Pacific Islanders V Club conflict

Really really depressing that this old issue has not been resolved. Surely our great game of rugby should be able to ensure that all countries are able to select their best players without individual clubs putting financial pressure on players to not play? Does this only apply to Samoa, Fiji and Tonga and other small countries? The RWC makes enough money to ensure that the pooer countries should be able to look after their own players. Absolute disgrace and if true then Toulouse and any other club found guilty of pressuring players like this should face severe penalties....big fines or even excluded from European competition for a season.

From the Telegrapgh.

Leading European clubs are pres­surising their Pacific Island players to retire from international rugby four months out from the World Cup, it has been claimed.

Dan Leo, the London Irish lock, believes that Samoa could lose up to a third of their squad with clubs offering incentivised contracts to players who turn their backs on their countries. Those who opt to represent Samoa, Fiji or Tonga in the World Cup potentially face losing 40 per cent of their salaries. Leo, 32, is speaking from personal experience.

“There’s no hints or beating around the bush, they come out and say ‘stop playing for your country’.”

Leo, who is leaving Irish at the end of the season, said. “It is standard practice. I have not made a decision about whether I will be at the World Cup because I am struggling to find a club that will pay me during the tournament. If I want to play professionally next year, I may have to forfeit ­playing at the World Cup.”

Leo’s case is not unique. He says Census Johnston, the tighthead prop, recently signed a new contract with Toulouse on the condition that he retire from international duty. A lot more players are in the same boat according to Leo, who led the Samoa players’ protests against their own union last November.

Johnston recently signed new contract with Toulouse on condition he retire from international duty

“Almost every Pacific Island player I have spoken to has had pressure put on them to retire [from international rugby],” Leo said. “If everyone could speak as openly as I do, they would say the same thing. Everyone is getting those pressures put on them. When they are negotiating a deal with the clubs, they will say ‘we will give you this bit more if you don’t play for your country’.

“Census is our most experienced player and by far our best tighthead. So if you take out a player like him, Paul Williams and myself, who are three guys coming out of contract, that’s a massive leadership drain on the squad. How do you replace that?

• World Rugby to review 'integrity' of residency rule

“That’s a very real thing for our management to deal with, hence they have named a 58-man training squad for the World Cup. Out of those 58, 12 or 13 will have their contracts coming up. If they decide to stay at their clubs then we lose a third of our [World Cup] squad.”

World Rugby’s Regulation Nine states that: “The future development and extension of the sport at all levels and throughout the world would be threatened if a Union was not able to select and have available the players it requires.”

Clubs would argue that they have done nothing wrong as retiring players are making an individual decision, but it would certainly seem in contravention of World Rugby’s demand of “compliance with not only the letter of the regulation, but also its spirit”.

Premiership clubs will be compensated for the loss of their England players during the World Cup, but not for their foreign internationals. Leo has a measure of sympathy for them and says it’s the responsibility of World Rugby to find a solution.

“I can see it from the clubs’ point of view that they don’t want to be paying players who aren’t going to be around but World Rugby will be making a huge amount of money from the World Cup so they should be stepping in there to secure the release from the clubs.”

A World Rugby spokesman said: “While it would be inappropriate to comment on any allegations without possession of the facts, World Rugby works tirelessly with its unions to ensure that the spirit of regulation nine and the integrity of the international game is preserved.”

The news comes just as Samoa’s players were making real progress in a long-running struggle with their own union having threatened to boycott their match against England last November. The union’s chief executive and head of performance have been replaced and a collective bargaining agreement, which would guarantee minimum levels of pay and facilities, is close to being formalised. At the previous World Cup, Samoa turned up to training sessions without practice balls.

“For so long, it has been about ­sorting out our own backyard. No one was going to take us seriously until we did that,” Leo said. “But we are fighting this battle against our own union and we don’t have the resources to fight against the clubs as well.”

Mods...please move this to the International section.

Thanks.

That is really sad and pathetic on behalf of any club/region/province that does this.

The likes of Census Johnston should grace a World Cup, its the pinnacle of rugby and if the players aren't going to be released to the Pacific Island teams, who may well spring a shock and knock out the "bigger countries" then we might as well sack off the whole group stages and play a knockout "tournament" made up of the old tri nations teams and the 6N teams excluding Italy

Pathetic

Funny (well very sad but its a turn of phrase) but the RWC is the best shop window these guys have anyway

I agree its utterly pathetic. And the IRB should defo be doing something to eliminate this.

The only way to stop it would be to ban club games in and around internationals I guess?

I think that's the common sense approach 7.5

Go the football route and stop all top flight games in the World Cup time frame.

