1
Ex-All Black great says 'sabbaticals' headed for scrapheap after lacklustre results
By Ben Smith
The sabbatical clause for top tier All Blacks are ready to be scraped according to Sir John Kirwan after lacklustre results at the international level.
ADVERTISEMENT
The growing use of sabbaticals in NZR contracts allowed the best of the best to earn offshore for a season, with Japan become the primary location, as a tool to keep the top All Blacks eligible for selection.
But with the All Blacks suffering a decline in results from the mid 80 per cent range to the low 70 per cent since 2020, the financial sabbatical could become a thing of the past according to Kirwan.
“I like the financial sabbaticals they do in Japan but what the players need to realise is that if you go to Japan, you’ve got to win [with the All Blacks],” Kirwan said on Sky Sport’s The Breakdown.
“So apparently the financial sabbaticals in Japan aren’t going to happen anymore because the players that have gone overseas have not won.
“That’s probably out of the book but I am absolutely in favour of our best players being available for the Blues and playing in the Super competition and playing for the All Blacks, totally.”
Sam Cane, Beauden Barrett, Ardie Savea, Damian McKenzie, Sam Whitelock have all had Japanese sabbaticals over recent years, skipping out on Super Rugby to play Japan Rugby League One where they can reap financial rewards.
ADVERTISEMENT
Jordie Barrett is the latest to secure an overseas stint, he is headed to Leinster on a short-term deal as part of his agreement with NZR that runs to 2028.
Should Kirwan’s assertion be accurate, that indicates a hard line will be taken on eligibility selection from the NZR board at a time where head coach Scott Robertson is set to ask for exemptions.
Robertson confirmed he would present to the board on changing the eligibility rules.
“What’s right for us now? How do we create it, so we still get the best players, we still get the best competition and still get the best All Blacks group?” Robertson said.
“And, potentially, if you keep an open mind you might look at the opportunity of guys that have shown a lot of loyalty to us.
“Yeah, there’s an avenue for it.”
Kirwan vehemently opposed changes to the eligibility laws, claiming that New Zealand “couldn’t afford it” and that it is “an absolute joke” players are putting their hand up from overseas.
He pointed to the Wallabies and Australian rugby which has tinkered with selection rules since the mid 2010s but that didn’t help them in the long run.
ADVERTISEMENT
“There is absolutely no way that our country can afford to pick people from overseas, it’s an absolute joke and most people that want to be picked from overseas are those that have already left,” Kirwan said.
“This is a fragile, fragile world. Has it helped Australia? Australia did it and they’ve gone backwards.
“So for me, we can never ever compete with overseas money so what we need to do is try and find a solution to keep our best players.”
That's a good change to discontinue the performance sabbaticals by New Zealand Rugby.
In the perfect world you would;
a) Only be able to take a sabbatical when their is a need to build up depth behind you. That is when there is a new player behind you that needs International game to get up to speed, and you have already mentored them for some time as the preeminent All Black of your position.
b) Be immediately included in the All Blacks upon return and have a chance to earn your position back. If you are not upto your previous standards you remain in the camp as an outside-the-squad member sharing your new learnings.
c) return to play and regain fitness and intensity in the domestic NPC, and earn chance of reinclusion to the November window. While not performing at All Black level you take a reduced pay cut.
Currently part of the sabbatical stipulation is that you've earnt the right to regain these standards while being selected for the AB's, that is hurting the teams performance.
Ultimately though I think there is grave difficulty in implementing b and c, and even if players aren't at the required standard you get the feeling that coachs are going to bank on you returning to it sooner rather than later and will try to endure a few poor performances.
Unfortunately I don't see any way to get around that with todays metrics understanding of stats etc, and what will eventually need to happen is that regulation c) is enforced upon return and there's a chance a good performing playing has to sacrifice missing out on a couple of squad selections to prove their standard in the NPC. This is kinda a win win regardless, but the reduced compensation to the player kinda negates some of the benefit of allowing them to earn more money the season prior overseas.
