They are debuting another New Zealander this week in Leeson Ah Mau who has come through the ranks of firstly the Auckland Lions, then the NYC team.
If you look at the Warriors, since 2000 they've debuted the following players who have since gone on to play for the Kiwis; (haven't included players who started elsewhere and then moved to the Warriors).
Louis Anderson
Vinnie Anderson
Henry Fa'afili
Lance Hohaia
Tevita Latu
Epalahame Lauaki
Thomas Leuluai
Simon Mannering
Iafeta Paleaaesina
Sam Rapira
Jerome Ropati
Motu Tony
Evarn Tuimavave
Manu Vatuvei
Brent Webb *
That's not a bad list. As most have eluded to, Australian club's representation of New Zealand eligible players has expanded enormously. Furthermore, Ivan Cleary and Wayne Scurrah have both boasted about the future of the Warriors being more heavily accentuated to a New Zealand favoured roster.
Out of the guys at the club who are Australian, most seem to have a purpose;
Ian Henderson (OK, he's Scottish, but he's been at electric at hooker)
Denan Kemp (wicked try scoring rate)
Aidan Kirk (wouldn't be on a lot and always does a good job - can play wing, centre or fullback)
Jacob Lillyman (Queensland State of Origin rep)
Micheal Luck (Plays an enormous amount of games consecutively, very resilient, and our best defender - most tackles for the 2007 NRL season)
Wade McKinnon (no need to comment, outstanding player)
Joel Moon (bought on promise of Junior Kangaroos excellence at five eighth)
Steve Price ('nuff said)
Brent Tate ('nuff said)
Michael Witt (won't be with the club much longer but was an excellent goal kicker also brought in on promise at five eighth, an area we haven't excelled at)
Unless I've missed someone, that means that 10 out of the top 25 only are non New Zealand eligible or born players. 2 of those are current Australian representatives, another is a Queensland representative. Another is in the top 2 in terms of defensive tackle counts. And also of course Wade McKinnon and Denan Kemp who are proven attacking threats. Would other clubs not take those players? We've got to be realistic here, the Warriors, like all NRL clubs, are here to win the Premiership. That's their goal. It'd be a niceity to be able to plug the team with Mt Albert or Otahuhu old boys, but if the stands don't get fulled, the sponsors don't come, you might as well kiss goodbye the Warriors and kiss goodbye one of the few cornerstones the NZRL can rely on in a very bleak time. God knows they've stuffed everything else up, for the Warriors to kiss it all goodbye would be an erroneous failure. At least this gives 15 blokes a professional contract (from memory, 32 players are actually on full time contracts which means 22 blokes get professional contracts), you have the NYC churning out players, you have NSW Premier League to develop players further, and you continue to have the game in the eye of young New Zealanders who may choose to take up this product which is a far more eye catching product than rugby union.
The true test is going to be the next 5-10 years. Remember, before 2008 there was no NYC team. Before 2007, for a good 10 or so years there was no premier league. IMO they were massive mistakes, although obviously this was due to cost saving. IMO the cost-benefit-analysis in the long run is so advantageous to the three tiers it's not funny. I believe Mick Watson's management was happy with 2001-2003 and believed they had it right that they could just rely on Bartercard Cup as the fallback to grow players on. But all it did was give a non-professional competition for international scouts to come by and watch and pick up players right from under the Warriors nose. Heck, John Ackland the current Warriors assistant coach picked up Sonny Bill and Roy Asotasi for the Bulldogs. IMO Watson's management lacked serious foresight and a long term vision for growing and developing players, and this is one of the primary reasons why the Warriors were ordinary in 2004 and into 2005.
For long term growth, you require structures. They have that. But for sustainability, they need crowds. To do that, they have to have a modium of success on field. If they don't, you might as destroy their license and give all the momentum gained back to rugby union. To do that, as sad as it may appear, guys like Price, Tate, McKinnon, Lillyman, Moon, Kemp, Luck are required. 10 out of 32 of the professionals are Australian. Again, I ask, bar perhaps Brisbane are there that many clubs in the NRL that have have 22 out of 32 as locally grown products??? The Warriors are following the same goals as all those other teams. Long term, that number will further dissepate, the youngsters will begin filling those spots now that they have opportunities. But it's not going to happen anytime in the near future. It's going to take time, and even then, I still believe there will always be 4-5 Australians at the Warriors.
Which, as we know, is a professional club. Not a national team. After all, they are the Warriors, not the NZ Warriors as erroneously stated.
