KEY POINTS:
Often, a game's yearning to prosper outside its traditional area of strength will lead to lax international eligibility rules. Having competed for one country, a player, seemingly almost overnight, is allowed to turn out in the colours of another. Take the case of South African goal shoot Irene van Dyk, who took the court for the Silver Ferns under netball rules which stated merely that a player could represent only one country in a given year. That episode created a justifiable sense of unease. So now, also, does that of rugby league player Nathan Fien.
The Queensland-born Fien, a former State of Origin representative, played his second test for the Kiwis in their victory over Great Britain in Christchurch last weekend. He was said to qualify under a Rugby League International Federation rule that says a player is eligible for "the country in which either of his parents or any of his grandparents were born". In fact, Fien's only connection was a great-grandmother who was born in Wanganui 100 years ago.
It appears the New Zealand Rugby League knew this before Fien played at Jade Stadium. If so, this was no honest mistake. To compound the indiscretion, it sought to defend the indefensible by backing his eligibility after the extent of his family heritage became known. According to Selwyn Bennett, the NZRL chairman, "any of his grandparents" meant great-grandparents as well. An obscure piece of Oklahoma state legislation supported this generalisation, he said.
It is nonsense, of course, and the NZRL must face the music today at a federation meeting. It could be either fined or lose the Tri-Nations competition points that the Kiwis gained by beating Great Britain. Oddly, no punishment is stipulated in the federation's constitution, but the British camp has suggested, quite reasonably, that New Zealand should be stripped of the points won in Christchurch. Such would be the case in comparable instances in many sports.
This, however, is rugby league, a game that sanctions lax eligibility rules because it is keen to spread its wings beyond the territorial reality that is so starkly presented in the Tri-Nations format. It appears not to realise that expansion will occur only if sports followers discern a plausible, professionally run game. Such is certainly not the case in New Zealand, where a case as ludicrous as that of Fien is condoned. Indeed, instances such as this - and the ongoing eligibility wrangles over the likes of Tonie Carroll, Karmichael Hunt and Willie Mason - are probably driving away committed fans as well as potential converts.
In many instances, international rugby league players are seen as using flags of convenience, rather than playing with pride for the land of their birth or for a country genuinely adopted as a new home. There will be an issue of credibility as long as such laxity remains. The grandparent provision aside, even qualification after three years of playing for the Warriors seems too simple. For that very reason, Brent Webb's exploits for the Kiwis remain an awkward subject - and an easy source of ridicule for the likes of Willie Mason.
Sports that wish to present a convincing and professional face must insist that players wishing to compete for a country other than that of their birth not only fulfil the three-years' residency requirement for citizenship but show a commitment by taking it out. Certainly, that would make it more difficult to expand a game outside its current areas of playing strength. But it would eradicate episodes as laughable and potentially debilitating to the Kiwis as that of Fien. Credibility is not a notion to be treated lightly when sports are competing so intensely for an audience.