No doubt players come back undercooked from their stints in Japan. The home series in June the last few years has been lack lustre due to a number of the best players coming off a low key season in Japan, then down time while SR finishes, then into a tough series.
Yep, europe may be the best answer afterall? You would have to exclude French deals, or I suppose only allow them to Div 2 or weak Top14 sides, so that you can select them in July?
Jordies case will be a very interesting test example. He is someone who I think has huge potential, so if he doesn't come back moderately improved I think europe as an option will be proved a failure as well.
Which ultimately anyone who does decide to take a huge pay increase but also want to return, will need to return on that absolutely low ball Super Rugby level contract, which could be a loss of around 300k remuneration?
I don’t get the “afford” comment-also unlike other codes eg football in the UK the international breaks don’t disrupt domestic comps as much
As in they don't have the playing population to withstand a hit to reduced talent in the Super teams.
Personally I think I enjoy watching rugby of a lesser standard, and actually reducing the standard of NZs teams to Australia's would make a more interesting, level, competition. It would also raise Japan to possibly being able to cope with their club sides in Super.
The domestic game in rugby is heavily disrupted by domestic football. The URC was started without Springbok players during the Rugby Championship, all play (other than perhaps France, but obviously minus over 100 players on international duty) currently halted for these internationals, and the Springboks, and possibly others, will have their holiday once the URC resumes again, then the competitions are going to be halted in another couple of months for 6N.
Football has smaller 2 week windows(?), where they get at max access to players 3 days before a game, and is much like other domestic cups etc where they just spam the games in somewhere. Rugby in the SH is not too affected because they have a more felxibile dual competition setup domestically (not one big one), but would be far more affected by having their players overseas than football would. The Copa America, the Rugby Championship equivalent, is only played every four years. The same problem with rugby exists however, despite FIFAs much firmer control on the game, say a Premier League players offseason is exactly when the Copa is played, just like the Rugby Championship. However with FIFA, they stipulate that those players are unavailable for their club for like a month afterward etc, where as say you are not going to get that to fly with the French clubs, every single year. That is why the predicament is greater for Rugby, along with it being a contact sport that requires far more player conditioning and rest.
Grasping at straws. They had a POOR POOR season by their high standards.
I might be wrong, but is there even enough talent coming through the ranks at JUNIOR LEVEL in NZ?
They last won the trophy in 2017.
2024 - Semi Finals
2023 - 7th
2019 - 7th
Much better than the last half dozen years though, which should be the main takeaway.
Look at SA's results, obviously the U20s doesn't really mean much. The youngsters have been the All Blacks shinning lights this year though, which is a change.
utter rubbish
Has John Kirwin ever heard of the South Africa Springbok, lol.
Talk about cherry picking your facts.
What about them?
The comparison to Australia is a terrible one since they have always struggled, conveniently not compared to SA who make it works extremely well and a closer match to NZ with their love of rugby.
Aus is a much better example as they only have a fraction more players than NZ does, where as SA has 3 or even higher amount of rugby players.
It also represents a much more relevant picture of the sporting landscape. SA are so different in nearly every way.
The difference is this was a serious issue for SA, as so much of their top talent who would actually be selected for the Springboks had left the country and chosen money and lifestyle over playing for the Springboks. If SA had not allowed this they would not be a good team.
For NZ, this is not actually a problem despite all the publicity Razor is generating around it to get his favourite player back. Generally speaking they have always had their very best players available to play for the ABs, so the system is working perfectly exactly as intended.
The problem for NZ rugby is the fringe ABs and second tier of very talented rugby players that leave. Let's be honest how many players that have left would actually be selected for the ABs 23? I think there are 3 or 4 in the history of professional rugby. Then maybe another 5 or 6 who were right up there but had not earned a regular starting place. These payers leaving severely effects the quality of NPC and Super Rugby, but NZ can't afford to keep all of the next best 30 or so players in the country.