Fiji after Jarrod Hayne

[LeagueXIII]

From todays Fiji Times:

Eels wing eyes Bati jumper

Wednesday, July 26, 2006
+ Enlarge this image
Eels Jarryd Hayne runs the ball back during the NRL Rugby League round 20 fixture against West Tigers at Telstra Stadium last weekend


THERE is a strong possibility that Parammatta Eels rugby league wing Jarryd Hayne will play for Fiji during the World Cup qualifiers in Australia in October.
While the Fiji National Rugby League chairman Peni Musunamasi is not sure about the youngster's availability, it is understood former national coach Shane Morris has spoken to Hayne.
Hayne is the son of former Fiji Bati Manoa Thompson.
The 18-year-old is currently one of hottest properties in Australian league circles.
Musunamasi said they would welcome the move by Hanes, because he was involved in top level competition.
"We are not sure yet if he will be available since this depends on his club," Musunamasi said.
"The time we are having our qualifiers that is when the ARL final is on and should his club make it they will need him to be there.
"Even if he doesn't play this year should we qualify for the World Cup, we would like to have him in that team."
He said the Fiji side was in the process of getting its Australia-based players for the play-offs, which will have Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and the Cook Islands taking part.
"Only two teams will qualify from the competition while the remaining two will have go through a repechage," Musunamasi said.
"We have been in the process of securing the release of players from the Australian clubs.
"We will be taking about 12 players from here and then have a trial match before the qualifiers before we name the team."

 

[phonetic]

Jarryd Hayne is a very impressive player. If he was to keep improving and hauling in loads of tries as he is doing now, who is to say he wouldn't be talked about at the Kangaroo selection table come 2008?

I know it's probably slightly far fetched, but it's something that has to be thought about.

 

[winnyason]

a superstar in the makings, i hope he has a shocker this weekend.

 

[nadera78]

It would be great if he played for Fiji, but only if he fully committed to them for his entire career. I hate thi crap with players turning out for 2 countries. Pick one and stick with it.

 

[hutch]

he did say in an interview on channel 10 that he would like to follow lote tuqiri and play for fiji. hopefully he doesnt follow him to yawnion.

 

[milton]

Fiji will have a great back line come world cup time

 

[ali]

What I want to know is, if he plays for Fiji in the qualifiers, surely he can't then play for Australia in the world cup? Because the way Hayne is going, fair chance he'll be good enough to play for the Roos before the world cup comes around. If he plays for Fiji, can we at least lock him to Fiji until after the cup?

If Hayne plays for 2 teams in the same world cup it will be the ultimate farce.

 

[The Observer]

Lote loved captaining and playing for Fiji, but he only went after he had been assured by Wayne Bennett that it would not affect his chances of playing for Qld and Australia.

If the One Nation brigade had their way, all it would mean is Aus born/raised players of Fijian descent like Hayne, Sims and co will turn down the chance to play for Fiji, and Fiji Bati will suffer as a result.

 

[nadera78]

I don't think that's entiely true. Some players would turn down the chance to play for the nation of their birth/parents/grandparents in the perhaps vain hope of one playing for Australia or New Zealand, but others would still look at it as maybe their only chance to play international RL.

It happens that way in other sports (especialy soccer, where there is a huge movement of players under the qualification rules) so why not tgg? Although admittedly regular matches would help the smaller nations with recruitment.

 

[the kirwan kid]

It would be great if he played for Fiji, but only if he fully committed to them for his entire career. I hate thi crap with players turning out for 2 countries. Pick one and stick with it.

I agree but I think it's important for the development of the game worldwide for players (at the start or end of their careers) to turn out for other teams as long as the other team is not England, NZ or Australia. Tony Carroll playing for NZ and Oz was a farce but someone like Tuquiri, an up & coming player at the time, playing for Fiji before representing Austrlia was fine IMO.

I also would have liked to have seen someone Adrian Lam get an Austrlaian Jeresy (no doubt he would have come close at the time) without affecting his occasional appearances with PNG. He is without doubt a QLDer through and through but he played for PNG after they came calling when he was in his mid 20s. At the time he was playing first grade in Briusbane and the NRL (let alone Origin) was a long shot.

 

[The Observer]

nadera78, it is exactly what happens with the most players, all the evidence points to it, and its naive to think otherwise. Look at Rugby - who do Joe Rokocoko and Sitiveni Sivivatu play for? Who did Fijian RAISED players Joe Tawake and Radike Samo play for? Not Fiji. When PIRA 2004 didn't capture eligibility, that gave you a chance of nabbing Sivivatu, but since they didn't play in 2005, the All Blacks nailed him.

In fact, someone like Maori/Fijian prop Deacon Manu only recently agreed to turn out for Fiji RU, after delaying for years to try to get NZ All Black selection. He did play for NZ Maori, which didn't capture his eligibility permanently, lucky for Fiji.

