[
TONY JOHNSON
]
TONY JOHNSON IS A COMMENTATOR AND PRESENTER FOR SKY TV’S RUGBY COVERAGE IN NEW ZEALAND.
Australia will only consider foreign-based players who have in
the past been contracted for seven years or more to the ARU,
and have played at least 60 tests.’
in a spin
20
// NZ RUGBY WORLD // JUNE/JULY 2015
THEY SAY IN COMEDY, timing is
everything.
The announcement of Australian rugby’s
plans to loosen its restrictions on the
eligibility of overseas players for the
Wallabies was delivered with the sort of
timing the late Robin Williams would have
been proud of.
The rugby public had hardly begun to
digest the revelation of a $6.7 million loss
for the year, when the so called 60/7
protocol snatched all attention away
from the ARUs wretched financial plight.
It was a brilliant piece of spin doctoring,
and on the surface, a policy with some
merit.
Rather than open the gates completely,
and treat each case on an ad hoc basis, as in
South Africa, Australia will only consider
foreign-based players who have in the past
been contracted for seven years or more to
the ARU, and have played at least 60 tests.
It will apply to few players, enough to
bring Toulon stars Drew Mitchell and
Matt Giteau back into consideration,
Japan-based George Smith too at a pinch,
but not the man Wallaby coach Michael
Cheika most wants, Leinster lock
Kane Douglas, a man with just 14 tests
to his name.
It seemed a practical part solution to
a massive problem, and immediately the
question was asked why New Zealand
shouldn’t follow suit.
It won’t be needed this year, the rugby
union has all the players the All Black
selectors wanted under lock and key until
after the World Cup, but with so many
planning to up sticks after that, surely a
policy with such limited parameters might
warrant at least a cursory consideration?
With the likes of Conrad Smith, Ma’a
Nonu, Colin Slade, Dan Carter, Tom Taylor
and Jeremy Thrush all departing and
others likely to either follow or retire,
would some of that experience not to
mention proven ability be invaluable in
what will be a period of transition?
Maybe, but NZR’s response seems to be
a blanket ‘don’t even go there’.
The biggest concern is that if they even
slightly open the door, it will be the thin
end of the wedge, and what the headline
writers repeatedly, so lazily, refer to as an
exodus, really will become an exodus. It’ll
be last one out, turn off the lights.
Certainly South Africa, with the Rand at
low value, have had huge problems keeping
a lot of their journeymen, let alone their
marquee players in front of their home
audience.
They have also struck difficulties over
the availability of their internationals,
most notably Fourie du Preez, who has
been restricted to home tests by his
Japanese club, while French-based players
like Bryan Habana have been forced to fly
back to Europe in between rounds of the
Rugby Championship, which is hardly
conducive to peak performance.
But there is also the issue of protecting
the integrity of the competitions below
test level that are such an integral part
of the game.
Start allowing the headline grabbers to
ply their trade in another competition and
what are you saying to the companies who
put good money into Super Rugby and the
ITM Cup?
It seems in South Africa they have the
money to bankroll the competitions, if not
keep their best players, but what about
Australia?
Despite only two years ago hosting a
Lions tour, their finances are clearly not
in great shape.
They have spent endless amounts of
money on big names from rugby league,
while a lot has been spent at Super Rugby
level topping up their teams with imports
from New Zealand, South Africa and
the Pacific Islands.
While being a much needed addition
to the rugby landscape, their domestic
championship is not making money, and
they had to fork out $3.5m to keep the
Melbourne Rebels afloat.
They have sponsors, but nothing of the
magnitude of the Adidas, SKY and AIG
deals that keep the NZR head comfortably
above water.
And now, by opening the door for some
of their best players to be chosen from
overseas, are they had not devaluing
Super Rugby, the product responsible for
a massive percentage of their income?
Right now the talk is all about Giteau,
and maybe after his heroics for Toulon
in the European final, Mitchell.
But next year it will also be about Adam
Ashley Cooper, Will Genia, and maybe
James Horwill.
Clearly it is a slippery slope and one that
NZ rugby bosses do not want to put a foot on.
The NZR stance may not be
unanimously popular, but it doesn’t take
a lot of spin to sell it.
OPEN DOOR
Matt Giteau may be
the surprise inclusion
in the Wallaby World
Cup squad.
1A 1st XV Rugby
Every Sunday | Rātapu
1:00pm
