Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

UN law quoted after Kerevi's Fijian comments spark eligibility debate

Samu Kerevi reacts following Australia's recent RWC defeat to England (Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images)

What was once a joke by Wallabies centre Samu Kerevi at a function in Fiji has unearthed a long-lasting criticism of World Rugby. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The 26-year-old recently said that he is moving to Suntory Sungoliath in Japan on the advice of his manager, saying that it would allow him to represent Fiji at the next World Cup in 2023.

Kerevi has since backtracked from those comments, showing his pride in playing for the Wallabies and stating that his comments were taken out of context. 

Many Australians were affronted by what Kerevi said, but the former Reds player has been pivotal in reigniting a debate that has been raging on for years surrounding player eligibility. 

Before 2000, players with dual nationalities could switch allegiances and play for another country. A number of players did this, including legendary All Blacks flanker Michael Jones, who had played for Samoa at the beginning of his career. 

(Continue reading below…)

Video Spacer

This is also seen a lot in rugby league, where players have freely moved between countries. However, since 2000, players have only been eligible to represent one union country. 

This law by World Rugby has been tweaked with the introduction of sevens to the Olympics which does provide an opportunity to change countries, but this has not been an easily exploited option. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Many players have campaigned in the past to have this ruling changed, with the CEO of the Pacific Rugby Players Welfare and former Samoa international, Dan Leo, has called these laws “outdated” and “archaic”. 

The former Wasps forward also said on Twitter: “UN humanitarian law protects the rights of an individual to hold dual citizenship & exercise those rights, hence the Olympics ruling.”

He went on to question what a home country actually is, saying: “What’s a ‘home country’ these days? Place of birth? Where you grew up? Where you permanently live? Where you played most of your rugby? For whom you first played Test rugby? Current rules only recognise last. Life isn’t like that and this blanket approach – no longer fit for purpose.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Such law changes will carry problems and complications in themselves, including how many countries a player can play for, how many times can they switch or whether they can change between multiple tier one nations or whether it is simply between tier one and tier two. 

But this is nonetheless something that World Rugby must address in the future and clarify their stance. Bristol full-back Charles Piutau is one player that has brought this topic to attention in recent years, as he has sought to play for Tonga after being overlooked by the All Blacks. 

Despite being one of the form players in the northern hemisphere while at Wasps, Ulster and now Bristol, his 17 caps in New Zealand have prevented him from representing Tonga, for whose under-20 side he represented. There is no reason that he would not have just as much pride playing for either country, which brings World Rugby’s law in question. 

In a week where residency qualifications have been the centre of attention after New Zealand-born players Willis Halaholo and Johnny McNicholl were called up for Wales, this is yet another dimension to rugby’s eligibility laws. Whether Kerevi wanted to or not, he has fanned the flames of a debate that many want World Rugby to look into again.

WATCH: RugbyPass went behind the scenes with the Tonga national team as they prepared for the 2019 World Cup in Japan

Video Spacer

 

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

N
NB 40 minutes ago
'Passionate reunion of France and New Zealand shows Fabien Galthie is wrong to rest his stars'

Nice bit if revisioniusm but that's all it is JW.


For your further education, I found the following breakdown of one prominent club's finances in the Top 14 [Clermont].


For Clermont (budget of €29.5 million for 2021-2022) :

- 20% from ticket sales

- 17% from the LNR (includes TV Rights, compensation from producing french internationals and other minor stuff)

- 5% from public collectivities (so you're looking at funds from the city of Clermont, the department of Puy-De-Dôme and the region Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes)

- 4% from merchandising and events

- 3% from miscellaneous

- 51 % from sponsorships and partnerships. They've got 550 different partners. The main ones are CGI, Groupama, Limagrain/Jacquet, Omerin, Paprec, Renault and of course Michelin (not surprising since they're actually the founders of the club).


As you can see nothing comes from the FFR at all. The LNR is a separate entitiy to FFR and their aims frequently do not accord.


It is also why the European breakaway plotted by LNR and PR back in 2013 had nothing to do with the governing bodies of either England or France - and it most certainly did not have their blessing https://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/story/_/id/15331030/jean-pierre-lux-anglo-french-cup-detrimental-european-rugby


And from the horse's mouth [ex AB skipper Sean Fitapatrick] about the comp between Top 14 and Super Rugby:


"The Top 14 in France is probably the best rugby competition in the world at the moment, purely for the week-in, week-out.”


“I think the quality of players. They are bigger, they are faster, they are stronger. Which then carries on into the international game.”

Take it from someone who knows JW😅

293 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ 'Steve Borthwick hung his troops out to dry - he should take some blame' 'Steve Borthwick hung his troops out to dry - he should take some blame'
Search