ON RUGBY:The IRFU's latest meddling has highlighted their own interfering structures and in the process again opened
themselves to ridicule, writes GERRY THORNLEY

HERE’S A thought for the day, and apologies for returning to previous themes and again highlighting the example of Isa Nacewa. For the second game running, Isa Nacewa filled in at outhalf on foot of Jonny Sexton going off with a dead leg in Cardiff on Saturday night.

So, in the brave new dawn which the IRFU hierarchy have outlined, what with their “position specific” edict regarding all foreign imports, will Joe Schmidt have to ring Eddie Wigglesworth, the union’s director of rugby, mid-way through the second half say, to ask for permission to play Nacewa at outhalf? Or would that require a committee meeting?

The more one examines the union’s restrictions on foreign players, that they be “position specific” and that they cannot be re-signed beyond their initial contract, the more suspect it becomes. It is also increasingly clear the union’s arrogant “non-negotiable” stance on their new edict has intensified a “Them and Us” divide between the IRFU/Ireland and the provinces.

As it is the provincial coaches operate under far more union-imposed restrictions than any of their counterparts in the Heineken Cup. Schmidt was possibly making a point when starting 15 Irish players in Cardiff on Saturday night, but it’s worth stressing that Rob Kearney was making his eighth Leinster start since the World Cup, and all of them at fullback, for the betterment of Irish rugby.

Leinster also lead the league, Munster stand third and Ulster sixth, even though all their Irish frontliners have played only three or four of 13 matches so far this season, and the maximum in the last two seasons has been 10 league games. Game management is all well and good, but were the union’s latest decree to come to pass, it would be no surprise if frontline coaches regarded the interference as unbearable. One could not blame them.

Irish players enjoy building long-term rapports with foreign imports (needless to say, there was no dialogue with, nor feedback sought, from the Irish Rugby Union Players’ Association, whose CEO Omar Hassanein was abroad on holidays when the IRFU unveiled their Christmas Grimms’ Fairy Tale). Under their new edicts, not only would the likes of Nacewa never be recruited in the first place (at least not as a utility player) but he, Doug Howlett et al could not be re-signed.

As one Irish international said to me recently the union are completely contradicting themselves on some of their “values” with regard to overseas players, for in effectively limiting all future imports to one contract, the IRFU will ensure the provinces only attract “mercenaries” as opposed to players who want to buy into the jersey.

Quality imports can still help to both develop and challenge young home-grown talent. Think of Nacewa playing at fullback between Andrew Conway and Dave Kearney in Galway for starters, never mind that Rob Kearney is now probably playing the best rugby of his life.

Howlett and Nacewa have five Irish-born kids between them, for heaven’s sake, which only makes the edict more insulting as well as a possible infringement of employment and international law, and discrimination under the Equality Act.

The Howletts and Nacewas also build up bonds with supporters as well, and the anger amongst provincial supporters is palpable if the response over the last fortnight or so hereabouts is any kind of barometer.

As one reader wrote: “They (the IRFU) got it wrong with (the) Aviva launch and they have now got this one wrong with serious consequences. I for one will not buy tickets for any internationals while this rule is in place and hope others make their feelings known.”

In arrogantly assuming they were not answerable to the Irish supporters, much less their own provinces, the union will assuredly alienate many of those fans.

The truly remarkable aspect to all of this is that the IRFU had the power of veto over any overseas’ player anyway, or to impose all manner of caveats, something that the rugby public scarcely has a clue about. It is for this reason the IRFU are being somewhat disingenuous when they state that, unlike the Irish team, the provinces can go into “the global market” for recruitments. Not without Big Brother watching them they can’t!

Instead, the union’s latest meddling has highlighted their own interfering structures and in the process again opened themselves to ridicule. Indirect regulation, such as they had, is far more effective than the direct and explicit route they have recently outlined.

It also smacks of envy of the strides taken by the provinces in the last dozen years or more and underlines, by their own admission, how much the union prioritises the Irish team, and generating money, above all else. But if the union want to bask in the glow of the best decade the sport has ever known, then they also have to take the rap for the slow demise of the club game. Indeed, this is in large part due to the IRFU’s clear policy of bypassing the clubs for a schools/academy/youth structure akin to the Australian model. This has always been Wigglesworth’s vision.

One IRFU person maintained their new diktat will have flexibility and that it will be open to review. But by then the damage could be beyond repair. Suppose the provinces become less competitive in the Heineken Cup and that top-class foreign coaches such as Joe Schmidt and Tony McGahan are no longer attracted to the provinces. Now suppose the likes of Jamie Heaslip, Seán O’Brien or other frontline Irish players in the mid-20s are renegotiating new contracts. The lure of staying with their provinces is greatly reduced. Like much else, the IRFU don’t seem to get this.

And does the union seriously think that the academies are equipped to compensate for the increased demands which would be placed on indigenous players? Or if not, (for they patently are not as things stand) will they increase the investment in the academies in terms of coaches and facilities to make them the best in the world, as they would have to be? Undoubtedly the union’s kneejerk diktat is largely in response to the obvious shortfall in one position, ie tighthead. Even this fails to appreciate how the signing of Heinke van der Meuwe has assuredly benefited the development of Cian Healy, providing him with healthy competition while at the same time making it more feasible not to overplay the young Irish loosehead. Provinces need a minimum of four quality props each and Irish rugby has never had that kind of conveyor belt, but banning the likes of BJ Botha or John Afoa isn’t suddenly going to make them magically fall out of the trees.

The Irish team is paramount, for sure, but it needs the provinces competing strongly in Europe. It’s a mutually beneficial relationship, not a one-way street.

It’s not in their nature, but the multi-cultural, multi-national IRFU seriously need to reconsider what they are doing before they alienate coaches, players and supporters alike to potentially very harmful effect.