Strauss v Bent. Which irks more?

[Pony]

Michael Bent has never set foot in the country (would have been mentioned at press conference if he had IMO) and walks straight into the Irish team. This was after Leinster hired a scout to scour the world looking for this type of player specifically. 6 months ago Bent probably never consider playing for Ireland, was not even aware he was entitled to an Irish passport.

Strauss at 23, 100% Saffer, thinks I'll never get a shot to play for my country or even SuperRugby. Leinster offer good money, maybe a shot at international rugby, and a chance to get out of SA?

Which is less annoying/more acceptable?

[John Cooper Clarke]

Neither. Or rather they are the same.

[Colliniho]

Thems the rules...

[McCloud]

No Matt Williams option?

[Aussiedub]

Michael Bent has never set foot in the country (would have been mentioned at press conference if he had IMO) and walks straight into the Irish team. This was after Leinster hired a scout to scour the world looking for this type of player specifically. 6 months ago Bent probably never consider playing for Ireland, was not even aware he was entitled to an Irish passport.

Strauss at 23, 100% Saffer, thinks I'll never get a shot to play for my country or even SuperRugby. Leinster offer good money, maybe a shot at international rugby, and a chance to get out of SA?

Which is less annoying/more acceptable?

Irish Passport, sister living in Ireland who was in the Rose of Tralee and Grandmother from Dublin - hardly likely to never have thought about Ireland...

[Pony]

Irish Passport, sister living in Ireland who was in the Rose of Tralee and Grandmother from Dublin - hardly likely to never have thought about Ireland...

Sister was a contestant in NZ Rose qualifiers AFIK. The fact remains he was approached by an agent and Ireland was suggested to him, not him chasing the option.

I'm not trying to knock the guy. Just wondering if people see a significant difference in their situations.

[bugler]

Unless you are pre-occupied with "blood" being the defining link to nationality then clearly Bent is the less palatable case.

Strauss has been part of Irish sporting culture and his local community for a few years now, and has contributed to sporting success on this island. I am not particularly keen on the project practice, but it beats most cases of granny qualification in a moral sense, IMO.

That said, the game is professional and about success, so the rules will be used to our advantage.

[cornerboy]

Have I been reading this stuff somewhere else for the last week or am I dreaming?

[HenryFitz]

Strauss. With CJ Stander second, Michael Bent third. Strauss was a poach, and he's spent three years getting the development and experience an Irish player should have got. There are enough talented hookers in Ireland not to be bothering with someone who was a mediocrity in South Africa. I've never agreed with the project player initiative - as Roger Wilson said in the Times yesterday: 'why not make an Irish player a 3-year project?' - and these are the fruits of it, a few paid patriots thanking the IRFU for the honour and the dosh.

The Bent case is necromancing the spirit of the Brian Ashton era, when luminaries like Dylan O'Grady and that Erskine fella walked into jerseys on the strength of their English accents. The same thing is happening now, except that the downbeat, muffled Kiwi accent is the one in demand.

[joconnell]

One point though is would three years put into the Irish player arrive at the same result? Is there something to be argued that the training, conditioning and skills coaching that strauss got in his earlier school years are what's giving him an advantage over the Irish equivalent? There's no doubt that SA produces some big, grunty men and they're probably used to more rough and tumble earlier on in life and thus physically develop earlier. What's the reason that strauss is better than an irish player right now? Would that be a better thing to research?

[HenryFitz]

One point though is would three years put into the Irish player arrive at the same result? Is there something to be argued that the training, conditioning and skills coaching that strauss got in his earlier school years are what's giving him an advantage over the Irish equivalent? There's no doubt that SA produces some big, grunty men and they're probably used to more rough and tumble earlier on in life and thus physically develop earlier. What's the reason that strauss is better than an irish player right now? Would that be a better thing to research?

