Ons steel die eilande leeg

Hallo

Dit is amper tyd vir die Tri-Nations en ek weet dat ek na elke All Black-wedstryd dieselfde ou holruggeryde storietjie gaan hoor  -  ONS STEEL DIE EILANDE LEEG. Hieronder het ek vir julle die polemiek wat op Rugby365 was, aangehaal en hiermee wil ek sê:

I REST MY CASE....

MAILBOX: Pot calling the kettle All Black?

With the All Black coaching trio of Graham Henry, Steve Hansen and Wayne Smith having launched an attack on the 'poaching' of local players by richer Northern Hemisphere clubs - is it a case of the pot calling the kettle ... All Black? This is what you had to say about it, and boy did you have a lot to say!

Firstly I think the development the Island team players get in New Zealand provinces and Super 14 teams is only of benefit to the Island nations. If any of the AB's want to make some cash out of their careers I see no reason why they can't make a decision best for them, be it playing abroad for money or staying at home for other reasons. Is Wayne Smith talking from experience with regard to imports weakening local talent - I'm trying to think of who he attracted to Northampton who now seem enshrouded in foreign vs. English player conflict not to mention not being involved in top flight rugby.

- Ryan Lundy

Whatever your opinion may be regarding this matter, there is one simple fact that needs to once and for all be understood by all our dear friends in the Northern Hemisphere regarding the so called 'poaching' of Pacific Islander players by New Zealand. I suspect that a lot of the individuals who respond to such requests for an opinion on this matter have never been to the Southern Hemisphere, have no knowledge of the fact that Auckland, New Zealand has the largest population of Pacific Islanders in the world and that Pacific Islander players who have been fortunate enough to be selected for the All Blacks have spent most of their lives living in New Zealand.

Their families live there, they were educated there, they plan to live the remainder of their lives in New Zealand and the New Zealand Maori culture is very similar and close to their own. NZRU do not trawl around the Pacific Islands taking highly skilled, mature and developed players from their villages to be put into the All Blacks.

Without actually spending some time in New Zealand you can never be expected to fully appreciate and understand this, so I suggest you pack your bag and get out of your comfortable residence in Richmond and get down under to broaden your horizons. One thing is guaranteed, NH rugby will remain 2nd class for as long as you fill your teams with SH players that prevent the development of your own players being eligible to play for the country in which they have made their home. You only have to look at your football team to see the similarities and dream of 1966. As for New Zealand rugby being in a turmoil with some of our finest players leaving for the NH money, be rest assured we have an abundance of players waiting in the wings. If the rules permitted we could win 1st, 2nd and 3rd place at the RWC.

Relax guys and take off the blinkers.

- Kiwi Nick

Oh how I wish England had never won the 2003 WC, for no other reason than the fact that idiots who wouldn't know a ruck from a maul now spend a large amount of time parroting Stephen Jones' dubious wisdom. Having grown up in the same neighbourhood and played for the same clubs and schools as Rodney So'oialo and Jerry Collins I'm not going to credit the poaching tag with a reply, but Henry has been selectively misquoted. In reference to Luke McAllister Henry said that he could be one of the best players in the world if he was in the right coaching environment, that won't happen in the rather skill-less and dour English domestic competition. Maybe you could start coaching youngsters properly so they don't have to come to NZ a' la Martin Johnstone to learn proper skills. But on the bright side if English clubs follow the current pattern and fail to develop their domestic competition you'll never make it past pool play again, the game will slip into obscurity and we won't have to listen to any more pontificating from the ignorant...

- Chris Boys (Wellington)

Reading all the opinion from your "pot calling the kettle black" of which most contributors pointed the finger at New Zealand for poaching players from the Islands I think it is only fair that you should publish a few statistics to put the record straight. I refer to your excellent article of 5 November 2003 "Born here, play there" in which you listed the amount players born overseas but playing for another country in the world cup of 2003.

Out of the entire squad of 30+ players New Zealand had 5 players born outside New Zealand ( one was an Aussie) which was just one more than England who had 4 players born outside England. Australia had 3, Ireland 6, Wales 4, Scotland 10.

Now with the greatest respect for the Islanders what is really interesting is that Fiji had 3 players who were born in New Zealand, Tonga had 8 of which 1 was born in Australia and 7 born in New Zealand and Samoa had 14 all born in New Zealand.

Just like many British and European people emigrated to New Zealand so have many Tongans Fijians and Samoans. The Majority of Islanders playing for the All Blacks were born in New Zealand or emigrated there as small boys with their parents. If it is OK for people of British and European descent to play for the All Blacks then is surely OK for people of Islander descent to play for the All Blacks as well and for some of your readers to say they should be stopped from playing for New Zealand is quite insulting.

Maybe I could draw a parallel to the British Athletics team who, quite fairly, has many athletes of African and Caribbean descent running for them. Now there would be a hell of a stink if someone should suggest that they should not be allowed to represent Great Britain.

