Northampton Saints refused to let Samu Manoa play international rugby in his contract... Is this fact????

by maestegmafia Mon 12 Aug 2013, 10:40 pm

First topic message reminder :

ChequeredJersey wrote:Manoa doesn't play for the USA because he has an understanding with Saints not to, I believe. Many players from smaller national teams have a similar arrangement

by maestegmafia Tue 13 Aug 2013, 10:52 pm

Rugby Fan wrote:
AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Dr_G, if a club recruits a player on the understanding that he will not appear for his national team, would you consider that a restraint of trade?
Teams in the North recruit New Zealanders and Australians on that basis, and no-one speaks of restraint of trade.

I think everyone is very aware that this is happening to any nation with a less wealthy league than the France, England or Japan.

Within a decade every league will just be a feeder to those three nations. Hopefully the IRB will protect international rugby.

by HammerofThunor Tue 13 Aug 2013, 11:50 pm

I don't understand why this is an issue for wealthy leagues. The reason it's more of an issue relating to club leagues is simply because they have more players not more money. If you have loads of money you don't need a guy to play all season, you just have a massive squad. It's an issue for professional teams that want a guy from a non-professional structure and can't afford more cover.

by doctor_grey Wed 14 Aug 2013, 12:19 am

maestegmafia wrote:
Rugby Fan wrote:
AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Dr_G, if a club recruits a player on the understanding that he will not appear for his national team, would you consider that a restraint of trade?
Teams in the North recruit New Zealanders and Australians on that basis, and no-one speaks of restraint of trade.
I think everyone is very aware that this is happening to any nation with a less wealthy league than the France, England or Japan.

Within a decade every league will just be a feeder to those three nations. Hopefully the IRB will protect international rugby.

Which means fewer home grown English talent making through to the top level
Which means a smaller pool of players for England to select from
Which means the England talent levels will go down
Which means England will be poopie.

Its a plot!
An evil plot to undermine English Rugby.
Thank goodness we will still have Rob Andrew............

by maestegmafia Wed 14 Aug 2013, 1:04 am

doctor_grey wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:
Rugby Fan wrote:
AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Dr_G, if a club recruits a player on the understanding that he will not appear for his national team, would you consider that a restraint of trade?
Teams in the North recruit New Zealanders and Australians on that basis, and no-one speaks of restraint of trade.
I think everyone is very aware that this is happening to any nation with a less wealthy league than the France, England or Japan.

Within a decade every league will just be a feeder to those three nations. Hopefully the IRB will protect international rugby.
Which means fewer home grown English talent making through to the top level
Which means a smaller pool of players for England to select from
Which means the England talent levels will go down
Which means England will be poopie.

Its a plot!
An evil plot to undermine English Rugby.
Thank goodness we will still have Rob Andrew............

It is what is happening in Soccer. Its what the TV companies like BT Vision who are paying for the game want.

by doctor_grey Wed 14 Aug 2013, 1:57 am

Agree - soccer went down that rathole a long time ago.

About BT, I am willing to go half-way with you on that one. Clearly they want the best players, headliners, in the league(s) they televise. Brings in more viewers and grabs more headlines. So it is not too much of a reach to presume they would want to bring in players from all countries. But if they gain rights to televise England matches in the future, they will have shot themselves in the foot because the talent level will inevitably go down.

Rugby is growing and expanding. Fitfully at times. Frequently because of the management by the national unions, the leagues, clubs and IRB. Other time absolutely in spite of them all. So more money coming in is happening. The question is how to manage it to ensure all parties benefit to certain degrees. The NFL owners, many of whom are billionaires, have been described as capitalists who agree to act as socialists. I think that is a huge subject and should be discussed on another thread. Seriously.

Besides, I don't want to lose my focus on defending my team and one of my son's favourite players from unwarranted, insidious, inappropriate, (add your own synonym here) attacks.

by HammerofThunor Wed 14 Aug 2013, 7:32 am

maestegmafia wrote:
doctor_grey wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:
Rugby Fan wrote:
AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Dr_G, if a club recruits a player on the understanding that he will not appear for his national team, would you consider that a restraint of trade?
Teams in the North recruit New Zealanders and Australians on that basis, and no-one speaks of restraint of trade.
I think everyone is very aware that this is happening to any nation with a less wealthy league than the France, England or Japan.

