Why does the rugby world rely on New Zealand to fill their teams?

First topic message reminder :

Australia have Digby, Quade and Mike Harris.
England have Thomas Waldrom and in recent years regularly used Shontayne and Flutey
at the last RWC it was revealed that half the Samoan squad were New Zealanders
Japan constantly have a steady stream of New Zealanders in their team

And then there's the coaching. Dingo in Aus. Warren with Wales in the Lions. Before him both Sir Ted and Shag coached Wales. Warren has spent time with Ireland too. Sir JK coached Italy and Japan. Canada have Kieran Crowley. And at assistant levels there are lots of Kiwis like Greg Feek with the Irish.


It's beyond a joke. The rest of the world looks at the All Blacks, see a few PI looking players and say that New Zealand is raping the Pacific Islands, yet the majority of those players are actually New Zealanders with PI heritage. And at the same time as they say it, their team and coaching staff is flooded with New Zealanders.

And it's just not at the elite level. Japan, France, UK, Australia. They all rely on top New Zealand talent to fill their professional teams


Thoughts?

You're right rainbow. The kiwi living in Aus thing is a very special case though. NZ can go to Aus and live and work essentially whenever they like. Aus doesn't allow anyone else that right I understand. However, Kiwis don't get normal permanent residency status if they enter under that arrangement and this leads to a few anomolies. For example they can't apply for citizenship regardless of how long they have been there, they are not entitled to many benefits even if they have lived, worked and paid taxes for decades, and if two kiwis have a kid over there that child isn't necessarily an Australian citizen, if the two kiwi parents were born there then the kid isn't even a NZ citizen most of the time. Large numbers of kiwis have moved to Aus in the last few years - the GFC and the Christchurch earthquake have been the big reasons for that but it happens all the time. However, in the last 6 months that has slowed to a trickle and is expected to reverse as the economics of things change (exchange rate making life hard for Aus manufacturers, tightening labour market in Aus, earthquake rebuild in NZ needing workers). At the same time quite a few kiwi expats are returning from Europe due to the tight eonomic situation there.

New Zealand has one of the most diverse diasporas of any country. An estimate d 20% of all NZ citizens live outside NZ. Also approximately 20% of the population in NZ was born overseas. A recent conference I went to said that over 1/2 of the workforce in central Auckland was born overseas. Interestingly too the biggest ethnic group of migrants and new citizens every year is the British. In most years inward migration is greater than outward migration though that has not been true for a few year but is expected to return to that this year or next year.

Anyway so its not suprising that Kiwis turn up all over the world and also the research suggests that while there is a bunch of no hopers living on the gold coast of Australia kiwis overseas seas tend to be well educated and earn well above average dollars.

I know that at one stage, a city I was in in China had 5 main language schools and 3 were managed by Kiwis, 1 by a Yank and another by an Aussie. The bulk of the teachers were Americans and English.

NZ success and influence is a nothing more than a fluke of geography. Any country in the world who had access to the gene pool of the PI would dominate, a group who in a science fiction movie would have been engineered to play Rugby. Fantastic players and a joy to watch. Any critism of NZ with respect to PI players is just jelously. Hell England play them whenever and at every available opportunity

rainbow-warrior wrote: I mean why would they want to drag their knuckles along the ground like the Aussies?! I came from Wales to NZ and NEVER considered Australia for many reasons, wanting not to associate with people who would reduce my IQ to their lower level was one.

Sounds like you were right to be protective of your IQ points if this post is anything to go by.

nganboy wrote:You're right rainbow. The kiwi living in Aus thing is a very special case though. NZ can go to Aus and live and work essentially whenever they like. Aus doesn't allow anyone else that right I understand. However, Kiwis don't get normal permanent residency status if they enter under that arrangement and this leads to a few anomolies. For example they can't apply for citizenship regardless of how long they have been there, they are not entitled to many benefits even if they have lived, worked and paid taxes for decades, and if two kiwis have a kid over there that child isn't necessarily an Australian citizen, if the two kiwi parents were born there then the kid isn't even a NZ citizen most of the time. Large numbers of kiwis have moved to Aus in the last few years - the GFC and the Christchurch earthquake have been the big reasons for that but it happens all the time. However, in the last 6 months that has slowed to a trickle and is expected to reverse as the economics of things change (exchange rate making life hard for Aus manufacturers, tightening labour market in Aus, earthquake rebuild in NZ needing workers). At the same time quite a few kiwi expats are returning from Europe due to the tight eonomic situation there.

