Where the Grass is Greener: Irish rugby union, migrant coaches and the globalisation debate
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Football Studies, vol. 8 no. 1 2005
Where the Grass is Greener: Irish rugby union, migrant
coaches and the globalisation debate
Alan Bairner Darren Barbour
Loughborough University University of Ulster
Loughborough, England Jordanstown, Northern Ireland
Introduction
This article is intended to make a contribution to the debate on the relationship
between globalisation and sport with particular reference to labour migration.
The study concentrates on the migration into Ireland of southern hemisphere
rugby union coaches, and the findings are based on in depth interviews with
seven of those coaches. Although the article reinforces some existing ideas
about, and approaches, to athletic labour migration, by examining coaches
rather than players and by asking rather different questions than have
previously been asked, it is hoped that it also offers new insights. In particular,
the article explores the coaches' understanding of the general process in which
they are involved and their perception of the implications of that process for
rugby in Ireland and as a global activity.
'Globalization is the "name" that is often used to designate the power
relations, practices and technologies that characterize and have helped to bring
into being, the contemporary world' (Schirato & Webb, 2003, p. 1), however,
as Tony Schirato and Jennifer Webb (2003, p. 2) acknowledge, there have been
intense debates about its meanings and applications. These have involved not
only the general meaning and analytical applicability of the concept but also its
significance in relation to specialist areas of study. For example, the
'globalisation' of sport and its cultural implications have received considerable
scholarly attention in recent years, however, as Joseph Maguire (1994a, p. 398)
observes, 'discussion of the concept has been marked by a degree of
confusion'. Attempts to clarify this confusion have been made by, amongst
others, Maguire (1999) and also by Peter Donnelly (1996), Jean Harvey,
Genvieve Rail and Lucie Thibault (1996), Alan Bairner (2001) and Toby
Miller, Geoff Lawrence, Jim McKay and David Rowe (2001). How successful
these authors have been in this respect is a different matter. What has become
apparent, however, is that there are certain key elements that surface time and
again in debates concerning the relationship between globalisation and sport.
The main aspects of these debates are as follows. First, there is
disagreement about when the set of developments that have been categorised
under the general heading of 'globalisation' actually began. Second, there is
considerable discussion as to what has driven this set of developments forward.
Third, there is conflict surrounding the question of what these developments
27Irish Rugby, Migrant Coaches and Globalisation
have meant especially with reference to the possibility that they are responsible
for increased cultural homogeneity. It is this third debate which is of crucial
importance to the present study.
As Roland Robertson (1995, p. 26) notes, 'much of the talk about
globalization has tended to assume that it is a process which overrides locality,
including large-scale locality such as is exhibited in the various ethnic
nationalisms which have seemingly arisen in various parts of the world in
recent years'. Indeed, according to Robertson (1995, p. 29):
there is a widespread tendency to regard this problematic as
straightforwardly involving a polarity, which assumes its most acute
form in the claim that we live in a world of local assertions against
globalising trends, a world in which the very idea of locality is
sometimes cast as a form of opposition or resistance to the
hegemonically global
For Robertson (1995, p. 34), however, 'it makes no sense to define the global
as if the global excludes the local'. Calling for the debate about global
homogenisation versus local heterogenisation to be transcended, Robertson
(1995, p. 27) adds: 'It is not a question of either homogenization or
heterogenization, but rather of the ways in which both of these tendencies have
become features of life across much of the late twentieth-century world'. This
discussion is taken to a higher level of abstraction by John Urry (2003) who
rails against the national/global dichotomy, which represents the latter as if it
were a new region. According to Urry (2003, p. 43), this 'territorial trap'
ignores the fact that global systems are inherently entropic and challenge the
very notion of the bounded region.
Most literature concerned with the impact of globalisation on sport has
tended to regard both the local and the global as somewhat more finite than
Urry would suggest. Indeed much debate has centred on the nature of the
relationship between the two. Thus, Maguire (1999) warns that homogeneity
and integration should not be overstated in the globalisation debate. On the
other hand, his adoption of the concept of 'diminishing contrasts and increasing
varieties' also suggests a reluctance to embrace any simple notion of a
persistently heterogeneous sporting landscape (Maguire, 1994a, p. 402).
Elsewhere it has been argued that sport does allow local particularisms, such as
national traditions, to resist homogeneity although the heterogeneity that
remains is necessarily marked by the stamp of globalising tendencies (Bairner,
2001). However, whilst respecting such an argument, David Rowe (2003, p.