Within a decade every league will just be a feeder to those three nations. Hopefully the IRB will protect international rugby.
Which means fewer home grown English talent making through to the top level
Which means a smaller pool of players for England to select from
Which means the England talent levels will go down
Which means England will be poopie.

Its a plot!
An evil plot to undermine English Rugby.
Thank goodness we will still have Rob Andrew............
It is what is happening in Soccer. Its what the TV companies like BT Vision who are paying for the game want.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Wed 14 Aug 2013, 8:26 am

Rugby Fan wrote:
AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Dr_G, if a club recruits a player on the understanding that he will not appear for his national team, would you consider that a restraint of trade?
Teams in the North recruit New Zealanders and Australians on that basis, and no-one speaks of restraint of trade.

Hmm, not quite the same, as the national bodies have declared that they won't pick players not playing domestically, so different situation surely?

by **LondonTiger** Wed 14 Aug 2013, 8:30 am

There are a number of players in several leagues including T14, AP and Rabo who have limited their international availability because they get paid more by their clubs. this is not a contractual thing, as that would be against IRB rules - but an informal decision by the various players involved.

At the end of the day it is these players jobs. They are not on banker wages and any lose of wages will affect them.

No idea why Saints are getting all the brickbats. Teams in all 4 home nations have had players who have chosen to limit their international availability to ensure improved wages.

by formerly known as Sam Wed 14 Aug 2013, 8:30 am

Casartelli, Scully might still get some game time in the centres given how little cover we have there. Geordan Murphy is set to mentor him though so I'd expect big improvements, Tait certainly took off under Murphy's mentorship.

As for BT they are currently using England internationala to advertise their new AP coverage. If anything they are promoting the image of home grown talent over big international stars.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 14 Aug 2013, 8:33 am

Scully is only on a 4 month contract (for now) and has just left training to head back to the states for their two internationals.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Wed 14 Aug 2013, 8:51 am

LondonTiger wrote:There are a number of players in several leagues including T14, AP and Rabo who have limited their international availability because they get paid more by their clubs. this is not a contractual thing, as that would be against IRB rules - but an informal decision by the various players involved.

At the end of the day it is these players jobs. They are not on banker wages and any lose of wages will affect them.

No idea why Saints are getting all the brickbats. Teams in all 4 home nations have had players who have chosen to limit their international availability to ensure improved wages.

LT, I think these are the key words - is it the player's choice or the club's choice, and perhaps in this instance the water is a little muddy?

by beshocked Wed 14 Aug 2013, 9:21 am

formerly known as Sam wrote:Casartelli, Scully might still get some game time in the centres given how little cover we have there. Geordan Murphy is set to mentor him though so I'd expect big improvements, Tait certainly took off under Murphy's mentorship.

As for BT they are currently using England internationala to advertise their new AP coverage. If anything they are promoting the image of home grown talent over big international stars.

Isn't Manu Tuilagi in the new AP coverage? Very good player of course but hardly what I would call home grown talent. More like born in Samoa, nurtured in Leicester.

by HammerofThunor Wed 14 Aug 2013, 9:43 am

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:LT, I think these are the key words - is it the player's choice or the club's choice, and perhaps in this instance the water is a little muddy?

It was his choice to move to Saints on a 6 mkonth contract, mainly as international cover. That was his choice. It's also his choice to represent his country or not. It's Saints' (and his) choice whether to offer/accept a renewed/extended contract. There has been no suggestion whatsoever, by anyone with any credibility, that he wasn't aware he was being hired as international cover. Comments were made by his coach in SF (where he was before the move) that was going to use the time during the world cup to make appearances and show what he can do. He's done that, he's now a key member of the Saints pack and now he's going off to play internationally.