Kiwi's can apply for residency and citizenship, they just have to apply and meet the requirements in the same way as any other person. It says so on the Citizenship website -> http://www.citizenship.gov.au/applying/how_to_apply/nz/

Kiwis enter Australia on a special category visa. It allows them to come and go as they please, but it doesn't automatically mean more than that and it seems like that is what kiwi's assume. That just because you don't have to pay the cover charge on entry to the disco, you won't have to pay for drinks either. Someone who has been here on a SCV for 10 years has only been able to be here for 10 years due to the rights of that visa. I spent four years in the UK and had no access to public funds as a condition of my Visa. I entered on that and it did not change regardless of working and paying taxes, and there was no reason that it should as that was the deal I accepted when I went in. It's the same here.

I wasn't complaining about it Boomeranga I was just laying out the situation and the anamolies that it creates. For example all Australia citizens and permanent residents can move to NZ freely and be eligible for benefits and the vote after two years.

It would be interesting for example for a child born in Australia to two NZ citizens by descent living there on the special visa. That child would not automatically be an Australian citizen and would definitely not be a NZ citizen. On the other hand he would probably be eligible to play for the Wallabies.

nganboy wrote:I wasn't complaining about it Boomeranga I was just laying out the situation and the anamolies that it creates. For example all Australia citizens and permanent residents can move to NZ freely and be eligible for benefits and the vote after two years.

The difference in my view is the numbers involved. What I often see quoted is 650,000 kiwis in Australia and 70,000 Australians in New Zealand. 15% of your population is a very large number of people to absorb as if our own without check regardless of the disparity in size of the two places.

nganboy wrote:It would be interesting for example for a child born in Australia to two NZ citizens by descent living there on the special visa. That child would not automatically be an Australian citizen and would definitely not be a NZ citizen. On the other hand he would probably be eligible to play for the Wallabies.

I doubt we are the only country in the world that doesn't accept every baby born in country as automatically being a citizen.

Regarding sport, it runs both ways. Ben Franks is an oz born baby representing NZ. Thorne spent 18 years here. Kerr-Barlow was born and raised to a teenager in Darwin. Nathan Cayless lifted the League world cup as Captain of NZ, but has he ever lived there? Even Sonny Bill spent 8 or 9 years here in our sport system before rightly representing NZ in both codes.

boomeranga wrote:

nganboy wrote:I wasn't complaining about it Boomeranga I was just laying out the situation and the anamolies that it creates. For example all Australia citizens and permanent residents can move to NZ freely and be eligible for benefits and the vote after two years.

The difference in my view is the numbers involved. What I often see quoted is 650,000 kiwis in Australia and 70,000 Australians in New Zealand. 15% of your population is a very large number of people to absorb as if our own without check regardless of the disparity in size of the two places.

nganboy wrote:It would be interesting for example for a child born in Australia to two NZ citizens by descent living there on the special visa. That child would not automatically be an Australian citizen and would definitely not be a NZ citizen. On the other hand he would probably be eligible to play for the Wallabies.

I doubt we are the only country in the world that doesn't accept every baby born in country as automatically being a citizen.

Regarding sport, it runs both ways. Ben Franks is an oz born baby representing NZ. Thorne spent 18 years here. Kerr-Barlow was born and raised to a teenager in Darwin. Nathan Cayless lifted the League world cup as Captain of NZ, but has he ever lived there? Even Sonny Bill spent 8 or 9 years here in our sport system before rightly representing NZ in both codes.

Quaid Cooper is not an Australia citizen as I believe but qualifies through the residency and is not due any entitlement there. Australia has some of the worst rules as to full tax paying Kiwis in the world, as I say they remain 2nd class citizens. Unfortunate but true.

Full Credit wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote: I mean why would they want to drag their knuckles along the ground like the Aussies?! I came from Wales to NZ and NEVER considered Australia for many reasons, wanting not to associate with people who would reduce my IQ to their lower level was one.

Sounds like you were right to be protective of your IQ points if this post is anything to go by.

fa0019 wrote:I think Scott Gibbs and Robert Jones played here for a short while.

Scott Gibbs still lives there.

