maximising their earning potential against gaining international caps. If you say to a player you can either earn less playing a game where your career can end any second with a horrific injury in the hopes that an international coach picks you or you can go abroad and earn double the amount I can see why they would go elsewhere.
I know nothing about Japan. But if you are top of your game - go spend 3/4 years in Japan - would your quality of performance drop as a result?
Tim, you’re asking the RFU to make a mature, well thought out, reasoned decision. This is not that different to when I ask for a Quin’s dominated back line for England. It’s unlikely to happen no matter how much we might wish for it!
For me current circumstances dictate that we relax the rules, at least for a few years for all the reasons you list. From a practical point of view it’s not ideal for the national coach but if a player is wanted enough they can find a work around for an overseas player. It will almost certainly bring new talent through also which is a huge positive. Also, letting overseas players play for England once they’ve met the residency criteria but refusing English players who play in an overseas league seems perverse.
When you boil it down though this issue added to the law changes, the pandering to outside parties who have no real love for the game, the financial situation of clubs, the debacle that is the promotion/relegation situation, the number of games played, the number of seemingly incompetent people with their fingers in the rugby pie, the farce that is the talking around a global calendar, the seeming abandonment of the game below premiership level, the CVC deal, the poorly negotiated deal for tv rights, pathetic marketing of what is a fantastic product plus what seems to be a gravy train for RFU leadership all point to the fact that rugby is so poorly managed that, until we get real change at the top we’ll continue to limp on with the only saving grace being big crowds at Twickenham and 6 Nations games with the money that they provide to prop up this failing institution.
Bit pessimistic I know but I’ve just tried a Negroni and gin alway makes me a bit maudlin.
Personally I don't believe anyone should be allowed to play for a country unless they are living in that country, I also don't believe in the residency rule and I don't think you should qualify just because you have a Grandparent from said country, so I would be regarded as a hardliner on this subject. When I say no-one I mean anyone from a tier one country as they all have the option to play in a professional league while living in their homeland, this isn't the case for many in tier 2 countries so they would have more freedom because they can't earn a living in their country. If Tier one players want to play abroad for potential financial gain then so be it but they shouldn't be allowed to represent their country while doing so , I know that many will disagree with me not least the players in Question but I have never deviated in my position on this subject. Ps I don't believe that you should allow a foreigner to coach an international tier one country as I think it devalues international sport however any coach should be allowed to earn a living in another country just as a player would. So to be clear Gatland, Jones and Schmidt for example wouldn't have been able to coach a tier one international team other than their own but would have been able to coach anywhere in the world at club or provincial level to earn a living while helping home bred coaches at the same time.
5 million salary cap is stupidly low, Saracens under Nigel Wray we’re spending double or treble that, for 1 team say u had 3 good England internationals that’s £1 million gone 3 good foreigners another million, the numbers just won’t work. Say u have a squad of 40, 10 youth players on 25 k each, 250 k 10 non English internationals your back up players 40 k each, 10 decent club players 100-200 k each, start running out of money and all the top teams have way more than 3 of the engl@nd internationals and top foreigners. If top players earn significantly less playing for English club plus playing all the internationals than they would in Japan or France then u end up having a national team with gaps like Stefan armitage if u enforce the home playing rule
You are dead right, Tim, there’s not a lot of money sloshing about! As I said in a previous post of yours about which country has the best system in play - most of that is relevant here. I hope you’ll permit me to repeat much of my post again. I’d also agree with you that this game is incredibly physical and players are just one game away from perhaps receiving a career-ending injury. You cannot then blame them from seeking the best contracts available. If that is in either France or Japan, then they should have the right to pursue those options. It will only benefit the very very top players as you say. The RFU needs then to decide if they still want the top players to represent England … I hope they see sense and say yes!
After that, I reckon we are probably best served loosely following the French type model and (controversially) reducing the number of clubs playing in the Premiership. I’d do this by withdrawing the bulk of the RFU funding, placing the emphasis back on the clubs to become more self-sustaining (financially) and only getting a top-up from the RFU, based on bringing English qualified players through to the First XV level. That would be the only contribution from the RFU. Clubs would either individually or collectively have to negotiate TV/Broadcasting/ Sponsorship deals. I think this ‘tough love’ would bring about a natural reduction in the number of Premiership clubs (regular or aspiring), which in turn would lead to less player burn-out and more meaningful fixtures.