The only muddy water is caused by WUMs Poopie in the pool (and I include EOS).

by maestegmafia Wed 14 Aug 2013, 9:51 am

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:There are a number of players in several leagues including T14, AP and Rabo who have limited their international availability because they get paid more by their clubs. this is not a contractual thing, as that would be against IRB rules - but an informal decision by the various players involved.

At the end of the day it is these players jobs. They are not on banker wages and any lose of wages will affect them.

No idea why Saints are getting all the brickbats. Teams in all 4 home nations have had players who have chosen to limit their international availability to ensure improved wages.
LT, I think these are the key words - is it the player's choice or the club's choice, and perhaps in this instance the water is a little muddy?

Considering that after the incident was addressed by the IRB that Manoa resumed playing for the USA...?

by doctor_grey Wed 14 Aug 2013, 11:55 am

maestegmafia wrote:Considering that after the incident was addressed by the IRB that Manoa resumed playing for the USA...?

Mate, you seem hellbent to see the Manoa situation as dirty, eh? The IRB raised this issue after the last World Cup because people have correctly been making a lot of noise for many years about clubs in general not allowing (pressuring, really) some of their internationals from Tier 2/3 nations not to play for their nations. Response by the IRB in my view is very late in coming. Only connection to Manoa is circumstance.

I would be careful to avoid too zealously applying First World (Rugby) standards to Second/Third World (Rugby) nations. Our players make a lot of money playing for their nations. Most, I am sure, play for pride in jersey. But I am also sure there are those who play internationals simply for the extra money. For players not from the First World, they can take a big financial hit by representing their country. They may want to for all the right reasons, but might not be able to handle the loss in salary.

Clearly if Manoa was unhappy or felt aggrieved in any way, he could have signed his latest contract with almost any other club in the Premiership who wanted a top class player.

Clearly, he wasn't.

Therefore, no issue.

by maestegmafia Wed 14 Aug 2013, 12:17 pm

doctor_grey wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:Considering that after the incident was addressed by the IRB that Manoa resumed playing for the USA...?
Mate, you seem hellbent to see the Manoa situation as dirty, eh? The IRB raised this issue after the last World Cup because people have correctly been making a lot of noise for many years about clubs in general not allowing (pressuring, really) some of their internationals from Tier 2/3 nations not to play for their nations. Response by the IRB in my view is very late in coming. Only connection to Manoa is circumstance.

I would be careful to avoid too zealously applying First World (Rugby) standards to Second/Third World (Rugby) nations. Our players make a lot of money playing for their nations. Most, I am sure, play for pride in jersey. But I am also sure there are those who play internationals simply for the extra money. For players not from the First World, they can take a big financial hit by representing their country. They may want to for all the right reasons, but might not be able to handle the loss in salary.

Clearly if Manoa was unhappy or felt aggrieved in any way, he could have signed his latest contract with almost any other club in the Premiership who wanted a top class player.

Clearly, he wasn't.

Therefore, no issue.

Doc there is no "hell bending", the facts speak for themselves and the matter seems resolved. Manoa plays international rugby now and Saints, whether begrudgingly or happily, let him do so.

All I want to see is that the smaller nations, where International rugby earnings are minimal, are encouraged to play international rugby with pride. It is the flagship of any sport and the worldwide governing body wish to encourage and maintain that.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 14 Aug 2013, 12:46 pm

but you are happy for the players and there families to be penniless?

Far too much stone throwing by people living in glass houses. and as usual without all the facts.

by HammerofThunor Wed 14 Aug 2013, 12:57 pm

maestegmafia wrote:Doc there is no "hell bending", the facts speak for themselves and the matter seems resolved. Manoa plays international rugby now and Saints, whether begrudgingly or happily, let him do so.

Bit in bold is true.

by Cyril Wed 14 Aug 2013, 1:01 pm

LondonTiger wrote:but you are happy for the players and there families to be penniless?

Far too much stone throwing by people living in glass houses. and as usual without all the facts.

Quite. It's amazing how quickly some folk seem get on their moral high horses, especially when they've got an axe to grind.

International rugby isn't the be-all and end-all either.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Wed 14 Aug 2013, 1:15 pm

Cyril wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:but you are happy for the players and there families to be penniless?