Leaving aside that Strauss is not a very big, grunty Saffer, and that he's benefitted from 3 years training with top-class coaches at Europe's top club, yours is an argument for fixing the system which produces coaches and players. It does not justify waving a wad of cash at some young fella and saying 'Like to be Irish? Here's some money for you, and there's plenty more where that came from.'. Aside from it being an admission of inferiority, it's more likely to perpetuate the problems in player development because there's less of an incentive to fix them. It's classic 'sure it'll be grand' syndrome: 'sure why would we worry about not producing enough good young fellas, we can buy em off the Kiwis and Saffers for nearly nothing' or 'what's the problem with having 3 NIQ tightheads starting for the provinces, sure aren't they winning all around them?' It's people at every level - from schools' and club coaches picking fat flankers in the front row, provincial scouts scouring the world for affordable front-row talent, to an Irish coach picking a 3rd rung Kiwi prop for the national squad - looking after their own small little picture, to the detriment of Irish rugby as a whole.

[joconnell]

Yep, I think we agree on the same thing that the issue is that strauss is better than the same age player over here, and that's a skills and development thing. Same with McGahan fixing the munster academy, it's better to do the long term fix instead of this type of "buy in" attitude. If we buy in one player we get a few years, if we fix the problem we can have a production line of players.

[HenryFitz]

Yep, I think we agree on the same thing that the issue is that strauss is better than the same age player over here, and that's a skills and development thing. Same with McGahan fixing the munster academy, it's better to do the long term fix instead of this type of "buy in" attitude. If we buy in one player we get a few years, if we fix the problem we can have a production line of players.

I don't know that he was better than Cronin at the same age, but Cronin went to Connacht, where he didn't improve much, while Strauss went to Leinster and became a much better player under the tutelage of Feek and Gibbes. Even allowing for the higher level of rugby education in South Africa, any skills deficit that Cronin had would have been made up by the coaching at Leinster. The system, with its weighting towards the 3 major provinces and the casting of Connacht in the role of development province (but without development cash spent on getting the best specialist coaches), demoted Cronin, and elevated Strauss. It disturbs me to think that Irish rugby would privilege non-native players to that extent, and it is something I cannot support or accept.

[Dowlinz]

I'm perfectly fine with Straus's callup and would regard a man living, working and paying tax in this country for several years as Irish if he so wishes to be referred to as such.

Bent's callup is a disgrace, how you can claim to represent a country you've never previously lived in I have no idea.

[Dowlinz]

There are enough talented hookers in Ireland not to be bothering with someone who was a mediocrity in South Africa.

Are you sure? Up until 18 months when Best raised his game and consistency considerably we had no outstanding hooker (a crocked Flannery withstanding). Cronin and Sherry in particular are possibly the two most overrated players on this island, Varley is fairly rated but that is an acceptance of him being below international standard.

[joconnell]

I suppose at the time cronin was moving around, we had John Fogarty, Bernard Jackman and Strauss on the books, and that seemed like plenty of hookers at the time. Two we lost to retirement which shunted Strauss and Harris wright to the fore, but by that stage cronin had already signed to Connacht.

I totally agree with you about the second tier attitude to Connacht. If we take two years ago for example, I'd have worries for any leinster academy back prospect going to munster as there was basically no back play at all, and as you say they would have stagnated. Likewise the coaching setup at connacht wasn't a big enough attraction if you weren't getting weekly game time, and that's a big issue. Connacht might not be the most attractive coaching position to get but I think it'd be well worth the IRFU's money to pay over the odds for a big coach and well respected forwards and backs coaches so that it's really attractive for young players to go there. They have to be guaranteed to develop, or otherwise no young player in leinster for example is going to want to part from gibbes, feek and schmidt.

What's ulsters budget by comparison to connacht? They're bringing through some great young players and as a team they're building really nicely.

[Jackdaniels]

its good that we are uncomfortable with this, it means we still care. But, for many nations the world over, its a non issue, and we are in danger of being left behind if we fail to capitalise.
Cricket and Rugby teams the world over do this and not an eye lid is batted in general.
Its not ideal, but....perhaps....needs must?

