-
Pocock Banned
Pocock Banned
By PETER JENKINS
February 01, 2006
ONE of Australia's brightest rugby talents is banned from playing Super 14 - because the world governing body says he's too young.
Teen sensation David Pocock, an Australian Schoolboys flanker signed by the Western Force, has been caught out by a regulation that prevents anyone under the age of 18 playing at the senior level.
According to Force chief executive Peter O'Meara, Zimbabwe-born Pocock has the "build of Adonis" at 181cm and 99kg. Rugby league legend Steve Roach, who followed the Schoolboys tour through Europe last year to watch his son Daniel in action, claims Pocock was the standout of the trip.
At 17, and with his birthday not until April 23, Pocock is ineligible for provincial or even club football until the last three weeks of Super 14.
But his case is in the spotlight after the Force defied an order from the Australian Rugby Union and played Pocock in a pre-season trial.
The ARU confirmed last night an inquiry was under way.
The rookie, who is signed to an Academy contract with the Perth-based franchise, was given 20 minutes against South African side the Cheetahs last week.
An ARU spokesman said there was a chance the Force could have funds withheld - a fine by any other name - over their decision to play the under-age star.
"We advised them he couldn't play," an ARU spokesman said last night.
"It's an (International Rugby Board) regulation and is ARU board policy. There's a bit of paper that says they can't do it."
But Pocock, whose father was flown from Brisbane to Perth by the Force to sign a waiver, last night defended his cameo.
O'Meara also vowed the Force would now toe the line over a regulation brought in only last year to ban boys from playing against men. In the NRL, players can be selected at 16 years of age.
"I loved every minute of it," said Pocock. "When I was on the field I didn't feel intimidated at all. If you're good enough you're old enough.
"Peter (O'Meara) and (coach) John Mitchell made it clear it was up to me if I wanted to play, and I was keen.
"It's just disappointing I won't have the chance to push for a (Super 14) spot this year. But I'll get stuck into training and prepare myself for next season."
O'Meara admitted the Force were aware of the IRB ruling but were never planning to thumb their noses at rugby bosses by playing Pocock in the series proper.
He also asked for leniency over trialling a youngster who has been on a high-performance program with the ARU for the past two years and is already touted as a future Wallaby.
"Because of the age regulation, we want to bring him through the under 19s and under 21s this year and then cut him loose next season," said O'Meara.
"But I think we need to look at this issue.
"(The regulation) is there to basically protect the interests of younger men who are not part of a professional organisation and are involved perhaps in (social or club) rugby. We have to accept there will be exceptions to the rule.
"Over the past 20 years, I haven't seen too many players of the same age who have had this lad's physical maturity. He's an exceptional athlete.
"The first guy who ran at him the other night was cut in half," O'Meara said.
-
So what is the opinion? Should he be allowed to play or not?
Trials - why not. As the name suggests they are just trials....
Super 14 Game - What is the difference between 17y and 364 Days and 18 anyway? If he turns 18 during the season I think that he should be able to play all games in that season.
-
First up I would say rules are rules, but then rules are also there to be modified as common sense prevails.
As O'Meara says it was designed for players at your local club not being eaten alive by gnarly old bastard opposition forwards, not to stop the development of an obvious future star.
I couldn't work out how to put the photo with the post but you can find it here http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.a...5001023,00.htm he is a bloody big lad!
I would suggest that the rules perhaps should be relaxed for professional teams and then put the onus (and liability) on the clubs to do the right thing.
The Force would be mad to do anything to that would styme the development of this fella cause I am sure he has the potential to be a real star of the future.
-
That is what they are all saying. But really, why can he play the last 3 games of the season just because he is one week older?!?
-
The Western Force's latest recruit...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2.../rugbybaby.jpg
Just kidding. :)
Player signing and selection should be at the club's descresion. It's not in the clubs interested to get young players killed, which I assume is the purpose for this rule.
-
Gotta blood them young Sage, this is a footy state you know ;)
-
Just listened to the ABC radio news, why is it that the only things that they can report are when there's something going crappy?!
If they reported more of the team news type stuff then fair enough for balance but not if that's all you hear!
Perhaps the ABC and the FTA TV networks are dirty they missed out on the broadcast o 6PR and Fox?
-
I think I have to work on the theory of Rules are Rules. RugbyWA would have to have been fully aware before they signed him. To play him and disregard the Rules is a disgrace.
Whether you agree with the rules or not - You gotta play by them.
For sure, make all efforts to get them changed to a more practical standard. But until that change happens play by the rules
-
Yup committed, I have to agree with you there and saying exceptions can be accounted for only opens rules for exploitations.
I don't like it but it's true.
-
I thought it was rather a silver lining that Channel 10 put on the coverage...I think you shouldnt be complaining about Media Coverage, note Perth Glory's coverage this year...
Has been woeful, generally the media coverage has been magnificent.
Also is Pocoe the stockiest 17 year old you have ever seen?
He must have been doing weights at 13...93.5kg :eek:
-
CH 10 had coverage???
Certainly didn't make it on to WIN (a composite of 9 and 10 programs)
Are they covering the Blues match?
ABC TV are the only ones showing anything in the bush and that includes the 10 main news that we get as the WIN news.
Perth Glory have gone the way of Perth Wildcats, lost appeal to the wider audience and basically sucking all round on the paddock.
The Force are something in a genuine international competition (as opposed to a national comp plus token NZ attendance) and still they barely rate a mention.
Rugby WA aren't really helping themselves much either, would have to be one of the deadest websites around the comp for giving news of anything involving the club, you're left to find out off news and supporter type sites.
Maybe they are snowed under from the huge membership uptake, maybe they are just resting on the laurels for having such a great public start, maybe their media and it departments aren't up to it, I dunno I just know that I'm not getting much news info from a team I'm a member of.
Take that.....
-
Strange that the ABC has been doing poor coverage since Tom Baddeley is the "Manager, Media & Communications" and he was the main news reader on Perth ABC news last year until he resigned to join the Force. You would think that he would have the contacts and the skills to present all that is good about the team.
-
"Age Restrictions 'Killing Game'"
Puts a different spin on the baning of Pocock from playing for the force this season
http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0...-23217,00.html
-
Headlines sell newspapers, or get peoples attention - but never tell us the whole truth.
"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story"
-
Burgs, Channel 10 had an interview with peter o'meara.
Lasted about 3-4 mins, was basically saying they shouldn't have been punished and it was harmless...very Force positive...