Losing players to our rivals ...

[Mr Mwenda]

Does England never get any back from over the dyke? Might be mistaken but weren't Morgan and Underhill in Wales at some stage?

[Raggs]

Does England never get any back from over the dyke? Might be mistaken but weren't Morgan and Underhill in Wales at some stage?

Underhill was there for university, but playing for Ospreys (I think) definitely wouldn't have hurt his development.

[Puja]

Does England never get any back from over the dyke? Might be mistaken but weren't Morgan and Underhill in Wales at some stage?

Underhill was developed in Gloucester's academy and then went to university in Cardiff before getting picked up by the Ospreys. Morgan was developed in Wales if he was developed anywhere, but he was more of a late bloomer than an academy product. The Welsh could have a case for being irked at the Vunipolae - raised and initially schooled in Wales before leaving for prestigious rugby playing private secondary school in England.

Puja

[Scrumhead]

Also AFAIK, both would only ever have been eligible for Wales on residency.

[Stom]

Dombrandt played for wales u20s. Because he was there at the time. Just like Moriarty and England.

[Scrumhead]

Yes, but Dombrandt wasn’t tied to an English club.

[PoolerSaint]

The U20s are a vehicle for developing players to play for the national side. The purpose must be to select players who want to play for England at the highest level. What is the point of investing time and effort in a player that wont commit themselves to the national side?
I think young adults at 18/19 can make a choice.
It would also stop the absurdity of a situation like Ross Moriarty who played for England U20s when it was patently obvious he only ever wanted to play for Wales.

From a Welsh perspective I get the Moriarty point but on the other hand you have someone like Dombrant playing for Wales U20's when he was never actually qualified for Wales.
You always get a crossover of English players at Welsh University's and Welsh players in England (someone like Sam Moore I guess). At that level it should be all about player development, I'm sure Dombrant would state how beneficial that stint with Wales at U20's level was to his personal development.


Sent from my SNE-LX1 using Tapatalk

[Stom]

Yes, but Dombrandt wasn’t tied to an English club.

I don’t understand your point here? Moriarty wasn’t tied to a welsh club. Lee Dickson player for Scotland u20s.

There are lots of examples. It happens.

This case is different. Though not as bad as most.

[Scrumhead]

My point was that the Welsh U20s was Dombrandt’s best shot at getting picked up because he hadn’t come through the academy system.

No club (Welsh or English) had put significant time and money into his development. If anything Cardiff Met probably deserve the most credit for his pre-Quins career. Gloucester and the RFU had much more of an influence in Moriarty’s development and opportunities.

[fivepointer]

My point was that Moriarty shouldn't have played for England U20s as he had no intention of playing for the senior side. He was always going to try and play for Wales, irrespective of the fact he was in the Gloucester academy. Dombrandt shouldn't have got a game just because he was studying in Wales.
My feeling is that the U20s are a pathway to the full senior side and only those players who have a commitment to go down that route should play.
Most youngsters at 18-20 have important, potentially life defining decisions to make in their education and employment. Young rugby players are no different and should by that stage know which country they want to represent.
As far as the Fiji situation is concerned, I dont see a problem in exempting tier 2 nations in some form.

[Stom]

I’m glad the unions are the ones who decide this, not you. Without the chance to play for the other side’s u20s, these players would lose development. The unions have had a tacit agreement to select them no matter, but that might fall apart if Wales get more aggressive in their strategy. Which might see some youngsters lost to the pro game.

Which is a shame.

[Digby]

Hell, Spain got kicked out of the last RWC cause they accidentally picked someone who had played U20s for France in a qualifying match, despite him being actively Spanish.

Spain couldn't have cocked this area of administration up more had they employed Chris Grayling to manage the process. For myself I remain shocked given the scale of Spain's failings they weren't more heavily punished.

[Raggs]

My point was that Moriarty shouldn't have played for England U20s as he had no intention of playing for the senior side. He was always going to try and play for Wales, irrespective of the fact he was in the Gloucester academy. Dombrandt shouldn't have got a game just because he was studying in Wales.
My feeling is that the U20s are a pathway to the full senior side and only those players who have a commitment to go down that route should play.
Most youngsters at 18-20 have important, potentially life defining decisions to make in their education and employment. Young rugby players are no different and should by that stage know which country they want to represent.
As far as the Fiji situation is concerned, I dont see a problem in exempting tier 2 nations in some form.

OK, if you can now define which are tier 2 nations and what makes them so?

And by exempting, how's that work? Tier 2 nations players, can play for another nations u20s and not get locked in? Or they can play for their own and not get locked in?

As for all these decisions made by 18-20 year olds, nearly every single one of them is changeable with regards to education and employment.