As the World Cup reviews, inquests and best XVs begin to fade in the rear view memory, Harri Morgan has an idea for the road ahead. Make the tournament more competitive by changing the rules of eligibility. It works for others, he says.
For us fans, the joys and disappointments of Rugby World Cup Japan 2019 can now be shoved neatly into the library of sporting memories.
Okay, perhaps Springbok fans can milk it for a while longer.
For those on the World Rugby payroll, there rests a responsibility to dwell a while longer. It is their duty to delve into the facts, figures and intangibles that underpinned the tournament.
They will look at the drivers for profit and loss, the success of logistics strategy and management of natural disaster. There may be a report, possibly a PowerPoint presentation.
One would think that in the course of said review there would be plenty of back patting – justifiably so. But, as with any review there will be a section marked – ‘what can we do a bit better next time’ or a more concise corporate equivalent.
When they look at how they could increase the level of competition at France 2023 they should rewind to Saturday November 2, 2019 – an historic day for rugby.
I’m not talking about Siya Kolisi’s South Africa bagging custody of the Webb Ellis trophy for a third time. Instead, I would point World Rugby to the events that had unfolded earlier in the day at Eden Park, Auckland.
No, New Zealand hadn’t attempted a North Korean-style propaganda exercise whereby they pacified their population by conducting their own final in which they won convincingly.
The epoch-ending event was Tonga getting up over world champions, Australia in rugby league’s Oceania Cup. It was the first time the Kangaroos had been defeated by an opposition outside of the traditional “big three” powerhouses since France in 1978.
Nice stat, but how is that relevant to the Union code?
The result on the day was a combination of all the usual cliches – effort, accuracy, intensity etc.
Taking a broader perspective, though, the sub-plot that is international rugby league’s eligibility laws, is crucial to the narrative.
It is fair to say that a chasm exists between the inclusive approach in league and that which exists in Union.
Tonga’s talismanic, Jason Taumalolo is one of the best in the code. Ahead of the 2017 Rugby League World Cup, he opted to shift his allegiance away from one of the aforementioned power houses – New Zealand – for whom he gained 10 caps, in favour of Tonga.
It’s a decision that has no doubt hit his wallet, but one that he has stuck by.
The union parallel would be Charles Piutau – 17 times capped for New Zealand. One of the code’s top talents. Ineligible for the All Blacks because of his decision to pursue his career interests overseas. Ineligible for Tonga because World Rugby says so – and that’s the bottom line.
Rugby Union’s governing body does not allow for the fluid approach to self-determination deployed by their league brethren.
The Grannygate scandal of the late nineties/early noughties saw a former All Black, Shane Howarth, represent Wales in somewhat dubious circumstances. It was the straw that broke the camel’s back on that one – dodgy ancestry.
But it was at a time when rugby union still allowed players to play for one country, even though they had already represented another. In the full version of the sport, that leeway was closed.
There is, of course, the sevens loophole that Tim Nanai-Williams utilised to qualify for Manu Samoa, having previously been tied to New Zealand. In practice a player is heavily reliant on the good nature of their employer should they wish to jump through that hoop.
Unless there is change, World Rugby’s premier competition will continue to exist without a full complement of the game’s premier players. Which is fine, if, as a product, they are comfortable with the existing number of truly competitive games in the tournament.
How many did we see in Japan? A dozen, perhaps?
The challenge, if there is a decision to review eligibility, will be to define the circumstances by which a player can switch allegiance.
How long should the stand down period be? Should players only be allowed to switch where they or their parents are born in their target nation?
Should players only be allowed to move from tier 1 to tier 2 nations? I use that terminology begrudgingly.
It wasn’t long after Sonny Bill Williams’ return to rugby league that a photo-shopped image of him in a Toa Samoa jersey was doing the rounds on social media.
If he does represent Samoa it will be great for Samoa but better still for international rugby league as a product.
Sure, Union might be the dominant code at an international level, but to retain that advantage, particularly in the Pacifica, World Rugby would be wise not to ignore the actions of a competitor.