I think it is wrong to tell a player "retire from International duty or we do not employ you". However it seems to be more a case of "We will pay you more if you retire from international duty". And after all why should the clubs be paying a fortune to a player when unable to play them?

LondonTiger wrote:I think it is wrong to tell a player "retire from International duty or we do not employ you". However it seems to be more a case of "We will pay you more if you retire from international duty". And after all why should the clubs be paying a fortune to a player when unable to play them?

The treatment of players needs to be consistent regardless of which country they play for. And players should be paid by their countries when on international duty for which there is clearly enough monet within the game to do. That should be the obligation on the richer countries to help out the poorer because it is for the greater good of the game. I cannot imagine Toulouse putting pressure on a French star to retire from the international game purely because they pay the players wages and want him to play for them instead.

Well the owner of Toulon, I am not putting his name here as I cannot spell it, does not give a flying fook what country they are from, during the last 4N he demanded that his South African and Argentinian players returned immediately, so I do not think that it is just down to players from the tier two nations, although I would have thought that they are at a bigger risk. I wonder what colour the air was in his office when he read that Australia were changing their policy to include Drew Mitchell and Matt Gituea in their squad.

On a serious note though, I would hope the IRB would look into this and sort it out.

Am I right in thinking this is a World Rugby issue, not an IRB one?

hugehandoff wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:I think it is wrong to tell a player "retire from International duty or we do not employ you". However it seems to be more a case of "We will pay you more if you retire from international duty". And after all why should the clubs be paying a fortune to a player when unable to play them?

The treatment of players needs to be consistent regardless of which country they play for. And players should be paid by their countries when on international duty for which there is clearly enough monet within the game to do. That should be the obligation on the richer countries to help out the poorer because it is for the greater good of the game. I cannot imagine Toulouse putting pressure on a French star to retire from the international game purely because they pay the players wages and want him to play for them instead.

Toulouse would get compensation from FFR. They also will have offered someone like Toby Flood more money knowing that by moving to Toulouse he was ending his international career.

LordDowlais wrote:Well the owner of Toulon, I am not putting his name here as I cannot spell it, does not give a flying fook what country they are from, during the last 4N he demanded that his South African and Argentinian players returned immediately, so I do not think that it is just down to players from the tier two nations, although I would have thought that they are at a bigger risk. I wonder what colour the air was in his office when he read that Australia were changing their policy to include Drew Mitchell and Matt Gituea in their squad.                    

On a serious note though, I would hope the IRB would look into this and sort it out.                                                    

He also threatened to terminate Halfpennys contract at the start of the season when he was out injured, think its a case of him being an egotistical dictator

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/11099245/Leigh-Halfpenny-could-have-his-Toulon-contract-terminated-due-to-ongoing-injuries-says-club-president.html

marty2086 wrote:He also threatened to terminate Halfpennys contract at the start of the season when he was out injured, think its a case of him being an egotistical dictator

Yeah,I remember, It seemed to heal Halfpenny pretty quick though, I even made a thread on here about it. But at least he is not fussed what country his players come from when he demands things from them.

There seems to be a general concensus that this is wrong.

Therefore, I'm compelled by the laws of 606 to initiate Devil's Advocate Protocol 6.7.B:

F**k them.

Screw the Pacific Islanders. Sure they're only an insignificant part of the WC event anyway. Nobody cares whether the show or don't show................................

Jokes going to be on the clubs when they all start playing for England instead

I doubt any of the English clubs are fussed Gooseberry. The AP doesn't start until after the group stages and by then the PI teams are likely to be out and the players will return to their clubs. Whilst Vunipola and Tuilagi don't sound very English, Faletau doesn't sound Welsh and Nakaitaci doesn't sound French.

Sad to see Census Johnstone take the cash over his country. But optimistic by Dan Leo to claim his experience is invaluable given his distinct lack of ability displayed this season. I think if every league was suspended until after the group stages that would help the small nations as no club would need their players for the majority of the tournament. It also doesn't shorten the leagues by more than a few weeks.

If World Rugby cant fix the problems with the scrum, then theyre never going to be able to fix an issue like this one.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:He also threatened to terminate Halfpennys contract at the start of the season when he was out injured, think its a case of him being an egotistical dictator

Yeah,I remember, It seemed to heal Halfpenny pretty quick though, I even made a thread on here about it. But at least he is not fussed what country his players come from when he demands things from them.

Tony Marsh had the right idea: "Well if they wont let me go an play Internationals, then I'll go and play for France"

Or have the World Cup in the summer.

BamBam wrote:That is really sad and pathetic on behalf of any club/region/province that does this.

