RugbyRebels

Until the regs are tightened up this is something we're going to have to live with.

Not sure how Randall qualifies. He was born in England to English parents. He did live in Wales from 4 to 17 and represented them at U16 but i dont think that in itself would be sufficient. Grandparent perhaps?

To be totally clear, I’ve got no issue with Sheedy’s call up. In fact, it will be nice to see another actual Welshman playing for Wales.

I’m still sore about Jonny Williams as I think we’d shown enough interest for him to know he was on the England radar, but at least he had a very direct connection via his Dad.

The likes of Tompkins and Rowlands irritate me though. Apparently Tompkins had no idea he was eligible until he was approached. That just feels wrong. Rowlands would probably never have made an England squad, but that’s not the point.

While Randall clearly has a connection to Wales he is not Welsh and never has been. Pivac needs to Foxtrot Oscar.

I have no problem with them taking Randall. It'll stop people talking about him and narrow the focus for our backup 9. And it also shows that the Welsh 9s can't actually be that good if they're seriously looking at a guy in the conversation to be our 6th best scrummie...

Scrumhead wrote:To be totally clear, I’ve got no issue with Sheedy’s call up. In fact, it will be nice to see another actual Welshman playing for Wales.

I’m still sore about Jonny Williams as I think we’d shown enough interest for him to know he was on the England radar, but at least he had a very direct connection via his Dad.

The likes of Tompkins and Rowlands irritate me though. Apparently Tompkins had no idea he was eligible until he was approached. That just feels wrong. Rowlands would probably never have made an England squad, but that’s not the point.

While Randall clearly has a connection to Wales he is not Welsh and never has been. Pivac needs to Foxtrot Oscar.

Rowlands has a Welsh dad, hardly seems like much of a poach, considering it's likely his dad was the one who introduced him to rugby.

Scrumhead wrote:The reason any Worcester or Sale players have been left out is the final league fixture.

I fully expect Lawrence, Hill and at least Tom Curry to be added when the squad is updated in a couple of weeks.

I wouldn't be surprised to see no Sale players added to the squad for the foreseeable future with the number of positive test results coming out of their squad. Whether they currently test negative or not is a player from an infected squad (with a possibility infecting the wider squad) a chance Uncle Eddie is willing to take.

Stom wrote:I have no problem with them taking Randall. It'll stop people talking about him and narrow the focus for our backup 9. And it also shows that the Welsh 9s can't actually be that good if they're seriously looking at a guy in the conversation to be our 6th best scrummie...

Given who we've been selecting as our 1st and 2nd choices for the last few years, you can probably understand the Welsh not giving England's view of our SH pecking order much consideration.

Should pulling on an England shirt in a game against the Barbarians count?

It doesnt currently but if you're willing to represent a country in a show piece game at the national stadium shouldnt that count for something?

There's no easy answers to eligibility. Solve one issue and you likely create another.

fivepointer wrote:Until the regs are tightened up this is something we're going to have to live with.

Not sure how Randall qualifies. He was born in England to English parents. He did live in Wales from 4 to 17 and represented them at U16 but i dont think that in itself would be sufficient. Grandparent perhaps?

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rug ... d-19007211

Wales Online reckon that living in a country for 10 years makes him eligible under IRB rules. Mind, they also quote him when moving to Bristol as saying, “I had a great time in Wales and especially at Llandovery where they helped me develop a lot. But I’m English, so I don’t feel like a traitor for moving back to England,” which bodes well.

Puja

fivepointer wrote:Should pulling on an England shirt in a game against the Barbarians count?

It doesnt currently but if you're willing to represent a country in a show piece game at the national stadium shouldnt that count for something?

There's no easy answers to eligibility. Solve one issue and you likely create another.

I think it should. It's at least on a par with playing England A in terms of representative rugby. Mind, I'm still annoyed that Haley playing for England A vs South Africa A didn't tie him to England because, despite England A (fine, "Saxons" ) being our A side and thus our capture team, South Africa A somehow wasn't South Africa's A side - that was the Emerging Springboks, who hadn't played a game since 2012 and had no games scheduled.

Not that I particularly *want* Haley, but it's a complete mockery.

Puja

This is my point. The rules are ridiculous and under Pivac, Wales seem particularly eager to exploit them.

Also for the record, I feel the same whenever we ‘poach’ players in dubious circumstances.

Once he's moved back to England, he loses his residency claims doesn't he?

Raggs wrote:Once he's moved back to England, he loses his residency claims doesn't he?

Not if he's got 10 years' continuous residency, I believe. I don't have a huge problem with that rule - if someone's lived in a country for 10 years, it's fair to say they've got a connection to the place.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Raggs wrote:Once he's moved back to England, he loses his residency claims doesn't he?

Not if he's got 10 years' continuous residency, I believe. I don't have a huge problem with that rule - if someone's lived in a country for 10 years, it's fair to say they've got a connection to the place.

Puja

Never heard of that before. No issue with it either. I think that means i still qualify for Israel... The dream of being an international is still on!

Raggs wrote:

Puja wrote:

Raggs wrote:Once he's moved back to England, he loses his residency claims doesn't he?

Not if he's got 10 years' continuous residency, I believe. I don't have a huge problem with that rule - if someone's lived in a country for 10 years, it's fair to say they've got a connection to the place.

Puja

Never heard of that before. No issue with it either. I think that means i still qualify for Israel... The dream of being an international is still on!

https://www.world.rugby/handbook/regula ... es?lang=en

https://www.rugby.org.il/

Puja

I think what they're still really looking for to sign off on is a justifiable/authentic link to a country. The code is more what you'd call guidelines than actual rules.

fivepointer wrote:Until the regs are tightened up this is something we're going to have to live with.

Not sure how Randall qualifies. He was born in England to English parents. He did live in Wales from 4 to 17 and represented them at U16 but i dont think that in itself would be sufficient. Grandparent perhaps?

I have no worries about Randall qualifying for Wales having been raised there if that's where his loyalties are then he should represent them. If he's undecided we should cap him and keep hold of him for England. He's an exciting prospect playing regularly at a good level. He may or may not step up to international standard but we should allow Wales to poach another one and hinder another of our clubs who are being targeted by the WRU who are promising international caps for players coming across to the regions.

Sinkler having a tough time with wasps third choice loosehead

padprop wrote:Sinkler having a tough time with wasps third choice loosehead

West is our best loosehead scrummager though.

Raggs wrote:

padprop wrote:Sinkler having a tough time with wasps third choice loosehead

West is our best loosehead scrummager though.

Should also point out that Bristol have lost a lock, so will have less power coming throuhg.