The FRU and the other island Unions have been trying to undo the mistake of IRB Regulation 8.2 for the last 6 years.

IMHO Jarrod Hayne is a Fijian Australian, should represent both Fiji and Australia throughout the course of his career
a) if he wants to
b) if he is good enough to be considered and

- just like Tuqiri did. If Hayne plays for Fiji, he could stand down from rep football for two years until he competed for Aus selection.

I'd like to have seen Lam get more opportunities to play at an elite test level, whether it was with PNG, Aus or a PI team.

BTW Tonie Carroll is a legend with every right to play for both NZ and Australia. A RL Pioneer.

 

[screeny]

Lote loved captaining and playing for Fiji, but he only went after he had been assured by Wayne Bennett that it would not affect his chances of playing for Qld and Australia.

If the One Nation brigade had their way, all it would mean is Aus born/raised players of Fijian descent like Hayne, Sims and co will turn down the chance to play for Fiji, and Fiji Bati will suffer as a result.

That's a price worth paying for enduring credibility.

If players eligible for both are forced to choose, those who choose Australia will have to compete with the talent pool for a jumper; those who choose Fiji will get an int'l career more easily.

This subject really, really polarises opinion. Personally, I cannot see how anyone would want players representing two countries - it's anathema to my viiews on int'l sport - but in your case you cannot see how anyone would want the best players turning out for a country, even if only for a brief period of time.

 

[phonetic]

I tend to side with Screeny here. Although the problem is the lack of quality matches these nations play would be a huge deterrant for kids who are making the decision.

If there were a more comprehensive international calendar, including matches between Australia/NZ/GB and the islands, more and more kids of ethnic background would be choosing to represent their nation.

It's a catch 22. International competition won't improve without players sticking to their nominated countries. And players won't stick to their nominated countries if that country isn't playing any competitive fixtures.

 

[ali]

The problem as i see it is the qualifiers are still part of this world cup, so if he wants to play for Fiji in the qualifiers, then he must stick with them for the world cup. The other problem is he is such a good players, if he gets them into the cup and then abandons them, Fiji will be severly weakened come world cup finals time.

 

[The Observer]

That's a price worth paying for enduring credibility.

If one has to continually follow others' dodgy actions to get their approval, they don't have any credibility.

If players eligible for both are forced to choose, those who choose Australia will have to compete with the talent pool for a jumper; those who choose Fiji will get an int'l career more easily.

This subject really, really polarises opinion. Personally, I cannot see how anyone would want players representing two countries - it's anathema to my viiews on int'l sport - but in your case you cannot see how anyone would want the best players turning out for a country, even if only for a brief period of time.

I understand the way you think, you come from a thing about being passionate for your home country which is the UK/GB/England.

This subject really polarises opinion for people who don't get multiple eligibility are born - often who grow up in one country, whose family all come from that country, and only feel attached to it. I can see you can't understand the people that are different to you, but for people to assume that everybody has had the same background and think the same way about eligibility is, at the least, insensitive to people of mixed backgrounds, ancestry or heritage.

Let me give you an analogy that might make the issue easier to understand - with respect to your own idendity, do you identify more, do you feel closer to your father's side of the family or your mother's side?

You don't have to answer it, its a rhetorical question, but it's there to give you a better way to think about the issue, about what goes through these player's heads. You wouldn't force Tuqiri to choose his father over his mother, or vice versa - similarly, why should he choose sporting allegiance to, and thus play for, either Aus or Fiji over the other?

 

[The Observer]

The problem as i see it is the qualifiers are still part of this world cup, so if he wants to play for Fiji in the qualifiers, then he must stick with them for the world cup. The other problem is he is such a good players, if he gets them into the cup and then abandons them, Fiji will be severly weakened come world cup finals time.

Well I agree with you on both counts. If Hayne opts for Fiji in the Qualifiers, I hope he sticks with them for the course until RLWC 2008.

 

[winnyason]

the only way to keep players loyal to pacific nations, is establish a expanded tri series which already includes france in 2009, but pacific team imagine the likes of naquima, gene, moi moi. this is a big incentive for players.

 

[bender]

That's a price worth paying for enduring credibility.

I am not saying i necessarilly agree with observer, but i think the "enduring credibility" is a load of rubbish. The only credibility it loses is a few internet posters who let some union internet trolls get under their skin. At the end of the day, the majority of people couldnt care less who plays for who. They only care about seeing good close games. They couldnt care that Adrian Lam was brought up in Australia. They couldnt care that several kiwis were born in Australia. Hell, NSW couldnt care that Peter Sterling was born in NSW. Provided that you set the rules and stick to them, the sport has credibility. The WC would have massive credibility if Tonga won a game against England, even if none of their squad actually played there. As oppossed to an all home based Tongan side getting flogged by 100 points.