[HenryFitz]

Are you sure? Up until 18 months when Best raised his game and consistency considerably we had no outstanding hooker (a crocked Flannery withstanding). Cronin and Sherry in particular are possibly the two most overrated players on this island,

What? Even more over-rated than Ian Keatley?

Off the top of my head, there's Cronin, Varley, Sherry, Rael, Scannell and Annett. A few of them won't make it to international level, but you'd expect one or two to lift their game sufficiently, given the right coaching and high-level experience.

[Dowlinz]

What? Even more over-rated than Ian Keatley?

I said on the isalnd, nobody rates Keatley outside of this forum.

[Point]

If there is any annoyance, then it should be directed at those running rugby in Ireland and the provinces, who showed scant interest in the looming front row crisis, until it sat up and bit them in the arse. I welcome Strauss and Bent, if they improve what we already have.

[ronk]

Strauss. With CJ Stander second, Michael Bent third. Strauss was a poach, and he's spent three years getting the development and experience an Irish player should have got. There are enough talented hookers in Ireland not to be bothering with someone who was a mediocrity in South Africa. I've never agreed with the project player initiative - as Roger Wilson said in the Times yesterday: 'why not make an Irish player a 3-year project?' - and these are the fruits of it, a few paid patriots thanking the IRFU for the honour and the dosh.

The Bent case is necromancing the spirit of the Brian Ashton era, when luminaries like Dylan O'Grady and that Erskine fella walked into jerseys on the strength of their English accents. The same thing is happening now, except that the downbeat, muffled Kiwi accent is the one in demand.

We do that, they're called academies.

Strauss was signed because Leinster needed a long term option at hooker and it was cheaper to get a young player on the way up and ease him into the system than sign a ready made star. He spent most of his first season in the gym. All that would have happened if Strauss hadn't been signed is that the sudden retirement of Jackman and Fogarty would have led to signing some big name. When he was arriving there, were long term injury concerns about Flannery and Best (major neck operation). Cronin was off the radar. There was reason for the IRFU to take desperate measures in case the worst came to the worst.

Ireland don't have a lot of depth at hooker at the moment. Certainly one more international option is welcome, especially someone who can play the way Richardt can. Needing 3 in a squad, 4 options is really what we should be aiming for.

[bugler]

Clearly, the thinking behind the project system is that we are obtaining players of greater potential than we have here. Whether that's been the case is very questionable, given the results so far. But that doesn't mean the general theory is foolish. But you'd hope lessons are being learned from this as we go, so that we choose players more carefully. Because some past choices have been woeful, and worse than what we have here already.

Strauss is going to be the first success story of the process.

[HenryFitz]

We do that, they're called academies.

Nonsense. There's a difference between playing Plymouth Albion and playing the Blues, though the gap is closing these days.

Strauss was signed because Leinster needed a long term option at hooker and it was cheaper to get a young player on the way up and ease him into the system than sign a ready made star. He spent most of his first season in the gym. All that would have happened if Strauss hadn't been signed is that the sudden retirement of Jackman and Fogarty would have led to signing some big name. When he was arriving there, were long term injury concerns about Flannery and Best (major neck operation). Cronin was off the radar. There was reason for the IRFU to take desperate measures in case the worst came to the worst.

Why was Cronin off the radar? What was wrong with the radar?

Ireland don't have a lot of depth at hooker at the moment. Certainly one more international option is welcome, especially someone who can play the way Richardt can. Needing 3 in a squad, 4 options is really what we should be aiming for.

Yeah, let's just accept player-poaching, preferment for non-natives and the cheapening of the national jersey. It's good for us, and sure everyone's at it.

[rua13]

Neither to be be honest..

