Selling the jersey?

Players often chose to step down from the International game and pursue their club career, and a lot of the time this decision is completely understandable. There are many reasons which legitimise the decision; age, injuries, living and personal circumstances, an attempt to prolong a career. But as more and more money is being thrown around at professional clubs, is this possibly going to hinder our game at International level?

When your club is your primary employer there has to be full commitment, and as the money at stake becomes higher, the more power these clubs can claim over a contracted player. For years there have been circumstances when clubs have not released player for International duty, but it has usually been involving less pestegious and important International games such as "A" team sides or mid-season friendlies. It has also usually been at a time of vital importance to the club when they need all their players to be fully committed to a certain competition or tournament.

This has almost been accepted in the past, but there are very different circumstances cropping up. In  the last few days it has been revealed that Luke McAlister has requested an early release from his NZRU contract after being omitted from the All Black Tri-Nations squad. McAlister had already signed a three-year deal with the Top 14 champions, but was set to start after the Kiwi domestic season, ma king him available for the Tri-Nations and the World Cup McAlister's ommission from the initial squad obviously hit a nerve, as he failed to turn up to training for the preparation of North Harbour's  ITM Cup opener against Otago.

Excuses have been made, but they are not convincing to all, and on the back of his request, McAlister may well be off to Toulouse early, all be it with a NZ$60,000 fine to pay him out of his existing contract. As NZRU CEO Steve Tew has said , "It's a pretty messy situation" as the the NZRU have usually been reluctant to release players from their contract as it could set a bad precedent.

So instead of playing in his domestic tournaments and fighting to regain a place in the All Black's squad, McAlister seems to have given up and taken the "money" option by leaving early to play in France. He has essentially accepted that he will not play in the 2011 World Cup, but it is more than just this. Surely he must release that the friction caused by his decision will certainly jeopardise any potential involvement he could  have with the All Blacks. At 27 years old, already with 30 caps, how sad to see such a talented player potentially burn the bridges for any future in playing for New Zealand, the most prestigious team in World rugby.

The NZRU is different to many Nations in that, as well as the clubs doing so, it contracts it's players in an attempt to have them all playing domestically. OK, this takes away opportunities for players to play abroad, but it certainly works, as a tight unit is created. As mentioned in the opening paragraph there are going to be situation in which players will give up this opportunity to play for their country and make use of other options abroad, but in McAlister's case, it just seems there is so much more he could offer.

Luke McAlister's case has been highlighted because his situation is current and the world cup is just around the corner, but there are many other players looking for the extra money by sacrificing International opportunities. Now, McAlister may have genuine and legitimate reasons for his decision which aren't purely based on money, but at the moment they certainly aren't apparent. If the pessimistic view of the McAlister saga is in fact the correct one, will other players start to prioritise potential earnings over the possibility to play for their country?