281) has sought to go beyond 'an apparently emerging consensus in the
sociology of sport that cultural nationalism and (g)localism resist globalising
processes, and also that the progress of globalization is unevenly developed
across space and time'. According to Rowe (2003, p. 282), 'the social
28Solidarity and Market Power in German Soccer Football Studies, vol. 8 no. 1 2005
institution of sport is so deeply dependent on the production of difference that it
repudiates the possibility of comprehensive globalization while seeming to
foreshadow its inevitable establishment'. Thus, rather than simply allowing for
the peaceful coexistence of the global and the local, 'international sport's
fundamental reliance on localized, nationally inflected forms of identity
inevitably also offers resources for the mobilization of conscious and
unconscious anti-globalization' (Rowe, 2003, pp. 291-2). Whilst this claim has
merit, it conjures up a dichotomy that fails to do justice to the nuances of the
relationship between global and local phenomena. Even George Ritzer (2004,
p. 138) who has recently characterised globalisation as 'a historic movement
from something to nothing', accepts that 'there certainly continues to be a
glocalization of something' (Ritzer, 2004, p. 106). He denies, however, that this
something is as significant as glocalisation theorists would wish to believe. Yet
the validity of this assertion can only be tested at the level of people's everyday
lives and experiences and not simply in the rarefied atmosphere of theoretical
abstraction (Bairner, 2005). Thus, there is a constant need to interrogate the
lives of those whose experiences are in some way reflective of the processes
collectively categorised under the heading of globalisation.
One such theme often cited as an exemplar of the globalisation of sport is
the migration of athletic talent. It should be noted at the outset, however, that
discussions of this phenomenon have tended to focus on debates about when
globalisation began and what precise factors drive it forwards. The debate
about cultural homogenisation has played a less significant role in this
particular area of what one might describe as globalisation studies.
Theorising athletic labour migration
As David Stead and Joseph Maguire (2000, p. 36) note, 'today's global
commercial village is inhabited by increasingly cosmopolitan workforces'. But
how novel is this phenomenon? Although Maguire (1999) recognises that
'cultural workers' such as artists, musicians and poets and scholars have moved
around royal courts, salons and universities for a considerable period of time,
following Arjun Appadurai (1990) he asserts that the migration of sports talent
as athletic labour is a major feature of the 'new global cultural economy'. One
would wish to question the general implication that 'cultural workers', or what
Antonio Gramsci would have called traditional intellectuals, possess a unique
history in this respect. Migration of various types has been a feature of human
development for many centuries. Furthermore, the movement of athletic talent
has been a consistent feature of modern sport and cannot be regarded as in any
way peculiar to a modern type of global economy unless the origins of
modernity are correctly located in the late eighteenth century. With reference to
one major sport, for example, Pierre Lanfranchi and Matthew Taylor (2001, p.
1) argue that 'the tradition of cosmopolitan teams is deeply rooted in world
football history' and 'from the very start of the game, men have moved across
29Irish Rugby, Migrant Coaches and Globalisation
national borders, and from city to city, to play football'. One thinks, for
example, of Steve Bloomer, born in 1874, who enjoyed a highly successful
playing career with Derby County, Middlesbrough and England and went on to
coach in Germany, the Netherlands and Spain, or to be more exact, the Basque
country, where he spent two seasons (1923-5) with Real Union Club Iran
(Seddon, 1999). In cricket we could point to the examples of K. S. Ranjitsinhji
who was playing for Sussex County Cricket Club at the beginning of the
twentieth century (Ross, 1983) or Sir Learie Constantine who played for
Nelson in the Lancashire League between 1929 and 1939 (Howat, 1975). It is
true of course that the number of people who currently migrate with the sole
intention of pursuing sporting careers is greater than at any time in the past.
Nevertheless, the fact that they have been preceded by others militates against
claims that we are now living in a wholly new global universe.
It is undeniable that figurational sociology has been in the forefront of
attempts to explain sports labour migration (Maguire, 1994b; Maguire, 1996;
Maguire, 1999; Maguire & Stead, 1996; Maguire & Stead, 1998; Stead &
Maguire, 2000) although leading exponents such as Maguire have also
collaborated with scholars from other perspectives and drawn upon work
produced outside of the figurational tradition (See for example Bale &
Maguire, 1994; Klein, 1991). Other prominent contributions to the debate have
been made by Lanfranchi and Taylor (2001) and Magee and Sugden (2002).
According to Maguire (1999, p. 98), 'sports labour migration occurs at
three levels: within nations, between nations located within the same continent
and between nations located in different continents and hemispheres'. One
could legitimately add migration that occurs within nation states but between
nations since this would help us to theorise the migration to England of
professional footballers from Ireland, Scotland and Wales that can be traced
back to the end of the nineteenth century (Lanfranchi & Taylor, 2001).
Most of the sports migration studies have tended to focus on the reasons
why athletes migrate and how they experience life as migrants. Indeed, scholars
have gone to considerable lengths to classify motivations and experiences.
Thus Maguire (1999, p. 104) argues that:
while it is important to explore the lived migrant experience, in order to
understand how the sports star interprets relocation and the sense of
being an outsider in an established culture, it is necessary to use a
conceptual framework that avoids separating this experience from global
cultural processes.