15. Tim Nanai-Williams - New Zealand
14. Alofa Alofa - New Zealand
13. Paul Perez
12. Johnny Leota - New Zealand
11. Alesana Tuilagi
10. Tusi Pisi - New Zealand
9. Kahn Fotuali'i - New Zealand
8. Ofisa Treviranus (c)
7. Jack Lam - New Zealand
6. Alafoti Faosiliva
5. Kane Thompson - New Zealand
4. Teofilo Paulo - New Zealand
3. Census Johnson - New Zealand
2. Wayne Ole Avei - New Zealand
1. Sakaria Taulafo

10 of the 15 in Samoa's line up for tomorrow were born in New Zealand. Why are other countries still reliant on New Zealanders?

Boom!! Yeah, take that everyone. Dallym, you've been waiting patiently for that one

I'll post here because the other Samoa v ABs thread has a bug in it that takes my phone to the App Store :/

"The Samoan people really are ecstactic at seeing their second-favourite, and in some cases favourite, rugby team here"

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11477045

For many AB fans, the feeling is mutual. I'm glad NZ helps out our Samoan brothers with NZ born/trained players and coaches of Samoan heritage. Long may it continue.

The rest of the quote above was ".....but it has taken a long time for it to happen - too long".

So true. Hope tomorrow is a success for Samoa.

Whoop ti do.... lets all praise NZ.

Why does the rugby world rely on New Zealand to fill their teams?

Hmmmmmmmm

Tough one.....

It's Middle Earth and the only non-Mordor controlled bit on the map?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Okay, I'll have a stab:

(records taken from the end of each month)

2004 June - No.1 ranked team in the world
2004 July - No.1 ranked team in the world
2004 August - No.1 ranked team in the world
2004 Sept - No.1 ranked team in the world
2004 Oct - No.1 ranked team in the world
2004 Nov - No.1 ranked team in the world
2004 Dec - No.1 ranked team in the world

2005 - No.1 ranked team in the world
2006 - No.1 ranked team in the world

2007 Jan - No.1 ranked team in the world
2004 Feb - No.1 ranked team in the world
2007 March - No.1 ranked team in the world
2007 April - No.1 ranked team in the world
2007 May - No.1 ranked team in the world
2007 June - No.1 ranked team in the world
2007 July - No.1 ranked team in the world
2007 August - No.1 ranked team in the world
2007 Sept - No.1 ranked team in the world

2008 August - No.1 ranked team in the world
2008 Sept - No.1 ranked team in the world
2008 Oct - No.1 ranked team in the world
2008 Nov - No.1 ranked team in the world
2008 Dec - No.1 ranked team in the world

2009 Jan - No.1 ranked team in the world
2009 Feb - No.1 ranked team in the world
2009 March - No.1 ranked team in the world
2009 April - No.1 ranked team in the world
2009 May - No.1 ranked team in the world
2009 June - No.1 ranked team in the world
2009 Nov - No.1 ranked team in the world
2009 Dec - No.1 ranked team in the world

2010 - No.1 ranked team in the world
2011 - No.1 ranked team in the world
2012 - No.1 ranked team in the world
2013 - No.1 ranked team in the world
2014 - No.1 ranked team in the world

2015 Jan - No.1 ranked team in the world
2015 Feb - No.1 ranked team in the world
2015 March - No.1 ranked team in the world
2015 April - No.1 ranked team in the world
2015 May - No.1 ranked team in the world
2015 June - No.1 ranked team in the world
2015 July - No.1 ranked team in the world

Hopefully a few clues there

I'm unclear...

NZ poach the very best islanders for their 30 man squad, world class and in some cases they turn out to be NZ legends and legends of the game, yet when they send a number of also rans who actually have Samoan heritage back to compete for a Samoan shirt theyre the good gyuys?

Lets be clear, NZ have had exclusive rights to Island talent for a century, and have made it part of their mission statement to keep island talent theirs, due to migration trends this has always been the case, however now the Islands are being pilliged by everyone with a cheuebook, so the question isn't why does the rugby world rely on New Zealand to fill their teams? It's why does the rugby world allow the Islands to be treated in such a way? Islanders have been the difference between a decent NEw Zealand team, and a great New Zealand team for years, now that talent is up for grabs, and none of it benefits the Islands!

But the Islanders aren't put in prison ships and sent to New Zealand.  They go willingly because of job opportunities, education, culture etc etc.

And if you think I'm being disingenuous, I'm only quoting some of the declared reasons put out there by English posters when the subject of supposed 'mercenaries' often cropped up a few years back.