Far too much stone throwing by people living in glass houses. and as usual without all the facts.
Quite. It's amazing how quickly some folk seem get on their moral high horses, especially when they've got an axe to grind.

International rugby isn't the be-all and end-all either.

From the perspective of the governing body, the IRB, I think it pretty much is?

by Cyril Wed 14 Aug 2013, 1:24 pm

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
Cyril wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:but you are happy for the players and there families to be penniless?

Far too much stone throwing by people living in glass houses. and as usual without all the facts.
Quite. It's amazing how quickly some folk seem get on their moral high horses, especially when they've got an axe to grind.

International rugby isn't the be-all and end-all either.
From the perspective of the governing body, the IRB, I think it pretty much is?

I'm talking more from the point of view of the players and fans (and 'clubs' obviously).

by maestegmafia Wed 14 Aug 2013, 1:30 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:Doc there is no "hell bending", the facts speak for themselves and the matter seems resolved. Manoa plays international rugby now and Saints, whether begrudgingly or happily, let him do so.
Bit in bold is true.

All of that post is true...!

by HammerofThunor Wed 14 Aug 2013, 7:52 pm

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
Cyril wrote:
LondonTiger wrote:but you are happy for the players and there families to be penniless?

Far too much stone throwing by people living in glass houses. and as usual without all the facts.
Quite. It's amazing how quickly some folk seem get on their moral high horses, especially when they've got an axe to grind.

International rugby isn't the be-all and end-all either.
From the perspective of the governing body, the IRB, I think it pretty much is?

Well it shouldn't be if it is. Their responsibility is rugby in general. Including the domestic game (which is far far bigger than international rugby and needs a hell of a lot more managing).

by HammerofThunor Wed 14 Aug 2013, 7:54 pm

maestegmafia wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:Doc there is no "hell bending", the facts speak for themselves and the matter seems resolved. Manoa plays international rugby now and Saints, whether begrudgingly or happily, let him do so.
Bit in bold is true.
All of that post is true...!

Well most of it was opinion but the bold bit was the key fact. He is playing. That's what is important. Everything else is opinion/subjective heavily influenced by personal bias.

by **Rugby Fan** Wed 14 Aug 2013, 8:42 pm

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Hmm, not quite the same, as the national bodies have declared that they won't pick players not playing domestically, so different situation surely?

Not really that different. One of the attractions of All Blacks & Wallabies for teams in the north is their unavailability for international rugby. The policy of the unions means the mechanics are different, but it is the player who makes the decision to put a club contract first, which is largely what appears to have happened with Samu Manoa at Saints. In the case of someone like Nick Evans, we recognize his free agency, whereas we are inclined to imagine a more minor player being had over a barrel.

The All Blacks wanted Carl Hayman for the last World Cup. They asked him to be available but he refused. Again, the mechanics are differerent - NZRU wanted him to leave Toulon - but the player decided to put club rewards ahead of international commitments. Hayman's case is a reminder that the trade-off can happen at all levels of the game.

Of course, Hayman was still available but the NZRU stood by a selection criteria which you don't much see in other international sports. We know the reasons for these policies but they could also be regarded as restraint of trade clauses. The club/country conflict isn't just down to the clubs (or regions & provinces)

When England decided to select EPS players only from within the Premership, sports lawyers openly speculated that players in France would have a good case under EU law. It's difficult to imagine a player bringing such an action, however.

by HammerofThunor Wed 14 Aug 2013, 9:25 pm

The EPS is an agreement with the premiership clubs so they can only come from there (I think Haskell and Wilkinson had it in their contracts to be released). The issue was that French based players would be at a disadvantage if they couldn't make all the training. Much like Gatland's law that never was. Blown up by the media from a sensible clarification of the situation (if not available you're not getting picked unless we're desperate) into a hard and fast selection criteria like in New Zealand.

