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with the CEO of the Pacific Rugby Players Welfare and former Samoa international, Dan Leo, has called these laws “outdated” and “archaic”.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

USA vs Japan | Full Match Replay

Yokohama Canon Eagles vs Shizuoka BlueRevs | Japan Rugby League One 2024/25 | Full Match Replay

O2 Inside Line: All In | Episode 5 | Making Waves

Confidence knocks and finding your people | Flo Williams | Rugby Rising Locker Room

Tackling reasons for drop-out in sport | Zainab Alema | Rugby Rising Locker Room

Jet Lag: The biggest challenge facing international sports? | The Report

Boks Office | Episode 39 | The Investec Champions Cup is back

Rugby’s Greatest Rivalry? | New Zealand & Australia | Sevens Wonders | Episode 5

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 3 hours ago
Why the Aussie revival is for real and what it means for New Zealand

Yes, true, reading your first sentence I immediately remember reports of them just leaving them be, which also doesn’t sound very smart now. Quite a minor thing, but like with the “further stipulations” suggestion I had, even minor oversights can cause big problems!


Right, so that old decision basically came down to the Rebels license being newer (still in effect) that meant it was the Force that had to be cut? You can’t really extrapolate one to the other of course. Theres no hindsight ability to be able to say “well we should have taken out losses and cut the Rebels”.


I can agree on your last point/para, even though it’s largely the same argument you presented in your OP which I tried refuting. I say it’s similar really because it comes under the same ‘risk’ management as spreading your pro population. They wanted to be able to provide more opportunities to retain the likes of the Meafou’s, just as much as the wanted to tap in further to those Meafou’s in Melbourne. Bringing in the Rebels was the best way to do this, but perhaps it should’t have been done at such a sacrifice.


All considered though, it’s hard to know if one should believe the reports that the Rebels had a way out of the dilemma. They obviously had individuals involved powerful enough to make the State retaliate towards RA, but my stance had been that COVID and so, the stopped payment, had been what put them under. I don’t lay fault with RA for their demise, but I also had a bigger expectation that Melbourne was the sporting captial of Australia. It really does just seem like a AFL land however (they reckoned their 10k crowd was enough but it’s hard to believe).

20 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING 'Cheslin-esque' teenager tipped for Boks is one of five Stormers deals 'Cheslin-esque' teenager tipped for Boks is one of five Stormers deals
Search