- Gareth Williams (Wales)

It is quite interesting that a large majority (if not all) of Northern Hemisphere posters think that there is some similarity between All Black players being offered huge salaries by NH clubs and the so called New Zealand poaching of Pacific Islanders players.

This point has been raised, re-raised, re-hashed and god knows what else by NH posters on the Planet Rugby forums. To be honest it gets to a point of complete absurdity and it is quite sad that NH posters can not understand even a simple argument that when a Pacific Island individual has lived in a country for god knows how many years (Lets take Lauaki for instance - who happened to have gone to primary school in Auckland, is accused of having been poached).

To be honest I'm unsure as to whether the rehashing of the Pacific Islanders claim is just to make Northern Hemisphere posters and supporters feel better about themselves when they loose to the All Blacks, after all it is much easier to claim that the opposition has cheated rather than admit that they were actually a better side.

The point made by Henry and Co is valid, Northern Hemisphere clubs are paying excessive amounts of money to lure current top flight Southern Hemisphere players in an attempt to improve their own game. Maybe NH posters and supporters should be asking why money like that isn't being spent on developing their own players as this is reducing the possibilities for young players in those locations to develop and also play within that competition.

- Pete Ra
I
t is a great call by Graham Henry!

At the moment the international game is failing and the gap between New Zealand (especially when it comes to depth) and the rest of the world is ever increasing, which is odd considering New Zealand has just over four million citizens.

Most people will complain about the All Blacks poaching players from Pacific Nations. There are a couple of reasons why this argument is invalid.

Firstly, the bulk of overseas players that play for the All Blacks - and I mean the vast majority, moved to New Zealand for reason's other then Rugby. Many of the players like Tana Umanga, Jerry Collins, Joe Rokocoko, Ma'a Nonu etc moved to New Zealand at a very early age, well before they were even near club rugby contention. Unless of course you want to argue the Jo was in the All Black frame at 5 years of age.

Sitiveni Sivivatu moved to New Zealand in his late teens, a victim of poaching? I think not. Upon a recent trip to Fiji I learnt the Sivivatu could struggle to make his Fijian high school first XV. Which leads me to my next point - Development.

The point of Henry and Co's statement was not only to stop taking our players but to spend money on developing your own.

The international game is suffering due to a lack development in many countries. UK/France is a prime example (in pouching New Zealand players) which is what Henry is referring to but take a look at Australia. The Aussies spend millions of dollars on buying league players every year and Australia is really struggling with development.

Look at the Super 14 results - the Waratahs and the Reds right down the bottom of the table. The Force finished mid-way which is probably due to the vast amounts of cash they have, which is not good for Australian or world rugby. The Brumbies finished top of the Aussie teams and I must admit that the ACT is the only state in Australia that has any recognisable form development. It does get worse. The NSW club rugby competition is very predictable having only three sides with the ability to win it.

Now, before anyone asks "But how many players born overseas have played for New Zealand?" I will tell you. It is less the 8 per cent. Yes, 92 per cent of the players that have played for New Zealand were born in New Zealand. Only 27 players that have played for the All Blacks were born in Tonga/Fiji/Samoa.

On top of these figures I would like someone to say how many of these players were 'poached' and were lured to New Zealand by large sums of money and how many of these played dreamed to one day play for the All Blacks ever since they could pick up a ball.

- Haden McAlpine


Absolutely a justified rant by the AB coaches. I've written to your website before on this (when Hayman was signed) but didn't believe it would go this far.

What are the Northern Hemisphere unions thinking letting their game get eroded in this way? I heard recently that there are only three English-born first choice first-fives in the Guinness Premiership. If this is true, does that not worry all English supporters a bit? (I'm not sure about other positions, but would imagine similar stats for wingers at least.)

They have by far and away the biggest player base in the world and yet they want to grab Kiwis and Saffas at the expense of their own players. I seriously think that if this current trend continues the international game is in serious trouble.

The Northern Hemisphere has kept Argentina as a second class team by not releasing their players for internationals and are now setting their sights firmly on New Zealand. This will only serve to weaken New Zealand, French and English rugby.

NZ are currently the leaders of the pack, try and develop some play to catch them. To quote someone (who I can't remember) "you can't strengthen the weak by weakening the strong".

Rugby cannot compete with soccer on a world stage for popularity, money or numbers of players yet the Northern Hemisphere systems seem hell bent on following this model.

The French have definitely laid their stall out on this as one of their players showed in the test on the weekend. Can't remember the players involved but there was a slight bit of contact and the Frenchie was writhing on the deck in a performance that any Italian soccer star would have been proud of.

Last time I took the field (last season) rugby was a game played by men for the love of it. Now it looks like even something as sacred as your national jersey (in this case the famous black one) is second to cash. Sad days for our game.

- Andy Neilson

The Pacific Islands never have to put up with this sort of thing from New Zealand, do they?
Pot? Kettle? All Black...

- Tim Payne