Edit: but agree with everything else

by doctor_grey Thu 15 Aug 2013, 2:02 am

maestegmafia wrote:
doctor_grey wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:Considering that after the incident was addressed by the IRB that Manoa resumed playing for the USA...?
Mate, you seem hellbent to see the Manoa situation as dirty, eh? The IRB raised this issue after the last World Cup because people have correctly been making a lot of noise for many years about clubs in general not allowing (pressuring, really) some of their internationals from Tier 2/3 nations not to play for their nations. Response by the IRB in my view is very late in coming. Only connection to Manoa is circumstance.

I would be careful to avoid too zealously applying First World (Rugby) standards to Second/Third World (Rugby) nations. Our players make a lot of money playing for their nations. Most, I am sure, play for pride in jersey. But I am also sure there are those who play internationals simply for the extra money. For players not from the First World, they can take a big financial hit by representing their country. They may want to for all the right reasons, but might not be able to handle the loss in salary.

Clearly if Manoa was unhappy or felt aggrieved in any way, he could have signed his latest contract with almost any other club in the Premiership who wanted a top class player.

Clearly, he wasn't.

Therefore, no issue.
Doc there is no "hell bending", the facts speak for themselves and the matter seems resolved. Manoa plays international rugby now and Saints, whether begrudgingly or happily, let him do so.

All I want to see is that the smaller nations, where International rugby earnings are minimal, are encouraged to play international rugby with pride. It is the flagship of any sport and the worldwide governing body wish to encourage and maintain that.

Maestegmafia,
I hope you didn't take offense to the 'hellbent' comment or consider it an insult. Maybe I have been over here in America too long and started using their expressions. 'Hellbent' or 'hellbent for leather' means very determined - if I can translate American into English. I was trying to be a little tongue-in-cheek about your staunch disagreeing with me over the Manoa situation and not coming over to my side (as you should!!!). Besides, the last thing I would want to do is antagonise anyone with mafia in their name. Or more importantly a passionate and knowledgeable Rugby fan.

I still don't see hard facts beyond separate events linked by coincidences in his situation. And he has never complained or considered it an issue.

On the plus side, clearly the IRB finally started doing something they should have done years before. We agree there. I also agree players should be encouraged to represent their native country, if at all possible. The problem about players losing significant money (or even their jobs) if representing many second or third tier countries is real. Not sure what we should do about that.

by maestegmafia Thu 15 Aug 2013, 9:36 am

Doc

The fact is that saints were looking for a player to cover a position they were weak in during the World Cup in 2011. They chose a player who was likely to be selected, who was at the start of his international career, one who could be called upon by his nation and if he did would not do the job Saints needed.

The fact of the matter is that this put them in a vulnerable position of contravening Regulation 9, something they could and should have avoided.

by formerly known as Sam Thu 15 Aug 2013, 12:49 pm

Maes there was clearly a gentlemans agreement that he would opt out of playing in the RWC but be eligible in the future. The player was clearly happy to do this for the financial and long term career opportunities. The IRB will want to promote the international game but at the end of the day players will look to off their families financial security first, same as we all would.

by ScarletSpiderman Thu 15 Aug 2013, 1:29 pm

formerly known as Sam wrote:Maes there was clearly a gentlemans agreement that he would opt out of playing in the RWC but be eligible in the future. The player was clearly happy to do this for the financial and long term career opportunities. The IRB will want to promote the international game but at the end of the day players will look to off their families financial security first, same as we all would.

It's not too different from players retiring from international rugby in hopes of prolonging their club career really. Mike Phillips has said that he was considering international retirement in order to help him keep playing at club level.

by Casartelli Thu 15 Aug 2013, 7:08 pm

doctor_grey wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:
doctor_grey wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:Considering that after the incident was addressed by the IRB that Manoa resumed playing for the USA...?
Mate, you seem hellbent to see the Manoa situation as dirty, eh? The IRB raised this issue after the last World Cup because people have correctly been making a lot of noise for many years about clubs in general not allowing (pressuring, really) some of their internationals from Tier 2/3 nations not to play for their nations. Response by the IRB in my view is very late in coming. Only connection to Manoa is circumstance.