The story back then was that players that showed up in lesser/smaller/less diverse Nations were probably there for all the wrong reasons of mercenaryism (admittedly created word for effect ) - and the Nations they went to were being opportunistic in clinging to them and seeking them out. But the larger Nations were just nice places for people to go for culture, education, entertainment and quality of life in general.  So their mercenaries were less problematic and more justifiable.

There have in fairness been plenty of overseas players that have played for NZ too. From an Irish perspective John Gallagher was an Irishman/Englishman who also represented both the NZ 1987 rugby world cup winning side and Ireland A and of course the first ever New Zealand rugby captain Dave Gallagher was from Ireland.

Over the years NZ have had had as many imports as Ireland have yet I think it is fair to say that due to their proximity to great rugby nations as Samoa etc. they have benefited probably more than most from people who also grew up in NZ but of a Pacific Island heritage. There is nothing wrong with that but I think it is fair to say it has helped shape their rugby history of sucess over the years.

Fanster wrote:I'm unclear...

NZ poach the very best islanders for their 30 man squad, world class and in some cases they turn out to be NZ legends and legends of the game, yet when they send a number of also rans who actually have Samoan heritage back to compete for a Samoan shirt theyre the good gyuys?

Lets be clear, NZ have had exclusive rights to Island talent for a century, and have made it part of their mission statement to keep island talent theirs, due to migration trends this has always been the case, however now the Islands are being pilliged by everyone with a cheuebook, so the question isn't why does the rugby world rely on New Zealand to fill their teams? It's why does the rugby world allow the Islands to be treated in such a way? Islanders have been the difference between a decent NEw Zealand team, and a great New Zealand team for years, now that talent is up for grabs, and none of it benefits the Islands!

Ok. NZ Legends from the Pacific Islands
http://stats.allblacks.com/asp/bornoverseas.ASP?stats_ID=8 )


Jerome Kaino (but lived in NZ since the age of four)
Olo Brown?
Jerry Collins
Mils Muliaina (but lived in NZ since age of two)
Rodney So'oialo
Maybe Rokocoko and Sitivini too (not sure if they fit the legends tag)


sure, NZ really are poaching the best who go on to become NZ legends

Does it really matter though if they were poached or grew up in NZ? The fact remains that NZ rugby has benefitted massively from players of Island heritage. There have been many many examples.

Perhaps...and forgive me..... perhaps all European/'white' people just simply don't fully understand the people who were in that region thousands of years before Europeans showed up in the first place.

What's a border?

Maybe the Samoan and indigenous Kiwis don't see a border culturally, spiritually or ethnically.  Maybe it's only the descendants of the European settlers who can see a nice clear cut border separating Samoan culture and Nationhood from that of New Zealand.  
Maybe its as natural for a Samoan to see the island of New Zealand and the indigenous peoples there as family and 'home from home' as English or Irish people might feel about the USA - If we also forget the US's indigenous peoples too and decide to craft borders to suit our own sensibilities.

It makes me laugh when some Europeans get outraged that people of other PI heritage are actually NZers by choice or birth and therefore are eligible to represent their new homeland, but these same people seem to feel that only Maori and Europeans can represent NZ (surely anyone with white skin must be subject to the same 'but they aren't really from there' nonsense?).

It's worth noting that Samoa didn't actually gain independence from NZ until 1962, so I assume all Samoans born upto that point and their children (grandchildren?) are eligible to a NZ passport. The countries are inextricably linked on all sorts of levels.
If all ethnically Samoan NZers went 'home', the population of Samoa would increase over 60%.
According to 2013 census 144,000 people identify as Samoan, of whom 50,000 were born in Samoa (rough figures).

It's just suprising more 'foreigners' aren't in the All Blacks considering 25% of the population were born overseas.

But most sensible posters already understand all this.

Why does the rugby world rely on New Zealand to fill their teams?

I thought it was so the rest of us could understand the rules that they play by, not the ones written in the rule book that would be too simple, but the ones that allow Kiwis to do things on a rugby pitch that no one else can get away with, like McCaw lying over the ball for what seems an eternity at the break down or the use of dummy runners causing obstructions that never get seen by the officials!

If you can't beat them join them.

Secretfly where did you get that information on NZ rankings? They were ranked No.2 behind SA for a period in 09 or 10 (I can't remember which and can't be bothered to look it up). It was the year NZ lost to France at home and SA beat NZ three times.