Otherwise, I can only see a return to the old days where you had set regions: South West, London & Home Counties, Midlands and the North. Clubs being condensed into one of the Four regions. That way you could follow either the Irish or New Zealand models with the top English qualified players centrally contracted and part funded by the RFU, before being leased back to the regions. In this system, even in this scenario, I’d still scrap the only being eligible to play for England if you play in England rule. After all if someone with more money than sense wants to pay our top players mega bucks, then great …! It would be up to the players’ agents to negotiate the appropriate release clauses in their contracts when they sign!
There are benefits in our players playing in other countries as they are usually exposed to other high quality team mates and opposition as well as different styles of coaching. Not paying their high salaries means the RFU can focus on pathways for younger players and catering for specific positional deficiencies within the national set-up.
Rugby in England (& Wales) is at a crossroads and the powers that be have the chance to make the professional game in this country fit for the 21st Century. Let’s hope those presiding are not the 57 Old Farts (to quote Will Carling of many years ago!), who are simply anxious to preserve their privileged positions at Twickenham!
So I think for the good of rugby in England they need to take a number of steps.
Remove: The Cap; Marquee Players.
Introduce: Minimum Wage, Maximum Wage (within x% of lowest paid member of the squad); quota of English & UK players.
The Cap-the introductions should remove the need for a cap (to a point)
Marquee Players-Unbalance squad pay and falsely justify the import of foreign players
Minimum Wage-Players should expect a minimum wage. The minimum wage in a club is controlled by the max wage!
Maximum Wage-The highest paid players should earn no more than x% (bigger brains than mine required) more than the lowest this should prevent runaway wages and keep minimum wages up.
Quota-a minimum quota of English players in the squad (ie 70%), additionally for solidarity and realistic growth of rugby a secondary target of UK players (another +10% of the squad) before foreign players can be included.
Numbers above are just to give clarity not actual solutions.
As highlighted with centres a key position is held by a number of players unavailable for selection by England, sometimes due to not being selected by England and therefore taking other international honours if available.
Turkeys need to vote for Christmas, teams are loosing money it is unrealistic to increase ticket prices further in the current climate so further cuts need to be made or a raise in the number of matches and tv revenue. Last two are unlikely with the dropping number of teams!
Rugby is the only professional sport in Ireland in a country where it’s competing against the more supported GAA. If all the top players left here attendance would probably dip and it would be a downward spiral. Although you’d still have younger player coming through you still need star players. Hate to see a situation like football were all our best player always have to go to England.
I think that given the poor current financial state of English rugby that the players should be free to maximise their incomes.
A playing career is short and most players will have a limited number of years to make as much money as possible for their families.
My single limitation would be that players can make it to all England training camps - this probably means playing in France would be the only other international option that is realistic.
Ideally, the players should come through the English development system as well - or the Welsh / Scottish / Irish.
If the English rugby system was a financial powerhouse then my opinion would probably be different - but it's clearly not given the state of Wasps/Warriors. Beggars can't be choosers
Quite! Feels unfair to deny the players at this point in, for some of them, their peak years
Up to 3:15 just substitute the word England for Wales and I would agree.
England - no England player is going to play in either Scotland or wales, they wouldn’t get the money. Dublin to London is one hour, Paris or Toulouse is 60-90 minutes away. So outside of the six nations, no they shouldn’t be allowed but that’ll affect almost no players.
Wales and Scotland - if they can’t afford their players, they have to let them go. But not outside of Europe.
The springboks won a World Cup with their players spread all over Europe and SA, so there’s no team
Cohesion argument.
England should be looking to allow a number of top players to go to France and learn the game, and earn their money. Racing and SF will pay well and they just catch the train back to London when needed. No big deal.
I'm with you 100%
but SA stadiums for club rugby are half empty
@@EggchasersRugby I can’t wait for Simmonds to get the Montpellier, Willis is great to watch at the weekends. Simmonds is going to be massive and will become loved down here and will slip Into Zacks boots.
Joel Kpoku is having a wild time at Lyon, he’s being totally overlooked and he’s a monster at the moment.
Dobby is having a fine time down in Pau and now totally overlooked even though in 2019 he was second choice SH!! Unreal! Why couldn’t he have been in the squad? He had a small problem with DVT but between 85-95% of the games since 2019 for England have been in Europe, so he could have caught a train or a boat.