I would be careful to avoid too zealously applying First World (Rugby) standards to Second/Third World (Rugby) nations. Our players make a lot of money playing for their nations. Most, I am sure, play for pride in jersey. But I am also sure there are those who play internationals simply for the extra money. For players not from the First World, they can take a big financial hit by representing their country. They may want to for all the right reasons, but might not be able to handle the loss in salary.

Clearly if Manoa was unhappy or felt aggrieved in any way, he could have signed his latest contract with almost any other club in the Premiership who wanted a top class player.

Clearly, he wasn't.

Therefore, no issue.
Doc there is no "hell bending", the facts speak for themselves and the matter seems resolved. Manoa plays international rugby now and Saints, whether begrudgingly or happily, let him do so.

All I want to see is that the smaller nations, where International rugby earnings are minimal, are encouraged to play international rugby with pride. It is the flagship of any sport and the worldwide governing body wish to encourage and maintain that.
Maestegmafia,
I hope you didn't take offense to the 'hellbent' comment or consider it an insult. Maybe I have been over here in America too long and started using their expressions. 'Hellbent' or 'hellbent for leather' means very determined - if I can translate American into English. I was trying to be a little tongue-in-cheek about your staunch disagreeing with me over the Manoa situation and not coming over to my side (as you should!!!). Besides, the last thing I would want to do is antagonise anyone with mafia in their name. Or more importantly a passionate and knowledgeable Rugby fan.

I still don't see hard facts beyond separate events linked by coincidences in his situation. And he has never complained or considered it an issue.

On the plus side, clearly the IRB finally started doing something they should have done years before. We agree there. I also agree players should be encouraged to represent their native country, if at all possible. The problem about players losing significant money (or even their jobs) if representing many second or third tier countries is real. Not sure what we should do about that.

There are three elements to “hell bent for leather,” an American invention that first appeared in print at the end of the 19th century meaning “at breakneck speed; recklessly determined.” “Hell,” of course, is the Bad Place, considered throughout human history to be located in either the Underworld or Paramus, New Jersey. “Hell” has also long been used as an intensifier, lending force to a proclamation, question or insult (e.g., “What the hell are you doing?” doesn’t really have anything to do with Hell.)

“Bent,” an adjective formed from the verb “to bend,” is here used in the sense of “directed on a course” with implications of “determined, resolute.” Put together, “hell bent” (sometimes spelled as one word, “hellbent”) has, since the early 18th century, meant “recklessly determined to do something at any cost; doggedly determined.” It’s a bit unclear whether the original sense was “willing (and possibly likely) to go to hell to achieve one’s goal” or just “really, really determined,” but the bottom line is that it’s best not to interfere with someone “hell bent” on anything (“I know your kind — hell-bent to spend what you cash in,” 1910).

The truly odd thing about “hell bent for leather” is that it appears to be a combination of two other phrases: “hell bent” and “hell for leather,” which also dates to the late 19th century. “Hell for leather” specifically referred to riding a horse very fast, the “leather” in question being either the saddle or, more likely, the leather crop used to “incentivize” the poor horse. Rudyard Kipling seemed especially fond of the phrase and probably contributed to its popularity. “Hell bent for leather” doesn’t make any more literal sense than “hell for leather” did, but the fact that “hell bent” is more widely understood undoubtedly led to the fusion of the two phrases.

by Cyril Fri 16 Aug 2013, 9:30 am

Who says you don't learn nowt on here!

by Portnoy's Complaint Fri 16 Aug 2013, 9:39 am

Are we playing Call My Bluff? Oh goody!

"Bluff"

by Standulstermen Fri 16 Aug 2013, 10:30 am

Saints have every right to sign the player that best suits their needs. Said needs we're during the RWC so they needed a player available then. It's job criteria. They aren't running the make a wish foundation. If Manoa chose to potentially earn some decent dough for the next ten years over going to the RWC then it's his call

by doctor_grey Fri 16 Aug 2013, 12:41 pm

Casartelli wrote:
There are three elements to “hell bent for leather,” an American invention that first appeared in print at the end of the 19th century meaning “at breakneck speed; recklessly determined.” “Hell,” of course, is the Bad Place, considered throughout human history to be located in either the Underworld or Paramus, New Jersey. “Hell” has also long been used as an intensifier, lending force to a proclamation, question or insult (e.g., “What the hell are you doing?” doesn’t really have anything to do with Hell.)

