General Rugby Discussion II

Squidgy Black

Buer wrote: »

Of course but have they even signed new contracts of late?

Otherwise it's all a bit over the top. They wouldn't be the first Fijians to walk away from the national set up whilst in their prime.

Yeah they both signed new contracts at the start of the season

Buer

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Yeah they both signed new contracts at the start of the season

Had a quick look, Nagusa signed it in April 2017 Nadolo signed his 5 months ago.

I really don't think the two are linked, particularly with Nagusa having signed the extension to his deal almost 2 years ago.

errlloyd

Buer wrote: »

Had a quick look, Nagusa signed it in April 2017 Nadolo signed his 5 months ago.

I really don't think the two are linked, particularly with Nagusa having signed the extension to his deal almost 2 years ago.

His previous deal with February 2015, so Nagusa would be negotiating a new contract around now. Spring time every odd numbered year it would seem.

sydthebeat

AdamD wrote: »

If Ireland called Zebo up tomorrow he'd show up, that's the difference.
.

the problem for zebo is he CANNOT show up if he was called to irish training camps......

thats actually the whole nub of the issue

Stheno

sydthebeat wrote: »

the problem for zebo is he CANNOT show up if he was called to irish training camps......

thats actually the whole nub of the issue

Has he actually said this?

If it's true what's up with all his whinging?

Buer

errlloyd wrote: »

His previous deal with February 2015, so Nagusa would be negotiating a new contract around now. Spring time every odd numbered year it would seem.

His current deal runs until the end of next season when he's going to be 33. I don't think he'd be looking to be involved with Fiji much more at this point anyway. His involvement with Fiji was always patchy and he was a back up at the last RWC.

Nadolo is 31 and is Fijian by birth only. I doubt there was too much convincing required for him to retire from international duty (if any) given the time and absences required to be involved.

I just reckon there's not enough evidence for people to blame the owner of Montpellier for two lads retiring from Fijian duty when they're approaching their final couple of seasons and have been capped regularly to date during their time with Montpellier.

Buer

Stheno wrote: »

Has he actually said this?

If it's true what's up with all his whinging?

Irish training camps are outside the designated international windows. Clubs are under no obligation to release players for them (and don't).

This is possibly the single biggest factor in Irish players abroad not being selected. Their are several meet ups for the squad throughout the year. There are also some test matches that fall outside the window (usually the first or last in autumn when unions try to squeeze in an additional game). Foreign based players cannot participate in these matches either unless released.

For Zebo, he could not have joined the squad for their August or Christmas training camps nor could he have been available for the Italian game in Chicago.

sydthebeat

Stheno wrote: »

what's up with all his whinging?

self promotion and column inches

Former Former

Buer wrote: »

Of course but have they even signed new contracts of late?

Otherwise it's all a bit over the top. They wouldn't be the first Fijians to walk away from the national set up whilst in their prime.

Pretty much this. Cf; Nacewa, Isa, half the Top 14 and most of the Wallaby squad.

We're looking at it through Irish eyes. It's easy to be full of national pride when you're getting paid loads of cash, you're winning trophies and get to travel the world in luxury.

After a few years of playing for Fiji, your national fervour might start to wane.

irishbucsfan

Buer wrote: »

Is there actually confirmation that Altrad had anything to do with these retirements or is it a complete assumption?

It’s a complete assumption based on zero evidence and little knowledge of the individuals involved

Bazzo

Buer wrote: »

His current deal runs until the end of next season when he's going to be 33. I don't think he'd be looking to be involved with Fiji much more at this point anyway. His involvement with Fiji was always patchy and he was a back up at the last RWC.

Nadolo is 31 and is Fijian by birth only. I doubt there was too much convincing required for him to retire from international duty (if any) given the time and absences required to be involved.

I just reckon there's not enough evidence for people to blame the owner of Montpellier for two lads retiring from Fijian duty when they're approaching their final couple of seasons and have been capped regularly to date during their time with Montpellier.

I follow Nadolo on social media and he spends an awful lot of time liking and linking things about Fijian rugby, T2 rugby etc, he seems to me to be fiercely proud of his heritage and Fijian rugby in general.

Clegg

Six Nations rugby has rejected the proposal of a 12 team world league and the mooted idea to take the Six Nations tournament off terrestrial TV. They've also rejected Pichot's idea of introducing promotion and relegation to the 6N.

Article is from the Telegraph which is behind a paywall, but here's the link anyway.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2019/02/01/six-nations-stays-terrestrial-tv-rejects-relegation/?li_source=LI&li_medium=li-recommendation-widget#comments

swiwi_

Buer wrote: »

His current deal runs until the end of next season when he's going to be 33. I don't think he'd be looking to be involved with Fiji much more at this point anyway. His involvement with Fiji was always patchy and he was a back up at the last RWC.

Nadolo is 31 and is Fijian by birth only. I doubt there was too much convincing required for him to retire from international duty (if any) given the time and absences required to be involved.

