Jump to:
- Search box
- Navigation
- Main Content
Team tracker
We give you an ideal tool to compare all the Super Rugby team announcements.
Missing Men
Can you solve the Missing Men? Today, Leicester's class of '06 v Northampton.
Loose Pass
This week covers Australia, planning and a curious coaching situation.
Latest Lions news
All of the latest news surrounding the British and Irish Lions tour to Australia.
Premiership latest
All the latest news, previews, match reports and reaction from England.
Scotland
Sorry, this story is unavailable
- Scotland Fixtures
- Table
| Pos | Team | P | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wales | 5 | 8 |
| 2 | England | 5 | 8 |
| 3 | Scotland | 5 | 4 |
| 4 | Italy | 5 | 4 |
| 5 | Ireland | 5 | 3 |
| 6 | France | 5 | 3 |
Around Planet Rugby
-
Competitions
Win games consoles, holidays, tickets to sporting events and much more with Planet Rugby
-
Facebook
Sign up to the Planet Rugby Facebook fan page
-
Twitter
Follow Planet Rugby updates on Twitter
Comments
melkdave says...
@Mightymaular
Thank you glad i was able to to shed some light on the problem LOL.I was going to end by saying.No U20s team /match before or since has technically been a full international match and its very unlikely one will ever be one again
Posted 02:51 03rd March 2012
Michtymauler says...
Melkdave
Very informative, cheers. I think just about everyone is agreed the U20 nominated second team is a nonsense! Doesn't make sense for nations not to have a second senior team. Hopefully the panel will see sense and maybe the situation may be amended by the IRB..
Posted 20:47 02nd March 2012
melkdave says...
When this 2nd team regulation came into the game.It was never envisaged in would be applied to an age group team .It was brought in to stop players hopping from country to country ala S.SO'OIALO who in 1994 was playing for the NZ 2nd team as a SH then in 1995 turned up playing for Samoa at the world cup as SH.when he failed to make the cut for the NZ team At the time every nation inc Wales had a A / B team or emerging team ect and these where correctly designated as a nations 2nd represenatve international team As another regulation brought in at the same time said every country must designate their 2 international teams.Now Wales dont have an A team but still must designate 2 teams as their represenative teams so picked the U20s .
This alone doesent tie a player to a country though as to be tied you have to play against one of another countries designated teams under IRB rules
Shinglers problem is that while playing in the U20s 6Ns chapionship in 2011.France didnt have an A team for 2011 so designated their U20s .So for the 1st time ever two nations U20s teams where designated as international represenative .This ment when they played eachother every player in that game technically played full international class rugby even though thats patinally ridiculous .No other U20
Posted 18:51 02nd March 2012
Ramage says...
Interesting that people on here are suggesting 3 years residency and change of passport but rules for residency and qualifications for a passports and citizenship vary from country to country and if you bring that in you return to the situation if you are born in Wales then you are Welsh. However you don't qualify for a Welsh passport as there isn't one nor one for Scotland at this stage, only a UK passport. As for an U20 side being the the team that decides whether a person is no longer able to play for another country is to me patently ridiculous. It means that if you don't have a second side and claim this is your second side then you are really stretching this ruling. Does that mean there is one rule for those who have a second side where U20 players can move freely and another rule for those who claim their U20 is their second side? It will be interesting to see what the ruling will be.
Posted 17:04 02nd March 2012
jontheref says...
Mitchymauler
Full citizenship and change of passport brings in the immigration people, don't really want to go there, but I see your point.
Posted 15:43 02nd March 2012
melkdave says...
I imagine its taking so long because they are taking legal advice to see if the WRUs position contravenes EU law or is correct just in case god forbid this ends up in the courts ala Bosman and FIFA/ UEFA. Beacuse whatever decision they make they dont want it being challanged in the courts by any party
Posted 15:31 02nd March 2012
Michtymauler says...
Jon
The residency rule bothers me! Maybe three year residency but full citizenship and change of passport to adopted country to show commitment!
No idea when the decision is due and why it would even take as long!..