The need for such a conceptual framework leads Maguire (1999) to his
categorisation of sports labour migrants as 'pioneers', 'settlers', 'returnees',
'mercenaries' and 'nomadic cosmopolitans', categories that overlap at the
margins but which Maguire (1999) implies are sufficiently self contained for
30Football Studies, vol. 8 no. 1 2005
the purposes of mapping patterns of migration in global sport. Jonathan Magee
and John Sugden (2002, p. 429) suggest unfairly that this approach 'tends to
pigeonhole migrants into one or other exclusive category'. More usefully, in
constructing a typology suitable for analysing foreign migrants in English
league football, they offer three additional categories: 'ambitionists', 'expelled'
and 'exiled'. Nevertheless, much, if not all, of the analysis informed by the
typological approach has focussed primarily on athletes with other participants
in the sports world being largely ignored. The present study, therefore, differs
from much existing work on athletic labour migration in two main ways.
Although the research touches on motivational issues, it does so only as a
preface to the main theme of the article, which consists of an examination of
the perceptions that migrants have of the sporting context to which they have
relocated and the impact that they believe their arrival may have had on that
context. Indeed, with regard to attempts to classify the various types of
migrants, the authors are inclined towards what some might think of as the
somewhat simplistic and hopelessly determinist view that few people migrate
with an expectation of experiencing an irreversible decline in their material
fortunes. To that extent virtually all of them are mercenaries to a greater or
lesser extent although it is important not to think of material improvement
solely in terms of instant financial reward.
In addition to asking these coaches specific questions about their Irish
experiences, it was also possible to tap into their wider knowledge of rugby in
order to address issues relating to cultural homogenisation. As Maguire and his
colleagues (2002, p. 26) note, sensitising questions in research into sports
labour migration include: 'which sports are most involved, why have they been
so affected and what structural or cultural changes have thus occurred in those
sports?' It is the third of these questions that particularly informs the present
study and how it is answered hopefully sheds light on the globalisation project
more generally. Asking coaches for their thoughts on this topic inevitably leads
to the reproduction of subjective points of view and no attempt has been made
to evaluate the opinions expressed with reference to other criteria such as match
statistics or performance analysis. Nevertheless it is argued that the emphasis in
this study on coaches as opposed to players ensures a relatively higher level of
self-analysis and mature reflection.
Method
As a senior player with one of Ireland's leading clubs, it was relatively easy for
one of the researchers to use his connections in order to approach overseas
coaches who were either currently working in Ireland or had done so in the
past. For the purposes of this study, eight coaches were identified as useful
subjects. One declined to become involved and seven were eventually
interviewed. These consisted of three coaches who had experience of working
with provincial sides in Ireland, three who have worked with Division One
31Irish Rugby, Migrant Coaches and Globalisation
sides and a former coach of the Irish national team. The national backgrounds
represented by these seven subjects are South Africa (3), Australia (2) and New
Zealand (2). The semi-structured interviews enabled the authors to be flexible
in terms of tempo and topics covered. In addition, although semi-structured, the
interviews were conducted in a relatively open manner allowing the subjects to
expand on their rugby experiences and to offer personal judgments. The fact
that one of the authors had been coached by more than one of the interviewees
helped to encourage an atmosphere of trust. Certainly none of those who were
interviewed appeared to be in any way circumspect about offering their
opinions and although their identities have not been disclosed in this study, that
was not a condition of them taking part in the initial research project.
The first element of each interview simply sought to establish the rugby
experience of the seven interviewees. Three of them had played at international
level. All of the others had played club rugby to a relatively high standard
although two of them had had their playing careers cut short through injury. All
of them had been involved in coaching since the early 1990s and had arrived in
Ireland, for the first time as coaches, between 1989 and 2001. The interviews,
which were conducted between January and March 2003, then proceeded to
consider more contentions issues.
Why Ireland?
In keeping with previous studies of athletic labour migration, one of the first
issues explored with the interviewees were their reasons for coming to Ireland.
Superficially, at least, these varied markedly. One South African was clearly
disappointed that he had not been appointed as national coach and felt it was
time to move on. His travels had previously taken him around the world and
two countries in particular had appealed to him - Ireland and New Zealand -
and the offer to continue his career as a top level coach had come from Ireland.
Personal ambition was clearly the determining factor here. A compatriot had
simply wanted experience of coaching in Europe and, although the appeal of
working with French players had been considerable, language became a
significant factor. The third South African had been approached by a former
Irish internationalist to coach the club with which he is strongly associated, and
he had accepted this invitation. One of the New Zealanders noted that he had
toured Ireland with the 1989 All Blacks and was invited to stay on as a club
coach. The other New Zealander disclosed that his grandmother came from
Ireland and that he had always expected to trace his roots at some stage. One of
the Australians revealed that he has Irish ancestry and an Irish passport:
I am in fact of Irish background so I have a foot in both camps, an Irish
wolfhound you could say, born in Australia and still an Irish wolfhound.
