RugbyRebels

rowan wrote:Whereas your view of this is evidently that there is never anything wrong with New Zealand poaching Pacific Island rugby talent, regardless how blatant the case may be, because the Pacific Islands are apparently indebted to New Zealand and should be grovelling at their knees with obeisance and gratitude.

Let's just say, I have a lot more respect for Rattue's perspective . . .

That speaks volumes.

Numbers wrote:

rowan wrote:Whereas your view of this is evidently that there is never anything wrong with New Zealand poaching Pacific Island rugby talent, regardless how blatant the case may be, because the Pacific Islands are apparently indebted to New Zealand and should be grovelling at their knees with obeisance and gratitude.

Let's just say, I have a lot more respect for Rattue's perspective . . .

That speaks volumes.

& so does the attitude being expressed by at least three people here, including yourself.

rowan wrote:

Numbers wrote:

rowan wrote:Whereas your view of this is evidently that there is never anything wrong with New Zealand poaching Pacific Island rugby talent, regardless how blatant the case may be, because the Pacific Islands are apparently indebted to New Zealand and should be grovelling at their knees with obeisance and gratitude.

Let's just say, I have a lot more respect for Rattue's perspective . . .

That speaks volumes.

& so does the attitude being expressed by at least three people here, including yourself.

Stop being a bellend then.

rowan wrote:Whereas your view of this is evidently that there is never anything wrong with New Zealand poaching Pacific Island rugby talent, regardless how blatant the case may be, because the Pacific Islands are apparently indebted to New Zealand and should be grovelling at their knees with obeisance and gratitude.

You want to point out where anyone's said that? You're literally the only one here who has. Keep reaching for that star bro, you'll make it one day!

If that's not what you're saying then you'll have to make yourself clearer, because what is for certain is that you've taken issue with the fact Fifita has clearly been poached, describing the notion as "presumptive," though he went to New Zealand with a Tongan high school team and was offered a scholarship in New Zealand while there, which led directly to his move to New Zealand and subsequent All Blacks career. That's about as clear a case of poaching as you can get. I've pointed out several times that this is the exception, rather than the rule, where Pacific Island players in the All Blacks are concerned. But you object to the idea of Fifita being poached and tell us he's free to make his own choice. Well so was Shane Howarth and the rest of the Grannygaters. I'm sure it had nothing to do with the 200K quid he made in the process. Once again, Fifita is not the victim here; the tiny Pacific Island nation which produced him is. But Zero thinks the islands should be thankful cos so many New Zealand Pacific Islanders opt to play for their ancestral lands. We know that this is not about money, of course. It relates to an inherent cultural attachment to one's ancestral homeland. I don't think there's ever been a single case where a New Zealander of Pacific Island extraction has turned down the All Blacks to go off and play for Samoa or Tonga. So they are certainly not robbing New Zealand. As for Chris Rattue, I'm not particularly familiar with him, as stated earlier, but if he's bringing the plight of the islands to the public's attention, kudos to the guy, and shame on those who'd find fault in that.

rowan wrote:If that's not what you're saying then you'll have to make yourself clearer, because what is for certain is that you've taken issue with the fact Fifita has clearly been poached, describing the notion as "presumptive," though he went to New Zealand with a Tongan high school team and was offered a scholarship in New Zealand while there, which led directly to his move to New Zealand and subsequent All Blacks career. That's about as clear a case of poaching as you can get. I've pointed out several times that this is the exception, rather than the rule, where Pacific Island players in the All Blacks are concerned. But you object to the idea of Fifita being poached and tell us he's free to make his own choice. Well so was Shane Howarth and the rest of the Grannygaters. I'm sure it had nothing to do with the 200K quid he made in the process. Once again, Fifita is not the victim here; the tiny Pacific Island nation which produced him is. But Zero thinks the islands should be thankful cos so many New Zealand Pacific Islanders opt to play for their ancestral lands. We know that this is not about money, of course. It relates to an inherent cultural attachment to one's ancestral homeland. I don't think there's ever been a single case where a New Zealander of Pacific Island extraction has turned down the All Blacks to go off and play for Samoa or Tonga. So they are certainly not robbing New Zealand. As for Chris Rattue, I'm not particularly familiar with him, as stated earlier, but if he's bringing the plight of the islands to the public's attention, kudos to the guy, and shame on those who'd find fault in that.

lol.