I just reckon there's not enough evidence for people to blame the owner of Montpellier for two lads retiring from Fijian duty when they're approaching their final couple of seasons and have been capped regularly to date during their time with Montpellier.

It fits with the assumed narrative that people like to have.

As an aside, on the one hand people rail against the exploitation of Fijian players, on the other hand any suggestion of a world rugby competition that includes Fiji is met with a very lukewarm response.

Can't have cake and eat it...

errlloyd

swiwi_ wrote: »

As an aside, on the one hand people rail against the exploitation of Fijian players, on the other hand any suggestion of a world rugby competition that includes Fiji is met with a very lukewarm response.

Why don't you guys take Fiji into the Rugby Championship?

troyzer

Clegg wrote: »

Six Nations rugby has rejected the proposal of a 12 team world league and the mooted idea to take the Six Nations tournament off terrestrial TV. They've also rejected Pichot's idea of introducing promotion and relegation to the 6N.

Article is from the Telegraph which is behind a paywall, but here's the link anyway.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2019/02/01/six-nations-stays-terrestrial-tv-rejects-relegation/?li_source=LI&li_medium=li-recommendation-widget#comments

Here's the text:

Controversial plans for a world league have been dealt a major blow after Ben Morel, the new chief executive of the Guinness Six ­Nations, dismissed out of hand any moves to take the championship off terrestrial television or introduce promotion and relegation.

Morel attended a meeting of leading figures in the global game in Los Angeles to receive a ­presentation by World Rugby’s vice-chairman, Agustin Pichot, on a proposal for a new annual 12-team competition to increase the value of Test rugby in the northern and southern hemispheres.

It is understood a key tenet of the proposal, which was first formulated in September in response to financial pressures being felt by unions in both hemispheres, included the introduction of promotion and relegation to the Six Nations.

The need to maximise media rights as part of a collective ­bargaining position would also jeopardise the Six Nations’ long-standing commitment to be ­broadcast on terrestrial television. The championship is currently shared between the BBC and ITV in the United Kingdom.

The Daily Telegraph revealed in November there was significant ­opposition to the plans within the Six Nations and, despite the LA ­update, which is understood to have included one concrete ­broadcasting offer, Morel’s strong stance would appear to suggest there is little hope of progress.

Backers of the plan claim that revenues could be increased by up to £10 million for each union if a global deal could be struck. ­However, Morel warned about the dangers of tinkering with the Six Nations, which he described as “peerless in the world of sport”.

“There will be no relegation mechanism, whatsoever,” said ­Morel. “It is definitely not on the agenda. It is clear that any future adaptations [to the global calendar] will need to be a substantial ­improvement on the current set up, which is successful as the latest ­autumn internationals series can attest. It would also need to fully ­consider player welfare aspects and not dilute key existing and leading competitions such as the Six ­Nations.

“I come back to the principle, there is always a temptation for any sport to build future value on ­volume. Rugby needs to be ­extremely cautious of preserving player welfare, the calendar, simple storylines. I would be a guardian of that as much as I can be.

“My immediate focus is to ­ensure the Six Nations continues to be a ­resounding success for our fans, our players, our unions as well as for our broadcast partners and sponsors and to build from firm foundations of our heritage that makes our tournament peerless.

“That is what creates the Six Nations’ value, so before you change that, you have to be very careful.”

Morel, who took up his post last November after succeeding John Feehan as Six Nations chief executive, was equally adamant about the Championship’s commitment to terrestrial television.

“It makes it extremely valuable for the Six Nations to have partners like BBC and ITV,” added Morel. “We are all building on those strong foundations but, at the same time, with that common objective of keep innovating, keep connecting with youth, free to air gives you that opportunity and not only just to talk to rugby supporters.

“It makes it quite unique that we have scarcity, appointment to watch and free-to-air coverage. I am pretty satisfied with where we are.”

Morel, a former managing director for the National Basketball Association and was a key figure in overseeing the league’s international growth, is keen to ensure that Six Nations content is available on a variety of formats in order to connect with the next generation of fans, but believes that can be achieved with a terrestrial broadcaster.

“In today’s world, even if you are free to air, people will still want to watch any quality content ­wherever they are and on whatever device,” added Morel.

“More and more, you need to make sure that with your broadcast agreement, the way you provide content can be watchable on a phone, on tablet, on TV or pay as much attention to the fan in the stadium, too. I want to make sure the Six Nations as an organisation is fan-centric, where you provide the best experience for wherever you are, whether it is in the stadium, on your sofa, on your morning commute in Rio de Janeiro. It is connecting the youth. Every year, the number of people streaming is going up.”

Morel ruled out any prospect of playing Six Nations matches in new territories, despite his ambition to grow interest in new markets such as the United States and Japan.

“There is absolutely no plan of moving games around,” he added. “The product is already pretty good so you are not going to mess around with it.”

