Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Dewi Lake suggests major change to Welsh overseas rule

By Josh Raisey
Dewi Lake did well to reach the World Cup after injury and was devastated to depart in the quarter-finals (Photo by Adam Pretty/ Getty Images)

Wales hooker Dewi Lake has questioned the Welsh Rugby Union’s overseas rule that is in place, suggesting an alternative that is based on time served with a region.

ADVERTISEMENT

As it stands, any capped player with fewer than 25 caps cannot play outside of Wales and continue to represent the national team. But Wales’ World Cup co-captain feels this does not necessarily represent a player’s service to Welsh rugby, and believes time spent playing or appearances for a region are a better indication.

Lake used Cardiff’s 35-year-old back row Josh Turnbull as an example who would fall under the 25 cap threshold, with 13 caps, should he move abroad, but has almost two decades-worth of service to Llanelli and Cardiff in the bank.

Video Spacer

How far have the Crusaders fallen? Unpacking a BIG Super Round | ARP

Video Spacer

How far have the Crusaders fallen? Unpacking a BIG Super Round | ARP

“I think it’s in place for time served in Welsh rugby,” the Ospreys hooker said on the Sportin Wales podcast.

“Where you’ve come through an academy, where coaches have put a lot of time into you, and then leave and then leave without giving it back to that club.

“Maybe it’s something you could do over time served for a club. If you came through an academy but you played in Welsh rugby and a Welsh region for a certain amount of years or games, or something like that, rather than an international cap rule.

“Some boys never get the opportunity to get a single cap, let alone 25.

“Look at Turnbull, he’s not got 25 caps, but he’s got 250 URC appearances, or something like that. And are you going to say he’s not got time served in Welsh rugby?

ADVERTISEMENT

“The bloke has been an outstanding servant to Welsh rugby and to Cardiff and Scarlets and his regions. Yet he wouldn’t be eligible for Wales if he was to move elsewhere. He’s served his time to Welsh rugby, he’s been class for Welsh rugby.

“It’s probably the cap thing that’s tough to get past. You understand people wanting to have people to give back to their club or region if their academy has put their time into them. But it stops a lot of opportunity for boys to play elsewhere, in France, Japan or England.

“Sometimes it hinders the national team. You’d think as a national team you’d want your best players all the time, and sometimes they’re not available to you because of a rule you’ve got in place, which means they’re not eligible.”

Related

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

J
JW 35 minutes ago
Boks and Pumas lead southern charge, but the north are ahead of the game

I don't think that's the case at all, particularly lock is a very bad example to make the point with anyway.


For eg; LSL would likely be the only local player (lock) in the side. There would be no Frost, or Williams, so no 'development'. If aussie had different selection policies the locks would all be overseas players, Skelton, the Arnolds, players I've seen from youth leveling up in Japan and qualifying for them instead, and no doubt there is a plethora of others that hit some good form in England or France, and who if included in a Wallaby environment at the time, might continue have played to their peak instead of turning into 'just' journeymen. I don't follow aus rugby enough for examples of this context but I reckon it would crowd out a position like lock (but is a good positive for the idea of selecting from offshore in general). Essentially there would be a lot of good players that left aussie shores upon making a name for themselves that would continue to remain in the national side, all but removing the need to blood young and unready local talent.


It of course would not be the same for every position, perhaps blindside would be the only other position where the amount of quality that is offshore compared to home would lead to the exclusion of local talent, and it wouldn't exclude rotating in the types of young player like Frost and Williams, but would Bell have become an international success so young? Other positions would be more where the gain of say including an experienced 10 or outside back would be dividends. But then you've also got to factor in whether the players those veterans would be trying to impart there global experience on would still be playing in Australia? Would Jorgensen be enough of a talent for a big French club to snap up? Or hungry for props like Bell and Tupou? Would they see how Ireland made use of Hansen and gun for Wright or one of the other very good Brumbie outsides? What's the point of having an experienced pro like Hodge in the squad when Wrights already overseas now in this new 'world' learning what there is of the French style himself?


The thing is your 'small' talent pool, suddenly becomes very 'large' selecting from offshore. The disconnect is it taking upto 3 times as long for people to flying back home, than say from Japan (or from EU to SA), along with the typical style mismatch's, not so much an ego thing. But with a lack of a DNA like SA, it might mean a lot more 'battles' between the respective styles and practices players are bringing back to camp. Can be only a positive in the right environment.


I think what they have now is the best of both worlds. There might be like 4 or 5 players they bring back, no disruption, no battle of the best way to play. You may have an important front rower like BPA, a world class player like Skelton, any number of veteran 10's, and a backline rock like Kerevi (not saying all these players would have been fit and ready to play international rugby, just imagine them at their peak for arguments sake). And that's what they have. It's what they'll likely go back to doing (if they get lucky with those generational players) for the next WC, even from now for the Lions. So I just don't think the 'picture' yuo outlined would be like reality, that's not to say I don't think there wouldn't be enough positives elsewhere to outweigh the negatives. Certainly going to another franchise for just 2 or 3 years before coming back would be a good development, but that idea is based on money that is not in the game at the moment.

248 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ 'After mistakes I was shamed': Why Nick De Luca is launching rugby camps with a difference 'After mistakes I was shamed': Why Nick De Luca is launching rugby camps with a difference
Search