The likes of Census Johnston should grace a World Cup, its the pinnacle of rugby and if the players aren't going to be released to the Pacific Island teams, who may well spring a shock and knock out the "bigger countries" then we might as well sack off the whole group stages and play a knockout "tournament" made up of the old tri nations teams and the 6N teams excluding Italy

Pathetic

Why should our clubs pay the same price a player absent for one month? Nobody force them to work in Europe.

shuren34 wrote:

BamBam wrote:That is really sad and pathetic on behalf of any club/region/province that does this.

The likes of Census Johnston should grace a World Cup, its the pinnacle of rugby and if the players aren't going to be released to the Pacific Island teams, who may well spring a shock and knock out the "bigger countries" then we might as well sack off the whole group stages and play a knockout "tournament" made up of the old tri nations teams and the 6N teams excluding Italy

Pathetic

Why should our clubs pay the same price a player absent for one month? Nobody force them to work in Europe.

When clubs sign them they know they're Internationals..... they know they have other obligations. Nobody forces clubs to buy players that also play International.

SecretFly wrote:

shuren34 wrote:

BamBam wrote:That is really sad and pathetic on behalf of any club/region/province that does this.

The likes of Census Johnston should grace a World Cup, its the pinnacle of rugby and if the players aren't going to be released to the Pacific Island teams, who may well spring a shock and knock out the "bigger countries" then we might as well sack off the whole group stages and play a knockout "tournament" made up of the old tri nations teams and the 6N teams excluding Italy

Pathetic

Why should our clubs pay the same price a player absent for one month? Nobody force them to work in Europe.

When clubs sign them they know they're Internationals.....  they know they have other obligations.  Nobody forces clubs to buy players that also play International.

And when a player signed, he has to read the contract, so he knows there is two possibilities. You still play for your country and you have an amount of money or you stop and you have more money. It's as simple as that. No one is forced and you can still play the international games, you just have to prefer your national jersey more than money.

It's different than him who sue World Rugby because of the release of players (the text is in french):  http://www.varmatin.com/rct/mourad-boudjellal-attaque-lirb.1889223.html

shuren34 wrote:

And when a player signed, he has to read the contract, so he knows there is two possibilities. You still play for your country and you have an amount of money or you stop and you have more money. It's as simple as that. No one is forced and you can still play the international games, you just have to prefer your national jersey more than money.

Isn't this all about it not being part of an original contract but now being an attempt by certain clubs to Amend contracts?  The clubs are the ones trying to change the conditions of present contracts not the other way round.  

Plus - the only reason some of the Internationals were getting picked in the first place - by clubs - is because they were seen playing at International.  So clubs use International as their shopping mall yet then try to kill off the International careers of the players they buy off those International shelves.  Nice.

SecretFly wrote:

shuren34 wrote:

And when a player signed, he has to read the contract, so he knows there is two possibilities. You still play for your country and you have an amount of money or you stop and you have more money. It's as simple as that. No one is forced and you can still play the international games, you just have to prefer your national jersey more than money.

Isn't this all about it not being part of an original contract but now being an attempt by certain clubs to Amend contracts?  The clubs are the ones trying to change the conditions of present contracts not the other way round.  

Plus - the only reason some of the Internationals were getting picked in the first place - by clubs - is because they were seen playing at International.  So clubs use International as their shopping mall yet then try to kill off the International careers of the players they buy off those International shelves.  Nice.

You're wrong. It's about the new trend in France where we tend to make two contracts one if you still play for your country and one if you don't. The exemple here with Census Johnston is a typical case. Toulouse offer him a new contract with more years (3years I think) if he stop playing for Samoa, he could refuse but chose money instead. Nothing wrong with that. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Well so be it. It's still using International to find promising players then trying to persuade those players to desert International.
And the clubs will still have watchers watching the Next World cup for more prospects.

So that kinda IS having your cake and eating it too

BTW - does anyone know how many French players were offered more money to retire from International? And if so, would the French public not be a little irate at the implications?

SecretFly wrote:Well so be it.  It's still using International to find promising players then trying to persuade those players to desert International.  
And the clubs will still have watchers watching the Next World cup for more prospects.

So that kinda IS having your cake and eating it too

Do you really believe our clubs wait for the few international games these nations are playing to watch the players they could buy?
They see them during the year in Super 15, English league or Pro12. They don't need these international games to see them.
Now with our stupid JIFF quota, they try to take them younger than before. Clermont even made an academy in Fiji.

SecretFly wrote:BTW - does anyone know how many French players were offered more money to retire from International?  And if so, would the French public not be a little irate at the implications?

