Club v Country

[auchtermuchty]

Doesn't go far enough in my opinion!

Linky (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/english/7015147.stm)

[Scaley brat]

I disagree completely mate, sooner or later the clubs must refuse to release the players to the national team.

Why should a local team such as Gloucester or Leicester or Brigend or Pontypridd give up their star players to the national squad, possibly affecting their chances of winning the league or championship. The local fans pay to see their team play not their team with the stars removed.

For example, The American national Baseball team has NO major league players. If they did no-one else would bother turning up, they'd be playing for second.
If you disagree with that statement, try looking at the olympics, the year America fielded Micheal Jordan's dream team in the Basketball, who won the gold medal....... I rest my case.

[rugby then work]

This is a difficult problem, whilst I can understand the need for sufficient time to train an England squad prior to an International it still falls to the clubs to pay the wages of those players and they expect them to be available for the large part of the season. If the £12 million package that's been suggested is true, that will go some way towards compensating the clubs financially for the loss of those players, but does not help if a club then loses a game due to lack of cover in a particular position. The wage cap stops teams having too large a squad and forces clubs to rely on players with less talent to back up the 'stars' who are away on international duty.

I still think it’s mad that the club game continues on the weekends of international fixtures, a slightly extended season would sort out that problem. Obviously that’s not so easy for tournaments such as the world cup.

[docbombhead]

I disagree completely mate, sooner or later the clubs must refuse to release the players to the national team.

Why should a local team such as Gloucester or Leicester or Brigend or Pontypridd give up their star players to the national squad, possibly affecting their chances of winning the league or championship. The local fans pay to see their team play not their team with the stars removed.

For example, The American national Baseball team has NO major league players. If they did no-one else would bother turning up, they'd be playing for second.
If you disagree with that statement, try looking at the olympics, the year America fielded Micheal Jordan's dream team in the Basketball, who won the gold medal....... I rest my case.

Since the Celtic Warriors got disbanded (Moffat you w**ker) Bridgend or Ponty don't have any internationals playing for them !! Infact the Celtic Crusaders RL have bigger gates than the Ravens now.

[Ex-Stacker]

I agree with Scaley Brat. Why should we, the supporters, pay good money to follow our team when the majority of the time, we won't be able to watch our best players?

What excuse have England got this W/C? They've had the players since July, and the net result has been boring,limited & ineffective rugby.
I appreciate that everyone wants their national team to do well, but as I'm not a rich moron uninterested in the grass roots game, I'm rarely going to be able to justify the expense of an international ticket (if I can acquire one), so my money goes into watching Sale. At the moment, we've got 10 players away on international duty (Cueto, Sheridan, White,Lamont,Lawson, Lobbe sr, Lobbe jr,Seveal'i,Bruno, Chabal) and we still have to pay full price to watch a match, but I would rather watch a weakened Sale team than an unimaginative national team (even though I will be in the pub tomorrow).

If the RFU want a stronger squad, playing less, get rid of the EDF cup, and stop playing tests when they're not needed, such as the summer tours & the 4th Autumn international.

[auchtermuchty]

I disagree completely mate, sooner or later the clubs must refuse to release the players to the national team.

Why should a local team such as Gloucester or Leicester or Brigend or Pontypridd give up their star players to the national squad, possibly affecting their chances of winning the league or championship. The local fans pay to see their team play not their team with the stars removed.

For example, The American national Baseball team has NO major league players. If they did no-one else would bother turning up, they'd be playing for second.
If you disagree with that statement, try looking at the olympics, the year America fielded Micheal Jordan's dream team in the Basketball, who won the gold medal....... I rest my case.

Thats my point - I think that the international players should be centrally contracted and then hired out to the top clubs on a pay for play basis with the RFU being the ones paid and not the players. This allows the clubs to put together a squad that will always be together with a few additions mid season and for the end of season struggles from the international guys.

I'm pretty certain that if a club refuses to release an eligible player for a national team it can have its membership of the RFU suspended under IRB regulations (ask Edinburgh). As such nobody is allowed to play them from within the national body who suspended thems ranks, where then does that leave the fans?

Off Topic
Think I'm missing the point here, but.......

Your point about the US baseball team is misinformed - it depends on the competition as to whether major leaguers play (WBC anyone?). In basketball the US still fields NBA stars and dont run away with it now - they nearly didnt qualify for the World Championships latter stages.
Off Topic

[Scaley brat]

Off Topic
Think I'm missing the point here, but.......

Your point about the US baseball team is misinformed - it depends on the competition as to whether major leaguers play (WBC anyone?). In basketball the US still fields NBA stars and dont run away with it now - they nearly didnt qualify for the World Championships latter stages.
Off TopicYou will never see players the calibre of Alex Rodriguez ,who was the most highly paid sportsman to date in any sport (until Beckham signed a $250 Million or £128 Million 5 year deal with L.A. Galaxy (A-Rod's contract is for $2m less over 5 more years) , playing in the world championship. The team owners don't release their STAR players to the national team.

My point is this, as salaries soar off into the stratosphere and the man in the street pays them through putting his ar$e into a seat. Sooner or later the fans will stop going to matches or watching on TV and the people who pay the wages will have to "win them back"
The only way they're going to be able to do that is by guaranteeing we will see the people we are paying to see. If I watch Chelsea playing Man utd, I want to see the great players I've heard of, not the guys who polish the boots and clean the bogs.
The fans will revolt and the FA and RFU will lose control of the teams.
There is a finite amount of cash. Something will have to give.

[auchtermuchty]

SB - I dont want to take this any further off topic so please check here (http://ww2.worldbaseballclassic.com/2006/rosters/index.jsp?sid=t940). Please dont try and talk baseball to me as if I dont know what I'm talking about. All I said was it depends on the tournament - he wouldnt turn up in the Olympics, although other MLB players might for the smaller nations. This is seen as good marketing by the teams management and gets them an insiders view on whether any of the other guys are MLB talent.

Back to Rugby......

If this is such a bad system why does it work in other sports and in other countries in this sport? To use the football analogy it would stop Benitez bleating about whether Gerrard is fit to play because he turned out for his country.

Every fan of any sport should want to have their country as the best in the world. This is not achieved by denying the country of the services of the best players in the best condition. How many club fans go to games on international weekend? I dont have the stats but I do know that last weekend I had a phonecall from Welford road ticket office offering me tickets to the Leicester v Bath game and I've only been there twice before!! So the best supported (numerically) club in the country couldnt fill the stadium because everyone was watching the England game, then bemoaning just how bad we look as a nation.

So if everyone is watching the England game, then why are we complaining about letting the best players have time to prepare? Poor club performances during this period is more down to poor club management. You'll know who is missing in advance and you should be able to plan for it.

This brings me to the point RTW raises about salary caps and missing players, if the RFU have the players centrally contracted and then the RFU 'hire' the players out to clubs, this will not affect the cap and you are only allowed 3 national squad players per team. With the 4 heineken cup teams with 4. It might even the league up a bit and make it more exciting for everyone.

God knows as a RUGBY fan and not a team follower - some premiership games are just devoid of life that adding 6 internationals to the fray might liven up.