Even the ridiculous 5 home based players compulsory inclusion rule which applies for all sides with the exception of New Zealand and possibly France. does not take away credibility of the competition. Most people dont even know or care about the rule. This tournament will be credibile and will succeed, if one thing happens - It must get on television. Once it does that, the ratings will take care of itself. I cannot believe that qualifiers have already started and they are not on Foxtel. It is to hard for the RL admin to arrange for proper quality camera recording of the matches and for this to be presented as a package to Foxtel. It isnt to hard for organisers of World series Poker, International Quad Racing, Sheep dog trials, or many other sports, but it is too hard for Rugby League administrators. IMO, as soon as this world cup gets on television (qualifiers included), it will get instant ratings, credibility and interest and its long term success will be ensured.

Back to the topic of international footballers, I strongly believe that a draft style system needs to be implemented. I believe in one nation for life, because it strengthens the weaker teams. But i also think that it should be a condition of registering an NRL or ESL contract that they be made available to their nation. I also think that players who have not represented at international level and who are selected by the lesser nations, should not be allowed to turn this down. This is harsh, but it is the only way that the lesser nations will grow to compete with the professional countries. It is a card hard facts of life that no matter how good the development work of the lesser countries is (France and maybe PNG aside), there is no way that they can compete with Australia. They need ancestor players for at least the next 20 years. When combined witht he one nation for life, this would result in competive minor teams and is the only way, to get more than half a dozen competive teams in the short to medium term.

 

[screeny]

If one has to continually follow others' dodgy actions to get their approval, they don't have any credibility.

But it's not following for the sake of following, it would be RL showing a sign of increasing maturity. Swap clubs, not countries.

I understand the way you think, you come from a thing about being passionate for your home country which is the UK/GB/England.

This subject really polarises opinion for people who don't get multiple eligibility are born - often who grow up in one country, whose family all come from that country, and only feel attached to it. I can see you can't understand the people that are different to you, but for people to assume that everybody has had the same background and think the same way about eligibility is, at the least, insensitive to people of mixed backgrounds, ancestry or heritage.

Hang on a minute....don't go patronising me on this subject as though I'm a moron. I am well aware of the issues. Do you think all - I'm sure some do - of these dual eligibility players are torn between patriotism? Of course not, it's their careers they're thinking about, and the chance to get involved in a great life experience, i.e. the WC.

Let me give you an analogy that might make the issue easier to understand - with respect to your own idendity, do you identify more, do you feel closer to your father's side of the family or your mother's side?

You don't have to answer it, its a rhetorical question, but it's there to give you a better way to think about the issue, about what goes through these player's heads. You wouldn't force Tuqiri to choose his father over his mother, or vice versa - similarly, why should he choose sporting allegiance to, and thus play for, either Aus or Fiji over the other?

Thanks for explaining it! Of course I understand the issue. I. like most people I'm sure, can represent two countries, but to answer your question I feel English, not solely because of my parentage but because I grew up there and was born there.

 

[The Observer]

But it's not following for the sake of following, it would be RL showing a sign of increasing maturity. Swap clubs, not countries.

It might as well be following for the sake of it. Your whole rationale is based on meeting other's expectations and coming into line with the practices of other sports rather than being based on a) reflecting modern society or b) a clearly, independently defined, principled ethos or rationale.

If anything, the kind of decision making your suggesting would be a sign of our sport's immaturity.

Hang on a minute....don't go patronising me on this subject as though I'm a moron. I am well aware of the issues.

I gave a analogy which might be useful for a lot of people who aren't directly affected by the issue, there was no attempt to be patronising. w/r/t being aware of the issues, I think you have you can identify the issues but you have no understanding of them.

Do you think all - I'm sure some do - of these dual eligibility players are torn between patriotism? Of course not, it's their careers they're thinking about, and the chance to get involved in a great life experience, i.e. the WC.

On this point, you're right. Some players do think about patriotism and allegiance, though for many they are thinking career or opportunity. That being said, a player can do even if they only turn out for one test team. I'm waiting to see you give the green light to a double standard here.

Do you suggest every player some test of a commitment, of loyalty, before they are allowed turn out for a representative team? What do you suggest that might be? :roll:

Thanks for explaining it! Of course I understand the issue.

Now who's being patronising?

I. like most people I'm sure, can represent two countries, but to answer your question I feel English, not solely because of my parentage but because I grew up there and was born there.

As a minor quibble, I strongly doubt most people connected to RL have ancestry/heritage/background in, or as you reduce it to, can represent, more than one country. What the % is is an aside and a different issue anyway.

Your stance about your is totally valid, its not for me to question and nor would I. I don't think your particular makeup, mine or anyone else's makeup in particular needs to brought up as evidence to justify a stance on eligibility.

FWIW my ancestry/heritage/background in more than one country. In sport, I be eligible to represent more than one national team, and I would see that as my inalienable right to do so.

As I've said, the last paragraph smacks to me of someone not understanding the implications of the eligibility outside the narrow example of sport.