Well, me boy, I see you know Paramus, New Jersey, which is about 15 minutes from me.
First point is I find it interesting everyone refers to Paramus as Paramus, New Jersey. With a unique name like 'Paramus' I don't understand why everyone not from Paramus, New Jersey refers to Paramus as Paramus, New Jersey. As an aside, Paramus, comes from an old American Indian word for "Hell-Bent for Shopping and Traffic Jams". The colonists, at the time not wanting to appear overly pushy with the natives promptly built many shopping malls in Paramus, New Jersey with poor roads which clog up every morning and evening as Paramus, New Jersey sits on one of the main arteries into New York City.

The other current usage for Hell-Bent For Leather which I felt was inappropriate to use around children under 18 is the determination (Hell-Bent) to find a woman with whips and things (For Leather). Obviously, the next question is can one fine this in Paramus, New Jersey? Since one can find almost anything in a mall in Paramus, New Jersey, I would presume the answer is yes. Not from personal experience, mind, but I understand one can go to the Garden State Plaza Mall, in Paramus, New Jersey) go into the Hell-Bent For Leather shoppe and ask for Tarzana.

by HammerofThunor Fri 16 Aug 2013, 1:22 pm

It's actually pronounced "Hell Bent for 'lather'" and represents the urgent need for washing

by Portnoy's Complaint Fri 16 Aug 2013, 1:36 pm

The word Paramus has occurred significantly more often in this post than would be normal.

Is there a an Indian presence on v2? As I suspect a spot betting scam.

by TrailApe Fri 16 Aug 2013, 3:14 pm

Should Northampton prevent George North from playing for Wales the "Act of Union would be burning on the Severn Bridge as an army marched on the midlands.

Why would the Welsh be burning up a treaty between England and Scotland?

by maestegmafia Sat 17 Aug 2013, 7:10 am

TrailApe wrote:
Should Northampton prevent George North from playing for Wales the "Act of Union would be burning on the Severn Bridge as an army marched on the midlands.
Why would the Welsh be burning up a treaty between England and Scotland?

Act of Union 1543...! Schooling has obviously dropped markedly in the UK. Do you not learn British history these days?

by doctor_grey Sat 17 Aug 2013, 9:04 am

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:The word Paramus has occurred significantly more often in this post than would be normal.

Is there a an Indian presence on v2? As I suspect a spot betting scam.

First of all it is important to pronounce Paramus, New Jersey in the proper manner. It is pronounced pa-RA-mus, New Jersey, not pa-ra-MUS, New Jersey. The natives in Paramus are very testy about this. So, if your ever visit Paramus, New Jersey, most likely looking for the Hellbent For Leather and Dominatrix Shoppe, please pronounce Paramus, New Jersey correctly.

And, yes, Port, there is a plot. Sadly to say, it is probably related to your Leicester Tigers going over the salary cap.
Even in Paramus, New Jersey people are watching you..............

by Portnoy's Complaint Sat 17 Aug 2013, 9:49 am

doc,
pa-RA-mus pa-RA-mus can you do the fandango?
That's two more for the spot betters' tally.

Its evens that any individual post contains scurrilous claims that the Tigers are beating the wage cap, whilst the fact is that Sinful posters are tapping out these libellous innuendos in order to deflect the charges from their own doorsteps.

by formerly known as Sam Sat 17 Aug 2013, 12:31 pm

beshocked wrote: Isn't Manu Tuilagi in the new AP coverage? Very good player of course but hardly what I would call home grown talent. More like born in Samoa, nurtured in Leicester.

Schooled and taught rugby in Leicestershire. Came through England age grades. He was born in Samoa and clearly guided by his older brothers so you could argue either way. Given his time with the Tigers academy and England age grade you'd say it was the English system that had provided all the investment.