@@laoch5658 you can’t have everything mate!
Rugby has grown to be a truly global international sport, you have to have an international mindset at the top. England for England is thinking left over from the amateur era that should be long gone.
Let players play aboard and earn money and new experience, it brings vital knowledge to the national team and will help their personal development. Let's face it most rugby players get paid poorly and deserve a lot better.
Premier League football players get paid more in a week than most rugby players get in a year.
Invest in younger players to develop talent and show them there is opportunity for international career development.
Talented athletes will look elsewhere for a career if there is lack of international opportunities, feel under appreciated and are not paid properly.
Learn the lesson from football! Just this once. We watered down the English game by brining in overseas players. Why not do the revere and let our players play with the best so they improve and so does the national team.
Yes, purely based on the fact it’s not really morally fair to punish players for trying to earn as much money as they can before their career is finished in their 30’s. Give the players their freedom back for goodness sake
In most cases English players will down grade in standards and pay if they go overseas. Only a few at the top will go, IE pay rise, and folk whom can't make a local club. IMO.
England aren't exactly NZ or SA with a production line of talent, weak currency and not enough opportunity.
If you are a prop and you want to play on the wing i can see problems.
😂😂😂
@@EggchasersRugby Love your content.
Players are allowed to play anywhere?
Let players earn money wherever they want
Of course. Welsh players go to Lloegr for the money. Oh hang on all the club's are bust.err...maybe some fiscal responsibility might be in order. As they say in Rugby League. You cut your cloth accordingly.RL has just a fraction of the money RU has and has lost no clubs. RU in Lloegr has lost four. Go figure. The questionin is irrelevant. Players will go abroad. There is no can. The only question is, is the RFU so arrogant to ban them from England selection because the won't play in the south of England. (yes I know there is Sale).
Your smaller squads/fewer games/relax rules schema leaves out two alternatives - fewer professional teams (which you mentioned towards the end)and reduction of overseas players. The former would bring smaller squads and fewer games but (arguably) higher average quality "native" players. Fewer higher-paid foreigners would increase the purse for locals. Your idea that only the mature internationals would be induced overseas is unreal. Finally, you are somewhat misrepresenting the Irish situation. Central contracts are not as dramatically important as you imply - there are only about 20 central contracts (Keenan got his only after nearly 30 caps; Stockdale has just lost his) and several important players do not have one. The role of the IRFU in player recruitment is rather more nuanced (albeit secretive). A key element of the Irish system is the level of spectator support for a small number of professional provincial teams and for the successful international team. The enlightened policy towards player welfare is another key factor which is not replicated in the English Premiership.
Great comments.
I did say i would favour limiting foreign players I think. And you're right on Central contracts...that is a contributory factor along with relaxed salary cap and just general connected thinking between provinces and IRFU.
And yep - as I think I acknowledge- players getting flogged in England and France.
Feyi Waboso is welsh
So I understand. As an Englishman...disappointed - serious potential!
Do football players all play in one league? No.
Imagine a world with no national teams, just professional clubs. Problems solved.
There's no official rule in Ireland.
Thanks Barry. That makes the retention even more impressive. I hear the tax breaks are quite attractive (and the rugby is pretty good too!)
Irish players tend not to leave there isn't an official rule on playing abroad but johnny sexton so far has been the only one who played abroad and still was picked for ireland. There are big tax breaks for staying in ireland as well.
While there is no official rule, the IRFU does have a non written policy of not picking players for Ireland that play abroad. Simon Zebo is the best example of this. And so this can act as a deterrent for any one who wishes to cash in abroad.
@@EggchasersRugby Ye the tax back is definitely a big draw. The unwritten rule is also fairly known to be there, but still gives the wiggle room if say the likes of the very top lads go and they can still pick them. I think Johnny's going to France and the lack of access for camps and ability to manage his minutes further cemented their wanting to Keep the top players within the provinces.
@@Analytical2000 Its fairly clear at this stage that Zebo and Schmidt did not get along. Zebo has pretty much said as much in a few live panels he's done. Zebo also wasn't irreplaceable, and wasn't even a nailed on starter when everyone was fit. I still think they'd make an exception if necessary for say Tadhg Furlong, but there's few other they would do it for. Its definitely a great tool to keep lads within the system, manage their workload, and keep the Provinces competitive.