The Saint wrote:Secretfly where did you get that information on NZ rankings? They were ranked No.2 behind SA for a period in 09 or 10 (I can't remember which and can't be bothered to look it up). It was the year NZ lost to France at home and SA beat NZ three times.

That'll be the July - October in 2009 he's left out of his list. It was only because SA had an indifferent NH tour that the positions reverted. I think any NZ fan thought SA were the best team in 2009.
I'm guessing he has only listed the months NZ were No1, not the months they weren't.

Yeah that was the one. SA strangely had a very poor NH tour. NZ were undefeated, topping it off with a thumping win over France in Marseilles I believe.

You can hardly say that Waldrom, Hape and Flutey were legends, if you are discounting Rokcoko and Sivivatu as non-AB legends. I agree though that the relationship between the PI and NZ is unique, and a lot of those players receive their training in NZ. If they are good enough they will probably be an all-black, if not they play for Samoa/Fiji/Tonga (by and large).

However, the sour truth though for everyone is that if an available player is good enough or has the potential to be, every union including NZ will investigate the possibility of their eligibility. No point pretending their your team has any more integrity than all the others, their are no clean hands in this particular pit. Sivivatu and Lauaki played against NZ for the PI team, Brad Thorn played rugby league for Australia, Steve Devine played u-21 for Australia, Greg Rawlinson was born and raised in SA, Joel Vidiri played for Fiji before NZ. No point being pious about it.

To be honest, New Zealand have lost very few potential All Blacks - Nick Evans to Quins being one of the few to make the move in his prime. Others have been more peripheral players or those looking for a big pay day later in their careers.

You can split the NZ players in England into 3 groups:
1 - Those with family ties to the UK (Hartley)
2 - Those who were marginal SXV players looking for new opportunities (Waldrom, Flutey)
3 - Former rugby league players who were already settled in England prior to changing codes (Hape, Paul, Vainikolo).

Of course one other cluster of imported players is the family of current or past professionals, in particular PI players. The likes of the Vunipolas, Manu T (Faletau for Wales). Be interesting to see if this is a group that expands in the coming years, or if it is a bit of an anomaly at the moment.

Of course the level of Islanders playing for other nations will expand, as the world develops travel has become far cheaper and accesible, what was once only an option to reach NZ is now an open world wide travel plan.

If the opportunities aren't there then French academies on Fiji will help new oppportunities.

The question isn't and never has been the number of Island players who play for NZ, or vice versa, it has always been who has the first option to select the very best, then allow everyone else to fight over the rest.

NZ have had near exlusive rights to this for 100 years, however going forward their grip is lessening, the heavy wave of migration is lessening, and access opens up to everyone.

I'm not accusing NZ of doing anything wrong, however they have paved the way for a free for all that the 3 Islands national team will surely take the brunt of the damage!

It really is outrageous that NZ gets the first pick of it's own citizens.

goneagain wrote:It really is outrageous that NZ gets the first pick of it's own citizens.

And the point I was making was?

Fanster wrote:I'm unclear...

I agree.

Fanster wrote:NZ poach the very best islanders for their 30 man squad

Poaching who and from where? Their own citizens from South Aukland?

Fanster wrote:NZ have had exclusive rights to Island talent for a century, and have made it part of their mission statement to keep island talent theirs, due to migration trends this has always been the case

Take your tin-foil hat off. Should no immigrants or their families ever be able to represent their new homes? As you say migration trends facilitate this, not rugby unions.

Fanster wrote:
The question isn't and never has been the number of Island players who play for NZ, or vice versa, it has always been who has the first option to select the very best, then allow everyone else to fight over the rest.

But they are NZers of PI heritage, mostly by birth and some by choice. Not due to the NZ govt or NZRFU decreeing it so. It's an accident of geography rather than any sinister plot.

Fanster wrote:NZ have had near exlusive rights to this for 100 years, however going forward their grip is lessening, the heavy wave of migration is lessening, and access opens up to everyone.

Again, it's only right that a country has first pick of it's own citizens. As for the wave of migration lessening, I'm not so sure. The number Samoan New Zealanders born in Samoa has remained around 50,000. That's quite a wide net the NZRFU are casting.

Fanster wrote:I'm not accusing NZ of doing anything wrong, however they have paved the way for a free for all that the 3 Islands national team will surely take the brunt of the damage!