BT are still promoting their coverage through England internationals as opposed to foreign superstars though.

by Casartelli Sat 17 Aug 2013, 2:18 pm

maestegmafia wrote:
TrailApe wrote:
Should Northampton prevent George North from playing for Wales the "Act of Union would be burning on the Severn Bridge as an army marched on the midlands.
Why would the Welsh be burning up a treaty between England and Scotland?

Act of Union 1543...! Schooling has obviously dropped markedly in the UK. Do you not learn British history these days?

Maybe he was taught that the 1543 Act was actually the second of the Laws in Wales Acts. Neither of them were called 'act of union'.

by blackcanelion Sat 17 Aug 2013, 2:26 pm

formerly known as Sam wrote:
beshocked wrote: Isn't Manu Tuilagi in the new AP coverage? Very good player of course but hardly what I would call home grown talent. More like born in Samoa, nurtured in Leicester.
Schooled and taught rugby in Leicestershire. Came through England age grades. He was born in Samoa and clearly guided by his older brothers so you could argue either way. Given his time with the Tigers academy and England age grade you'd say it was the English system that had provided all the investment.

BT are still promoting their coverage through England internationals as opposed to foreign superstars though.

Probably to much credit. I'm guessing he was an identified talent at 13 in Samoa. It's not unusual or limited to England. There's a fair scrap over similar aged players here. Some of them go to good schools in NZ some of them go overseas.

by Portnoy's Complaint Sat 17 Aug 2013, 2:33 pm

Having three brothers in England may have influenced things a bit.

by formerly known as Sam Sat 17 Aug 2013, 3:16 pm

He moved because his brother Freddie is the agent for his brothers and several other Samoan born players. The family wanted Manu and Vavae all to school in England with brother Andy going as well. They knew the schooling on offer would be superior and living with their brothers they would be well provided for with bigger career prospects in or out of rugby.

Certainly scouts scour the pacific islands looking for talent but in the case of the Tuilagi brothers Tigers didn't need to bother.

Interestingly Freddie has used Tigers as s development tool for Samoa. He found a Samoan 8 playing in the ITM Cup who liked rowing and was massive. Convinced him he needed to convert to prop as Samoa needed options there and then arranged a trial with Tigers. It was a good spot as Mulipola has developed brilliantly at Oval Park and has been a Samoan regular since.

by HammerofThunor Sat 17 Aug 2013, 4:27 pm

Out of curiosity are there any examples of kids coming from the Pacific to the uk for rugby that didn't have family or ties here already? The Vunipolas came over with their father. Tuilagi came over with his brother. Because is suggested several times as happening. Are they just all rubbish and never make premiership level or do we just not here about them for some other reason?

by formerly known as Sam Sat 17 Aug 2013, 5:39 pm

I think that generally NZ schools grab them. It's much closer to home and offers equally good opportunities. England is on the other side of the world and if you have no family with you it would very lonely for a 15/16 year old.

by doctor_grey Sun 18 Aug 2013, 7:47 am

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:doc,
pa-RA-mus pa-RA-mus can you do the fandango?
That's two more for the spot betters' tally.

Its evens that any individual post contains scurrilous claims that the Tigers are beating the wage cap, whilst the fact is that Sinful posters are tapping out these libellous innuendos in order to deflect the charges from their own doorsteps.

Mate,
I am not a Queen fan, but I don't know the preferences of the denizens of Paramus, New Jersey.
However, I can assure that almost every sentient person in Paramus, New Jersey fully understand that Saints have no need to divert attention from themselves. And that's because they are all usually the shy, retiring, modest types.

However, a short 30 minute ride up the A508 past a few nasty speed cameras, through a secret gate takes one past the posh mansions of the Tigers players and management. Adhering to the salary cap? Hmmm. There are even rumours not yet proven that Leicester Tigers have placed a few of the speed cameras on the Shire borders to pay the salaries, and thereby extorting even more money from Northamptonshire residents. I would argue to close the border if I wasn't staying in Market Harborough and need to drive to Northampton this week.

by HammerofThunor Sun 18 Aug 2013, 9:17 am

The speed cameras only make moneyif you're breaking the law. Typical Northamptonshire residents.

by Sponsored content