If he's tied to SA then I find that odd. If the pro teams are signing overseas then it should be with the aim of nationalising them unless they are a proven performer that will add something to the team.
hugh_woatmeigh wrote:If he's tied to SA then I find that odd. If the pro teams are signing overseas then it should be with the aim of nationalising them unless they are a proven performer that will add something to the team.
Low cost gamble on a player type (big winger) that there is no pro ready Scottish equivalent.
I have no issue with that type of foreign signing. It's the well paid journeyman who take Scottish players places that annoy me.
So SA still have an A team, but it's officially behind that U20's, is that right? Doesn't seem quite right. If he's eligible to be a project player, excellent. If not, a big strike runner is still a good thing to have.
Actually maybe it's not that easy. For some reason or another, mostly cause I didn't want to go back to work, I looked up World Rugby's eligibility guidelines. It would seem that the mere fact of playing for SA U20 doesn't necessarily tie him to them, it really depends on who they were playing against. For him to be tied to them for good, he would have to have played against another U20 team that was also designated "Next senior" side or played in an IRB championship, or closer to home the U20 6N.
Now it appear in his case that he " He was also part of the 2014 South African Under-20 team that lost by one point in the final against England in what was then known as the IRB Junior World Championship." So that rules him out, but it seems that it can be a case by case basis depending on what team you play against as to whether you're tied in or not.
Jps wrote:Actually maybe it's not that easy. For some reason or another, mostly cause I didn't want to go back to work, I looked up World Rugby's eligibility guidelines. It would seem that the mere fact of playing for SA U20 doesn't necessarily tie him to them, it really depends on who they were playing against. For him to be tied to them for good, he would have to have played against another U20 team that was also designated "Next senior" side or played in an IRB championship, or closer to home the U20 6N.
Now it appear in his case that he " He was also part of the 2014 South African Under-20 team that lost by one point in the final against England in what was then known as the IRB Junior World Championship." So that rules him out, but it seems that it can be a case by case basis depending on what team you play against as to whether you're tied in or not.
Brandon Thomson is ineligible because he played against a designated second team for SA U20s I believe. Worth checking that one out.
Now that WR has banned the ludicrous practice of naming an age group side as a "next senior" team, they should also retrospectively release anyone captured for a nation solely by playing for such a team in the past.
______________________
Dominating the SHMB
======================
Lizard wrote:Now that WR has banned the ludicrous practice of naming an age group side as a "next senior" team, they should also retrospectively release anyone captured for a nation solely by playing for such a team in the past.
When did they do that? Cause they still list all those U20 teams as the "next" senior side on their website
Jps wrote:Actually maybe it's not that easy. For some reason or another, mostly cause I didn't want to go back to work, I looked up World Rugby's eligibility guidelines. It would seem that the mere fact of playing for SA U20 doesn't necessarily tie him to them, it really depends on who they were playing against. For him to be tied to them for good, he would have to have played against another U20 team that was also designated "Next senior" side or played in an IRB championship, or closer to home the U20 6N.
Now it appear in his case that he " He was also part of the 2014 South African Under-20 team that lost by one point in the final against England in what was then known as the IRB Junior World Championship." So that rules him out, but it seems that it can be a case by case basis depending on what team you play against as to whether you're tied in or not.
Brandon Thomson is ineligible because he played against a designated second team for SA U20s I believe. Worth checking that one out.
Yea looks like it cause he played in the RWC U20 championship for them
If so. Shrewd signing as this is the last chance to sign project players before the three year window is extended.
I do wish Ford would move on as it would open up a hooker slot at Edinburgh - if we were going to pick a project player for any position it would be hooker tbh.
To be honest I am not fussed whether he is a project player or not. Edinburgh have a reasonable SQ/NSQ ratio (7 NSQ but will be 5 as Burleigh and Bresler become SQ next season) so for me if he improves the team that's all good whether he is able to become SQ or not.
With Regards to Ford moving on that weakens Edinburgh despite his flaws. The Rambo experiment is failing and Turner, if that good would have forced his way into more gametime by now. There are also few obvious project player type signings at hookers. I've read it a few times that Ford (and Dickinson) are reportedly on pretty team friendly deals so he may not be costing too much to keep around.
I guess the same argument can be made for Glasgow, Pat and or Flynn could have been binned for a project player.
I thought for a while Mcinally was looking promisng at hooker but its hard to judge any player on the last few years at Edinburgh, bad coaching, bad style will make anyone question what the hell is going on.
McInally deserves another year only to see if Cockers can bring something out of him