[ronk]

Clearly, the thinking behind the project system is that we are obtaining players of greater potential than we have here. Whether that's been the case is very questionable, given the results so far. But that doesn't mean the general theory is foolish.

Strauss is going to be the first success story of the process.

Brett Wilkinson was the first success story. Strauss will be the first one to get capped.

The project system has never been used to target potential front liners and throw money at them, instead the goal has been to assist with depth and maybe get lucky.

Connacht needed a prop, Wilkinson was a good candidate. At the time Ireland were highly dependent on Marcus Horan, but worrying about his age profile in the long term. Wilkinson is 28, Horan 35. As it happens, Tom Court was later signed and developed into a better player and Healy came through very well. But Healy was playing U20s in 2007 (2 years after Wilkinson signed).

If Horan had had his serious injury a year earlier we might well have seen Wilkinson, but the timing was perfect for Healy. Wilkinson did the job that he was recruited for, he earned his keep at Connacht and was available for Ireland if we had needed him.

Strauss did well for Leinster because of the Schalk Brits factor. Brits is a fast, undersized hooker who was out of favour in South Africa. For Saracens, he was regarded (by the English) as one of the best players in the world, they love him. They'd have loved it if he hadn't had that cap.

Strauss is a similar player. Fast, low, skillful and essentially an extra openside. Leinster signed him at the moment when Brüssow (a provincial teammate of Strauss) was making his impact as a short breakdown-specialist openside. At the time Leinster had that Cheetah connection through CJ and Ollie so they were perfectly placed to see what the Springboks were missing.

[ronk]

Nonsense. There's a difference between playing Plymouth Albion and playing the Blues, though the gap is closing these days.



Why was Cronin off the radar? What was wrong with the radar?



Yeah, let's just accept player-poaching, preferment for non-natives and the cheapening of the national jersey. It's good for us, and sure everyone's at it.

There should be a gap to ease them in. Plenty of academy players get/got/will get senior team action.


Cronin was young, raw and still developing. Again it made sense to have additional options. He had issues with his game and it wasn't clear to all that he was going to be able to make the step up. Regardless, Ireland were still going to need more hookers.


Hang-on. We already accept poaching. We sign international players and in some cases this makes them unavailable for their own teams. From a SANZAR perspective, which is worse, taking the odd young player who's not tipped for big things or taking essential players from the first team and raising the costs for keeping the remaining players.

[HenryFitz]

Hang-on. We already accept poaching. We sign international players and in some cases this makes them unavailable for their own teams. From a SANZAR perspective, which is worse, taking the odd young player who's not tipped for big things or taking essential players from the first team and raising the costs for keeping the remaining players.

Losing those players frees up slots for others. Us importing them can stunt the development of our own players. I'm not a fan of it, unless the player is experienced and coming to the end of their career. Going by the press reaction, I think the SANZ unions were most exercised to lose Stander and Payne, who were in contention for national honours. Strauss wasn't a big deal, and the losses of Howlett and Afoa weren't all that keenly felt, though Afoa, like any quality tight head prop, has been missed.

[blackwarrior]

I think there should be a separate thread about this.

[NotreDameRFC]

Strauss. With CJ Stander second, Michael Bent third. Strauss was a poach, and he's spent three years getting the development and experience an Irish player should have got. There are enough talented hookers in Ireland not to be bothering with someone who was a mediocrity in South Africa. I've never agreed with the project player initiative - as Roger Wilson said in the Times yesterday: 'why not make an Irish player a 3-year project?' - and these are the fruits of it, a few paid patriots thanking the IRFU for the honour and the dosh.

The Bent case is necromancing the spirit of the Brian Ashton era, when luminaries like Dylan O'Grady and that Erskine fella walked into jerseys on the strength of their English accents. The same thing is happening now, except that the downbeat, muffled Kiwi accent is the one in demand.

you can't bring stander into the debate because he's with Munster and we don't complain about foreigners down... here...as long as they wear red.....

[ustix]

Irk equally