There isn't an official case for the French players yet. For one big reason: a lot of our clubs want to buy them, so if one propose this type of contract, an other club will propose a lot of money and the possibility of playing for France.

shuren34 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Well so be it.  It's still using International to find promising players then trying to persuade those players to desert International.  
And the clubs will still have watchers watching the Next World cup for more prospects.

So that kinda IS having your cake and eating it too

Do you really believe our clubs wait for the few international games these nations are playing to watch the players they could buy?
They see them during the year in Super 15, English league or Pro12. They don't need these international games to see them.
Now with our stupid JIFF quota, they try to take them younger than before. Clermont even made an academy in Fiji.

I say its an Absolute Part of their Checking Out Process, yes.  

They look at Leagues too of course - that's not the point.  

They look closely at International to find the players that can hack it at International intensity.  All the 'old' NZ players (and Internationals from other nations - SA, Wales etc) that will turn up in France after the next WC will all have come in on only their Super 15 or Pro12 records?  
No way.  They're coming because they've proven themselves at the highest levels in International.

SecretFly wrote:

shuren34 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Well so be it.  It's still using International to find promising players then trying to persuade those players to desert International.  
And the clubs will still have watchers watching the Next World cup for more prospects.

So that kinda IS having your cake and eating it too

Do you really believe our clubs wait for the few international games these nations are playing to watch the players they could buy?
They see them during the year in Super 15, English league or Pro12. They don't need these international games to see them.
Now with our stupid JIFF quota, they try to take them younger than before. Clermont even made an academy in Fiji.

I say its an Absolute Part of their Checking Out Process, yes.  

They look at Leagues too of course - that's not the point.  

They look closely at International to find the players that can hack it at International intensity.  All the 'old' NZ players (and Internationals from other nations - SA, Wales etc) that will turn up in France after the next WC will all have come in on only their Super 15 or Pro12 records?  
No way.  They're coming because they've proven themselves at the highest levels in International.

What's the point of having a player who can play at the international intensity when at club level you never reach it. Some players are really good in the top 14/ european club style of play but are bad at international games and other could cope with the speed but aren't so good at clubs with physical side and long season.

It doesn't matter how you or I analyse it, Shuren; why Internationals are better or worse for Club rugby and so on.

I'm simply telling you - it's a fact that International players, that turn up from other nations (Wales, SA, NZ, Pacific Island Nations, etc), they're coming because of what they've done at International level.  

They have ability, they have marketing potential and they command high salaries because of what they've achieved at International levels.

I'm surprised this subject hasn't risen more interest than a few articles that seem to have been glanced over.

The media should be making a huge issue of this to shame the clubs into acting accordingl for the good of the game.

The issue World rugby has is that if they go toe to toe with the clubs (Boudjallel) they will face opposition willing to do just about anything to win, including bully tactics and legal loopholes, and realistically Boudjallel has already threatened World rugby with using French and international business and human rights laws.

If World Rugby go to war for the good of the game and lose the slow power drift from internationl rugby to club rugby will turn into a landslide!

Fanster wrote:I'm surprised this subject hasn't risen more interest than a few articles that seem to have been glanced over.

The media should be making a huge issue of this to shame the clubs into acting accordingl for the good of the game.

The issue World rugby has is that if they go toe to toe with the clubs (Boudjallel) they will face opposition willing to do just about anything to win, including bully tactics and legal loopholes, and realistically Boudjallel has already threatened World rugby with using French and international business and human rights laws.

If World Rugby go to war for the good of the game and lose the slow power drift from internationl rugby to club rugby will turn into a landslide!

It's a disgrace but what can be done? The islanders are in rugby to make money (many have to provide for entire families no doubt) and for many it's a choice between playing in a world cup or getting a contract with a club. This is why guys like Speight, Hughes etc.. don't end up even playing their countries at all, as they are guaranteed international rugby along with a club contract if they choose a tier 1 country.

The best way is to change the structure of the season, so the World cup doesn't interfere with club games, but is that even possible?

Am I right in thinking it's only the French league that has the problem? The Aviva and Rabo don't start until the knockouts, and by then most of their tier 2 and below players will have returned and started making their recoveries.

With the French league starting a few weeks before they could lose their tier 2 players for 5/6 games realistically, and then their best for another 2 weeks? This could really damage the season of a top 14 team.

Even having the cob=nversation about having to move an entire RWC to accomodate 1 league structure highlights the power the club system has!

Dan Leo is a Lon Irish player isnt he?

Isn't he a free agent now he's out of contract?

I had heard he had had talks with 2 french clubs who passed on hime due to RWC comitments.

