England, Eligibility and the Exceptional Circumstance

Since Leinster's Rob Kearney won the 2012 award, the three subsequent recipients of the crown of Europe's premier club rugby player, have been English ex pats plying their trade with French clubs. Jonny Wilkinson receiving the award in 2013, was but another accolade for the by then internationally retired great. However, the recent crowning of Abendanon, as it did with Armitage a year ago, has lit the touch paper in the ever simmering debate on selection of overseas players to wear the red rose. 

Those that vindicate the inclusion of the overseas based players do so because they believe that for England to have an optimum opportunity for success, the selection process should result in the best XV players taking the field, regardless of whether a player is domiciled in Toulon or the Toon. The decision of Aussie selectors to renegade on their own long standing home not away policy, is evidence that they feel they can field additional quality by drawing on their overseas based assets. Although, it must be noted that there are a number of caveats to 'Giteau's law' that will serve to ensure players serve their time in domestic competition, before being allowed to simultaneously cash in on their talent abroad and have a right to the green and gold jumper.

If you think there has been criticism of the RFU policy to this point, fast forward to a scenario where a Giteau or Mitchell inspired Wallaby outfit roll over England at Twickenham, whilst Armitage is doing his thing in Toulon. Keyboard warriors from throughout England would march on social media with @englandrugby undoubtedly in for some #angryfans. 

Those who support the RFU policy would argue that it has acted as a dam against a mass exodus of players fleeing the Aviva Premiership in search for the pot of gold at the end of the anglo-french rainbow. This school of thought would sight the tangible benefits of the emigration block as the increasingly vibrant domestic comp, as well as providing Lancaster with greater control over the welfare and collective performance of his elite internationals. That said, one could perhaps introduce a wider debate as to whether it is the 'policy' alone that keeps players within the nest. Recent murmurings around salary cap breaches acts as a reminder that top domestic players in England are themselves rather handsomely remunerated for their services. Of course there are non financial preferences and commitments that weigh into a players decision making process, but that's one for another day.

As referenced above those that support a relaxation of the 'policy' for RWC, largely do so on the basis that England will fare better with all the 'best' individuals available for selection. Do the best teams on paper always win? Speak to a 2007 All Black. If you can't find one, the answer to the above is no. Since taking over as Head Coach following England's 2011 RWC debacle, Stuart Lancaster has driven a shift in the culture of his elite playing squad with the aim that this will enhance performance. To quote Lancaster directly;

“The best teams are the ones which have the strongest cultures, have the team ethic, the desire to work hard for each other and for the shirt that they are playing for,”

The thing with culture is it inevitably takes longer to build than to destroy. With this in mind, would Lancaster be willing to risk the culture and performance levels that he has developed by bringing in the likes of Armitage or Abendanon at the expense of another who has played it by the book. It is refreshing to see the likes of Tom Young's and more recently Tom Wood not being afraid to openly express concerns that such a situation may disrupt the morale and cultural continuity of the wider group, not just the individual who misses the cut. 

Stuart Lancaster and his team are wise enough to be aware of all the above factors and will undoubtedly deliberate long and hard on a decision that will come under national scrutiny pre, during and post RWC.

If they do see fit to include non English domiciled players, it will be justified under the 'exceptional circumstance' clause. What then, constitutes an exceptional circumstance? Stop. Google time. 

Let us begin with a definition of 'exceptional', over to you Collins;

adjective

1. forming an exception; not ordinary
2. having much more than average intelligence, ability, or skill

Although slightly out of context with regard the present discussion, Hampel & Gurvich provide a useful introduction to the concept in their book on bail law. 

'The concept of exceptional circumstances, although not unknown to the law, is imprecise and difficult to define. It involves a significant degree of subjective judgement. What constitutes exceptional circumstances will vary from one case to another and from one decision maker to another' 

Perhaps the most pertinent point from the above is the freedom to apply a 'significant degree of subjective judgement'. Does this give those in power, carte blanche on the matter? Subjectively, selectors might choose to justify the inclusion of overseas players in the squad as the RWC is not an 'ordinary' event, or that the player has ability and skill that goes above and beyond the norm. To the same extent, the Tom's, Wood and Youngs, could also make subjective counter arguments that neither the player or the event could be defined as exceptional. 

Whatever decision is made and however it is justified, the powers that be should be wary that it will set a precedent on the currently unprecedented. A precedent, that will shape the way players interpret and act upon this policy going forward. My opinion on the matter is that in order for the policy to retain it's teeth in terms of player retention, the exceptional circumstance clause should only cover the truly unforeseen. To draw an example from recent rugby history, the All Blacks found themselves having to call on their fourth choice number 10 for the 2011 final. Had they called on Harlequins' Nick Evans under a similar type of clause, I would have deemed this reasonable. The nature of the game (RWC final) and the unforeseen injuries made for a situation that was both out of the ordinary and unlikely to be replicated, an 'exceptional circumstance' if you will.