Morel is keen to grow the women’s game and says he hopes to have a separate title sponsor in place for their Six ­Nations by 2020.

With the Championship getting underway tonight in Paris, he is also keen for more unions to host Friday night matches, which could also include Twickenham, despite the Rugby Football Union’s previous opposition to the slot.

“Friday games, for me, is paramount, but I wouldn’t do it every week,” he added.

“There is a lot of value in the tradition of two games on a Saturday, one game on a Sunday and that gives a great opportunity for the rugby supporters to travel; that unparalleled fan experiences that Six Nations brings, too. You have maintain that heritage.”

irishbucsfan

Stephen Larkham fired by Michael Cheika

sydthebeat

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Stephen Larkham fired by Michael Cheika

Not too unexpected, after the decision to retain cheika for the RWC.

The management of rugby Australia had to be seen to do something to change it up before the world cup. I see their s+C guy is gone as well

Squidgy Black

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Stephen Larkham fired by Michael Cheika

Small bit of a 'shift-left' as he's been made "national high performance coach advisor". So basically they want to save face and make some form of change before the RWC but keep him in the system and not let him go elsewhere.

irishbucsfan

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Small bit of a 'shift-left' as he's been made "national high performance coach advisor". So basically they want to save face and make some form of change before the RWC but keep him in the system and not let him go elsewhere.

He's left the setup. High performance job is with the union not with the senior team, just like Nucifora's was.

Squidgy Black

irishbucsfan wrote: »

He's left the setup. High performance job is with the union not with the senior team, just like Nucifora's was.

Yeah I understand that, just how often do you see an assistant coach leave the national side not so long after being suggested as the next head coach, but then stay as an employee of the Union.

To me it seems like a transition out of the side but keeping a hold on him for future purposes as opposed to just sacking him and him going off to another team in Super Rugby or Japan etc

irishbucsfan

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Yeah I understand that, just how often do you see an assistant coach leave the national side not so long after being suggested as the next head coach, but then stay as an employee of the Union.

To me it seems like a transition out of the side but keeping a hold on him for future purposes as opposed to just sacking him and him going off to another team in Super Rugby or Japan etc

Given they're talking about supporting him as he looks for another head coaching job, I'd imagine it's just them trying to minimise how much compensation they owe him.

Utah_Saint

I have a question about rugby boots

Leather vs Synthetic. Does it really matter for rugby boots? Also anyone here play in soccer boots? Does it matter for a back?

Squidgy Black

Utah_Saint wrote: »

I have a question about rugby boots

Leather vs Synthetic. Does it really matter for rugby boots? Also anyone here play in soccer boots? Does it matter for a back?

Most backs wear football boots. There's a handful 'rugby specific' lightweight boots but generally it's stuff like Adidas Predator, or more flashy wingers wear stuff like Nike Mercurial etc.

Leather vs Synthetic is all down to personal preference I find, most of the boots these days are synthetic of some sort apart from a handful. I'd say stick with synthetic personally, they're a lot cheaper generally, they might not last as long but you don't have to worry about keeping them clean etc.

But of course as you're a back they'll always have to be spotless....

Yeah_Right

Utah_Saint wrote: »

I have a question about rugby boots

Leather vs Synthetic. Does it really matter for rugby boots? Also anyone here play in soccer boots? Does it matter for a back?

If you're a forward, just make sure they're black. If you're back, go for something neon and garish then dye your hair and paint your nails to match them.

swiwi_

Utah_Saint wrote: »

I have a question about rugby boots

Leather vs Synthetic. Does it really matter for rugby boots? Also anyone here play in soccer boots? Does it matter for a back?

IMHO, the only important Q is moulded vs studs. Some surfaces won't let you wear metal studs. Otherwise, whether it's "soccer" vs "rugby" boots, leather vs synthetic etc, doesn't really matter.

Squidgy Black

Yeah_Right wrote: »

If you're a forward, just make sure they're black. If you're back, go for something neon and garish then dye your hair and paint your nails to match them.

Don't forget to wear white socks over your club socks too.

stephen_n

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Don't forget to wear white socks over your club socks too.

That sounds like a very Northsider thing to do.

Dickie10

has anyone noticed that general joe public seems to be kind of delighting in the fact that england beat us? it seems the idea of being number 2 or 3 in the world dosent sit well with irish public.

RobbieRuns

Dickie10 wrote: »

has anyone noticed that general joe public seems to be kind of delighting in the fact that england beat us? it seems the idea of being number 2 or 3 in the world dosent sit well with irish public.

Not sure if it is in the land of "West Brit" that you reside, but in the West of Ireland I can honestly say that I have not met one person who is happy that England beat us.... not even a hint of delight.

Dickie10

no just some people saying "ah sure theres too much talk about them, it wont do them any harm" or "ah sure thats ireland for ya , they always let you down with a bang when somethings expected" other people dont believe that the win over new zealand was that big of a deal considering south africa also bet them last year