Ah OK - so the pressure isnt coming from LI then. More an issue with the terms of a new contract.
I can sort of see both sides of the argument - can understand a club unwilling to sign someone that will be unavailable for large chunks of a season on international duty - but at the same time a player should be allowed to represent his country if good enough to be selected.

Surely these things can be negotiated in any contract though! A slightly reduced salary in the WC season and then back up to normal salary in the 2nd season!

Also, arent there legal release dates for internationals joining up for training sessions etc.


There is a similarity here about the general pay levels of men and women - one suggested reason is that womens careers suffer due to the time taken on maternity leave. We all generally feel that this is unacceptable - but in the same instance the internationals for smaller unions are seeing their pay suspended or problems with contract negotiations do to an extended leave of absence.

shuren34 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

shuren34 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Well so be it.  It's still using International to find promising players then trying to persuade those players to desert International.  
And the clubs will still have watchers watching the Next World cup for more prospects.

So that kinda IS having your cake and eating it too

Do you really believe our clubs wait for the few international games these nations are playing to watch the players they could buy?
They see them during the year in Super 15, English league or Pro12. They don't need these international games to see them.
Now with our stupid JIFF quota, they try to take them younger than before. Clermont even made an academy in Fiji.

I say its an Absolute Part of their Checking Out Process, yes.  

They look at Leagues too of course - that's not the point.  

They look closely at International to find the players that can hack it at International intensity.  All the 'old' NZ players (and Internationals from other nations - SA, Wales etc) that will turn up in France after the next WC will all have come in on only their Super 15 or Pro12 records?  
No way.  They're coming because they've proven themselves at the highest levels in International.

What's the point of having a player who can play at the international intensity when at club level you never reach it. Some players are really good in the top 14/ european club style of play but are bad at international games and other could cope with the speed but aren't so good at clubs with physical side and long season.

But surely if a club signs a player from say ....Tonga who is a very rough diamond, and work on him...he will improve and very likely be picked for his country. Is that not fair?

Look at how Samu Manoa has improved at Northampton since he moved from the US.

I think its shocking that players cant play for their country because the French clubs block it.

French clubs are single handedly turning rugby in to everything we hate about Football!

Sorry getting a bit carried away there...

Of course the alternative is to being the WC to a summer date when NO rugby is played so clubs wont miss their players....

Just to mention the football comment, doesn't the european clus now accomodate African players well when it comes to the African cup of nations?

Not that my knowledge of football is up to much

No the ACON is played through the European season...so clubs simply lose their African players.

Just ignore my rant...it would be simple just to move the WC from October when the season is in full flow in all leagues....to say July...no problems.

But is the idea of moving an entire RWC for the domestic leagues pleasure not a bit odd? I think the game should be prioritised from the RWC down, not the club game dictating the international game.

Don't think its odd at all.

Surely its more odd to have a global World Competition that demands all the best players in the world...yet have it at the same time when all the top leagues are still playing?

The club game is becoming more and more in control and will continue to do so...its inevitable. We just need to make sure we keep the best balance and don't allow rugby to become the cheating, diving copy of the football game.

I think this is an absolute disgrace. It is however what happens when the4 clubs take control. They should follow Glasgows example - all their fijians were allowed to play 7s or internationals even outside of the international windows when fijians from other teams were not.

Lots of teams might be happy to do this, but given the reduced availability of their pacific islanders to play for them they would be justified in paying them less.

If the relevant unions managed to rise above their current levels of corruption and find a way through sponsorship or whatever to the point where they could subsidize the players for their time spent with their national teams then everyone would be happy.

TJ wrote:I think this is an absolute disgrace.  It is however what happens when the4 clubs take control.  They should follow Glasgows example - all their fijians were allowed to play 7s or internationals even outside of the international windows when fijians from other teams were not.

Didn't you say this a while back, only for someone to post the team listings showing players from the premiership in it?

Yes - it was not as absolute as I thought - but one of the Fiji internationals was outside the international window and I know some players were not released by their clubs for it. I think there was also some confusion over which international I meant

I think the treatment of the pacific islanders is an utter disgrace. Teams will not tour there, they get their players poached a lot and barriers to international play are there for pacific islanders in the way they are not for players from the top countries

How so for the last point TJ?

No one will tour pacific islands so they do not get the income from tour games so do not have finances to compete. they are often pressured by clubs to retire internationally. They get little time together to train and they get very few chances to play against top teams. One stat I saw - an NZ star played 40 internationals in 3 years, a fiji star 40 internationals in 14 years

Scotlands pacific island tour was very well received. More teams should do it even with A or development sides