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it seems that's exactly what you are doing. NZ haven't paved the way for anything. PI immigtration for family, financial, educational, artistic and in a very small number (and I would suggest very recently) sporting reasons has been happening for over a century.

I do agree with you that we are now entering a new and worrying time for PI rugby and am just as concerned about foreign scouts and academies (including from NZ) taking things to a whole new level. It's a great pity that a number of PI players have retired from international rugby recently due to the lure of enhanced club contracts.

I think the problem is players like Taumoepeau, Laulala, Mafi, Fritz Lee, David Smith etc being capped once or twice for another country and then not being able to represent the PIs later in their career.

You could say that they shouldn't play for another country, but these guys are trying to make as much money as they and many choose tier 1 countries to better their careers. I would like to see the likes of these players become available for their countries but I understand that would really complicate things internationally but certainly possible.

Yes, Leinster you have hit the nail on the head. but it doesnt need to be complicated.

Tier 1 countries (and World Rugby) do have to look after the development of the game in tier 2 countries, and especially examples like the Pacific Island nations, and its not just about growing the game of Rugby Union but also because there are other oval ball codes that recognise what attributes these people have.

The NZRU has put a lot of investment into the game this afternoon, not only money, but moreover things like ground staff from the Chiefs have been up in Apia doing preparation of the playing surface, gear ie boots, hit shields, and goal post pads have been distributed to schools across Upolu, all profits from the game go to the SRU, the ABs cover all their own costs.

We have former tier 1 coaches and players coaching tier 2 teams, I fail to see any harm/damage in former tier 1 players (if they genuinely qualify) playing for tier 2 countries.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
The NZRU has put a lot of investment into the game this afternoon, not only money, but moreover things like ground staff from the Chiefs have been up in Apia doing preparation of the playing surface, gear ie boots, hit shields, and goal post pads have been distributed to schools across Upolu, all profits from the game go to the SRU, the ABs cover all their own costs.

Great work from all at the NZRU!

The Saint wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:
The NZRU has put a lot of investment into the game this afternoon, not only money, but moreover things like ground staff from the Chiefs have been up in Apia doing preparation of the playing surface, gear ie boots, hit shields, and goal post pads have been distributed to schools across Upolu, all profits from the game go to the SRU, the ABs cover all their own costs.

Great work from all at the NZRU!

In fairness its about time they travelled to Samoa. Excluding their nearest neighbours almost all other big rugby teams had visited Samoa before including in order:

Wales
USA
France
Canada
Japan
Italy
Ireland and
Scotland

It is a disgrace it has taken NZ so long to play there. Although it seems South Africa, Australia and England arent bothered either.

I think with us, the last time we went there was before the pro era? Realistically now, we can't do it. The only time I'd want us to do it is if it was a midweek game and we were touring NZ. England, Aus, NZ and maybe France are the ones who can do it more often as they have more pro players able to drop into their squads as extra cover, and they could afford to give all the gate money to Samoa.

I'd quite like to see England go over and play Samoa, I would have said Fiji too, but given the corruption allegations around their Union, I'd rather not see those individuals profit.

England are touring Australia next summer, even an England side full of Saxons players would learn a lot from playing against a Samoan side similar to the one that ran out yesterday

I can't believe that the SRU allowed NZRU management to walk into all of their schools and basically bribe young players. How many of these young lads who would've played for Samoa will now follow the money straight to New Zealand - and wouldn't you know it, the All Blacks management now know who to keep an eye out for!

Mark my words, this "historic game" is merely a facade to allow NZ to accelerate their already despicable pillaging of PI talent.

Hahahaha

At least I now know your just a paranoid fool...

Anyone who says anything pro southern hemisphere rugby =

Anyone getting the ghost symbol needs to review their posts though!

I sort of half wish ghost did come back, just for a short while, just to remind us of what he was actually like

Ghosted by Ghost, the shame.

 ~ ~ <=W=[][]

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ghosted by Ghost, the shame.

Now please go and review your posts...

Already done. I've concluded I'm not as likely as others to be GE.

Fanster = ghost?

No aspersions

No he isn't, not unless he's playing a very long game. (And if ghost did come back and didn't troll it wouldn't be the end of the world, not that that could happen beyond a few days)

Doesn't stop certain other posters getting wound up by him though.

Ahhh, that's too bad.

I'm sure you're awesome though fanster.