Posted 14:13 02nd March 2012
jontheref says...
Mightymauler
Agree about grandparents, and suggest 3 year residential as an alternative.
But, they must have a clause in there for which team constitutes binding the player to a country.
When will they decide?
Probably after the 6N.
Posted 08:48 02nd March 2012
Michtymauler says...
Comments noted. My opinion is it'll be farcical if he isn't allowed to play. I think qualification should be by bloodline and go as far back as grandparents. It's soon going to be difficult to differentiate between club and international rugby due to multiple nationalities playing for national teams!
Anyway, if he's supported by the IRB I wonder if AR will include him in the last squad against Italy! ...
Posted 22:52 01st March 2012
jontheref says...
Mightymauler
I have sympathy with your views, but from the WRU point of view, and the iRB regs, they have developed him, and don't want another nation getting the benefit.
I agree the U20 should not be the 2nd team, but the rewrite of the regs is suggesting playing for the 7's team will also tie you.
If the iRB regs agree with this, U20 and 7's tieing you in, players will have to beware.
He was over 18 when this happened, he was warned, and like it or not, he will have to live with the consequences.
But observing the iRB they are likely to change their minds!
Posted 18:09 01st March 2012
melkdave says...
Yes i also forgot they where from the 2010 U20s team So appologies for that lol.But it does rather prove my point that playing for the U20s doesnt commit a player as to country.Also what 18-19 yr old is going to turn down an oppotunity to play in a showcase tourament ie the U20s 6Ns .It was Shinglers performances in that tourament that enabled him to play 1st team club rugby at London Irish rather than be 4th-5th choice at the Scarlets behind S.Williams -J.Davies and G.Maule and now be offered international rugby by Scotland who he qulifies for by blood The WRU are just being awkward abnd using a technicallity to stop him so petty imo and a total farce
Posted 18:01 01st March 2012
Michtymauler says...
True, I forgot the Irish/Welsh boys were the 2010 U20 team and Shingler was 2011.
I agree U20 teams should be classed as ONLY that and not the nation's A senior team. It's ridiculous!!
As for the panel, given their own nations histories I hope they don't become hypocrites.. all to easy though!
At the end of the day, a third of the England team which played last weekend were non-English! This lad is HALF-Scottish HALF Welsh. He has legitimate rights to play fr either nation. Maybe he's his maw's favourite and Aaron is his dad's!! Would the Welsh people want someone in their team who tried NOT to play for their country?? The WRU are basically being awkward! Their actions are to stop Shingler from
playing for Scotland and that's it. It's not that they want to stop him
playing for Scotland so they can select him!!!
At the end of the day, we all enjoy the sport and all want to see good rugby, whatever the team! Shingler has potential and whatever his reasons for wanting to play for Scotland, whether it's allegiance to his maw, fast track to international stage or just loves the taste of haggis, it would be a disgrace to refuse him to play for Scotland and basically throw a talented young player into rugby no mans land!!
I think most would agree with that..
Posted 15:21 01st March 2012
jontheref says...
melk dave
glad to see you cannot answer my comments about you being wrong.
As to being an idiot, it is not my written English that is so poor.
It is you're an idiot, not your......
As to the Irish players who used to play with the Wales U20, that was in a different season, when the team was not desiginated the next team, i.e. 2nd team.
Capise?
Probably not.
Ask an adult to explain.
Posted 09:05 01st March 2012
jontheref says...
whelk
xx
Posted 00:56 01st March 2012
melkdave says...
@Jontheref
I will not be responding to any posts from you from now on as to my mind YOUR AN IDIOT and i see no point in conversing with someone who knows nothing about the game or the situation but just likes trolling
Posted 17:50 29th February 2012
jontheref says...
melkdave
Get your facts right, as it is you who have not read the statements issued to the iRB, from which the decision was made.
Read them then apologise for being wrong, (again!), and we can move on.
Go back to the original poatings, and see I am right.
The case with the two U20's who went to Ireland are totally different.
Again, read it up before commenting.
As to the farcical choice of players who you rate in the centre before Shingler shows your lack of knowledge.