Also, apparently ambiguous as fuck:

cashead wrote:Or maybe these brown boys and girl can play for whomever they fucking well are eligible for, and not have a bunch of white motherfuckers running around handwringing about it, like they've been stripped of their agency and shanghai'd into a black jersey.

You sound like you're confusing the word 'poached' with 'kidnapped'.

FFS...

Mikey is from England and therefore likely an expert on poaching. Lets hear him out.

If you handed Mikey the truth, he would probably drop it, or maybe fling it into the stands.

morepork wrote:If you handed Mikey the truth, he would probably drop it, or maybe fling it into the stands.

the other option is run with it then refuse to pass the truth on...

I don't even know how to respond to that without prompting some cunt to start quoting Al Pacino.

Mikey Brown wrote:I don't even know how to respond to that without prompting some cunt to start quoting Al Pacino.

Not Jack Nicholson?

Damn. That one is better.

That Rowan equates high school scholarships with the grannygate situation shows how desperate he is to make a point that doesn't really exist. Shane Hogarth was all black number 939 before he moved to Wales.

That Canta-brian dismisses the obvious comparison between the Grannygate situation and high school scholarships shows how desperate he is to deny the obvious. The comparison relates to personal choice, not prior test caps, as anyone can see.

Fifita's was as clear a case of poaching as you can get. It doesn't get any more blatant than offering a teenager a contract when he's touring with a foreign high school team. If that's not poaching, absolutely nothing is.

What contract?

cashead wrote:What contract?

"Fifita was born and raised in Tonga. He attended Tonga College and toured New Zealand with Tonga Schools, which is when he was spotted by Tamaki College, who offered him a rugby scholarship.

I've never heard of a scholarship that didn't involve paperwork and signiatures. Looks like you're down to the splitting hairs approach now.

Are you honestly trying to suggest that a scholarship and enrolment forms are tantamount to a professional sporting contract?

cashead wrote:Are you honestly trying to suggest that a scholarship and enrolment forms are tantamount to a professional sporting contract?

It depends on the type of scholarship, actually. But, again, you're splitting hairs, because you are so entrenched in your denialist stance on what was about as blatant an example of poaching as it is possible to get.

rowan wrote:

cashead wrote:Are you honestly trying to suggest that a scholarship and enrolment forms are tantamount to a professional sporting contract?

It depends on the type of scholarship, actually. But, again, you're splitting hairs, because you are so entrenched in your denialist stance on what was about as blatant an example of poaching as it is possible to get.

Yeah, because all talented high school rugby players will definitely end up being all blacks.

Again back to original point re Shane Howarth. Don't conflate the 2. 1 was an established international player. The other was a kid who may not have ever made it in Rugby, but would have got a high quality education regardless.

More splitting hairs - and taking comments out of context. The comparison to Howarth was to illustrate the fact that a player being entitled to make his own choice might not always justify the situation itself. If that conflation confuses you, you're probably just not very smart. In fact, you also do not seem to have a particularly solid grasp of the English language. Poaching is not defined by the players' chances of making it to the top. It's defined by a player being enticed away from one team, club, province or nation by another. That's all. So Fifita's case is about as clear-cut as they come.

I would never presume to consider myself smart. I guess the proof of the pudding is in the eating in that regard.

canta_brian wrote:I would never presume to consider myself smart. I guess the proof of the pudding is in the eating in that regard.

I'd say you're holding your own ...

Scuzzaman's endorsement speaks volumes