That must make him a bit of a then

What he should have said was "If it looks like a cake, tastes like a cake then it is a cake" we would have been 100% behind him! But ducks?? Nah.

Yes they do. One of Heighington's parents is from England - not even using grandparents here - while Chase satisfied the residency qualification.

If it's the rules you don't like, then make a reasoned argument about why that is and what proposals you'd suggest as an alternative. Then we might get somewhere.

Okay, I believe the rule should be you can only represent england if you were born in England, or under the current ancestry rules, if you have not already chosen to represent another country.



You are right too much of this is targeted at individuals, including Mcnamara, when it is the system that needs to change

So Heighington you don't have a problem with now?



Other questions:

What if your nationality changes to that of a nation you were not born in? What about people with dual nationalities? What about the fact that representing GB and Scotland was not previously a problem, at a time when you may have made an initial decision about representation, but now if you want to play eltie international rugby you have to declare for England? Is it fair to penalise people who make a decision based on one set of rules only to see those rules change later in life?



(not picking on you as an individual btw. Just using you to highlight that this really isn't as simple as 'you were born there, play for them')

GB and Scotland is a null argument as qualification for both is the same. GB is made up of Scotland, Wales, England, whilst the addition of 'and Ireland' has manged to include that island too.

The biggest issue for me is the representing one country being followed by changing allegiance to another. That is the place to start tightening up the rules in my opinion.

Firstly I would be all for a return to GB for smaller comps eg four nations, only splitting into Scotland Ireland Wales England for the World Cup. this would prevent alot of the problems IMO.



I understand wanting to play top level RL, but I think the likes of Brough made their descision based on the fact they never thought they'd make the england team and therefore it is their own fault. we are far removed from the GB team so you cannot blame a rule change, however as previously stated perhaps going back to GB is the best course of action.



It is a very complex issue which everyone has different opinions on. However the real problem is these people who change allegiance are often stopping proper young british talent from playing at international level, and that is a shame

Agreed. Remaining as GB for the comps that are not the WC would solve the problem.



Your second point I also agree with, you should not be allowed to change allegiance. You cant change what it says in your passport because you feel like it can you?

At any cost? Beware unintended consequences, one of which in this case, I suggest, is that doing that risks the future of Scotland, Wales, Cook Islands etc etc by making it extremely hard for them to find players.

Yes. Yes you can. And many do. I have considered it myself.

Harrison Hansen is a case in point. Born in Salford (poor lad), qualified for NZ and England through his dual nationality and Samoa through ancestry.





I think there's a growing consensus that scrapping GB was a mistake which has had consequences that nobody in charge of the decision really thought through at the time.



I'm beginning to repeat what I wrote in the first place and hate to bore people. It's emotive, far from straightforward and there are levels of nuance everywhere - that's the main thing I've been driving at.

I'd rather see Ablett and Houghton play for England over Heighington and Henderson for a number of obvious reasons.

Thats they're better?

That's one.

In my opinion Steve McNamara lost credibility when selecting Manu for his first train on squad. Manu eventually went on to play for the exiles.

The whole selection criteria needs to be changed, get rid of the "plastic poms" and give support and encouragement to those who genuinely want to represent their country and not just because that they cannot get into their own national team. E.G Chase is never going to play for the Kiwis as long as Benji Marshall can move aroung the pitch on a zimmer frame.

Why should not League take a lead and set an example to other sports such as Union and Cricket?

And that is where tightening up on other concerns would need to follow up. It's all one big mess and I feel we need to start somewhere. If there aren't 17 players from a given country who are eager to play RL then so be it, other promotional angles need looking at, not cobbling together a team of mercenary journeymen.

Key issue for me remains whether the player really identifies themself as being of that nationality (even if it's one of several they identify with) and doesn't just feel like they have a better chance of getting a game.



Now, who wants to set about proving that (for example) Rangi Chase doesn't fit this criteria?



You shouldn't, in my opinion, ban people from switching allegiance. If somebody becomes a citizen of a country, feels that country is their home, then why on earth would they want to represent anyone else? It would sit strangely with an immigration policy based on integration. "Please, don't just sit in enclaves of fellow national migrants - integrate, mingle, contribute to our society. Oh, you can't join in with our sports teams though. Sorry."

My argument is that Rangi was happy to represent NZ Maori and spoke out that he wants to wear the Black and White internationally mere months before he was called up for England. He should not then be allowed to change his allegiance. This is not a social experiment, this in international sport.

So how does Tony Smith fit into these convenient little Englander boxes? He's a UK citizen. He holds a UK passport. He has settled in the UK with his family. So is he British, Australian or both?

This was less than 4 months before Chase decided to play for England.



[i"Hopefully, I'll end up playing. This game could help me play for New Zealand. That's my goal to wear the black and white of my country.



"It's a dream of mine since I was a little kid. If I play well [in Leeds I might get a crack."[/i





[urlhttp://www.nzherald.co.nz/warriors-league-team/news/article.cfm?c_id=360&objectid=10730389[/url

The smith arguement is a non starter as its a different criteria from playing. A player should play for one country only. He should be eligable for the country of his, his parents or grandparents birth. If he gets citizenship of a country before representing another fine. But the likes of chase and carroll are a disgrace.

Doesn't matter really who Banana picks.

England are a poor 3rd behind NZ and Aus, and that's not going to change for a long time.

Is that the same NZ that England have consistently beaten on home soil in recent years?