As to wales veing your 2nd team of choice, why is it you are always bleating on when Wales win?
About how the other teams should have won, etc. etc.
If you are a fan, I'd rather have the magnimous English fans I met on Saturday at twickers any day.
As to which team can be designated a 2nd team, don't take it out on those who disagree with you, but the iRB.
As I said, if you read it, the decision is because of the current regs.
I doubt you will admit to understanding it even now.
Posted 13:35 29th February 2012
melkdave says...
@Jontheref
You really dont know any of the facts behind this mess do you ?? Shingler wasnt tied because he played for the welsh U20s last year at all .As @Mitchtymaular has rightly pointed out Ireland had no problem in securing 2 players from the same squad /team they where not tied to Wales in any way .The regulations are very specific and clear .A player becomes tied only if they play international represenative rugby against another countries designated teams..The technicality is that in 2011 during the U20s 6Ns championship France had designated their U20s as their 2nd team same as Wales .as it was a RWC year Thus technicaly every player in that one match only and just that one match played international rugby .Every other match of that championship was totally meaningless as to tieing players to a specific country No matter what the WRU says about players being told this or that Iam not saying the regulation is wrong ONLY THAT IT IS A FARCE that any country can designate an age group team as a represenative international team as they are uncapable of fulling any critea to warrant it IE they never play a Iinternational side only age group rugby.As to whos infront of Shingler for Wales atm well theres the present incumbents then Hook -Henson-Williams-Brew-Edwards-Czelka and most [probably G.North who Gatland and co have already said is a possiblity for center at the next RWC in the last RWC.You seem to think ive got it in for Wales well to remind you Wales are my 2nd team and i support them against anyone other than England (where i was born and have lived all my life) because im of welsh heritage.I just feel STRONGLY that it is a farce to have an age group team as your 2nd represenative international team and the IRB shouldnt have allowed this situation to arise.in the 1st place..Also i feel it stunts the development of welsh talant in the long run
Posted 12:27 29th February 2012
jontheref says...
melkdave
you really do miss the point don't you?
Whether you think the Wales U20 would be beaten "by others 2nd teams" is totally irrelevant.
Like it or not, those are the regulations.
U20 is, and has been for a few years, the Welsh "2nd team".
They are not saying the Wales U20 will play the Saxons.
It is down to playing numbers.
I agree Wales should have an A team.
They don't.
Shingler was told he would be tied, like it or not, he had his chance to say no, and didn't.
Change the regs, but in law there shouldn't be a retrospective on this.
Personally as far as I am concerned he can play for anyone, but the regs don't allow it.
I'm glad you think you know where he is ranked in terms of Welsh selection.
Can you give some substance to your claim?
Also who are the ones who will not make it out of your top 10, to allow him to play in 5 to 8 years?
Posted 09:43 29th February 2012
Michtymauler says...
Shingler would be a great asset to the new look Scotland back line and may be just the remedy for a struggling midfield.
The selection for the panel should be favourable to Scotland.. After all, the Irish managed to plunder two players from the same U20 team, Kiwis have been recruiting islanders for decades and the Italians, well I'll start laughing if I list the reasons they should favour the Scots!!
In this era where nations are selecting players through qualification of residency, it seems a bit crazy to have all this carry on over someone who is half Scottish through blood!!
Posted 01:22 29th February 2012
melkdave says...
Hopefully whatever the final decision It will see the end of the farce of having your U20s team as your 2nd international team.The simple fact is NO U20s team is capable of playing against any nations A team let alone its full side.It would litterally be BOYS against MEN .Personnally i would like to see Shingler get his wish and play for Scotland because atm he is way down the list for a welsh cap he must be what 8-9-10 th in line for center?? Given that its very doughfull he would ever play for Wales unless he gets a break 5-8 yrs down the line and some new wizkid hasnt come along. While at this moment in time he is being offered international rugby which equates to career advancment and development for him and a higher profile thus potential higher earnings .In any other field we wouldnt be having this farce because of a technicallity from 2011
Posted 23:17 28th February 2012