I have great pride in coming back to Ireland. It's fantastic. My mother
was born here and I've always felt that affinity.
32Football Studies, vol. 8 no. 1 2005
Whilst he had hoped to coach in the English Premiership, personal contacts had
facilitated an offer to work in Ireland. The other Australian simply wished to
coach and live abroad and to give his children new educational opportunities. It
appears that the fact that he had ended up in Ireland was largely accidental.
The quest for new experiences, the desire to enhance one's coaching
profile, personal contacts and Irish connections all feature in the interviewees'
explanations for why they decided to coach in Ireland. What was not mentioned
explicitly at this stage in the interviews was money although it should be noted
that one of the South Africans at a later stage commented that 'money is a
major reason for labour migration' and that 'the amount of money that an
individual player/coach can earn in the Northern hemisphere is far in excess of
what he can earn in SANZAR'. This was contradicted by a New Zealand born
club coach who claimed: 'it's not the money we are coming for because
coaching a club side in Ireland we are only living from hand to mouth'. He
admitted, however, that he owns a farm 'back home' which might suggest that
instant financial gratification via rugby was not a major requirement.
It was clear from the evidence provided in the interviews that there were
mercenary aspects to the decision of all of these coaches to move to Ireland.
Although financial inducements were seldom referred to by the interviewees,
comments that were made concerning the experience of coaching in a different
country certainly indicated a fair measure of self interest. It would also be
possible to describe two of the coaches as returnees insofar as they had returned
to the land of their ancestors. None can be classified as pioneers, settlers or
nomadic cosmopolitans. None of the coaches interviewed expressed any real
anger about the reasons that lay behind his migration. One claimed that 'as far
as coaching in South Africa was concerned it was clear to me from a political
point of view that I wasn't going to be appointed as the national coach'. As he
did not elaborate on what he meant by 'political', it would be difficult on the
basis of this comment to refer to him as an exile far less an expelled person.
Certainly his words were less emotive than those of former Springbok captain
Francois Pienaar, who had felt obliged to leave South Africa five years earlier.
For my part I would be lying if I claimed no longer to feel any pain at the
events of 1996, and the end of my Springbok career. . . . And I will
always bitterly regret that I was unable to leave Springbok rugby on my
own terms, on my own feet (Pienaar, 1999, pp. 270-1).
All in all therefore to varying degrees these men had arrived in Ireland in order
to advance their careers, not necessarily to earn more in the first instance,
although it is unlikely that any of them had been asked to accept a major salary
cut, but certainly to ensure material advancement in the long term. Having
established their motivation, the interviews then turned to what they found
once the move had been made.
33Irish Rugby, Migrant Coaches and Globalisation
How green was the grass?
The coaches were asked to recall their initial impressions of Irish rugby. They
all felt that structures had been poor and skills levels lower than they had
anticipated. As one club coach put it: 'The two words which spring to mind . . .
were that the whole set up was "very amateurish'". Another club coach
commented: 'Without being arrogant or anything like that the standard is quite
poor and also there is not the playing numbers here'. The third club coach
agreed, admitting that 'the skill level was a lot lower than I thought it would
be'. Several interviewees were more reticent on this issue but one provincial
coach arguably spoke for them all when he recalled: 'I saw a huge amount of
opportunity, tremendous natural talent but technically poor, tactically poor and
underdeveloped as they didn't have a structure for playing at elite level'.
All of the coaches accepted that their impressions of Irish rugby quickly
changed, however, this is not to suggest that they believed their initial
impressions were erroneous. Rather they felt changes had been implemented,
which had clearly helped to develop the structures and the skill levels that they
believe had previously been lacking. One provincial coach referred to
'substantial changes'. Another observed that 'it was just quite difficult here for
the first six months without any structures, but now it's up and running and I
really find the people great to work with'. The former coach of the national
team claimed that 'there has been a massive improvement in all areas of Irish
rugby'. A club coach talked about the whole set up becoming 'a lot more
professional' although the two other clubs coaches who were interviewed both
expressed reservations about how much progress is actually being made.
The coaches were also asked to be more specific about the positive and
negative aspects of contemporary Irish rugby. Most of them commented of the
achievements of the national team and of provincial sides, particularly in
European competitions. One provincial coach explained in some detail, and
with a degree of hyperbole, the grounds for optimism:
The positives are that we are proving that we can win major
competitions, we can win the World Cup, we can pretty much compete
with anyone else in the world. There is enormous support for the team
and enormous pride in the team. There is a wealth of good players in
Leinster and Munster, as in numbers, numerically. There is great
dedication, the athletes are very coachable guys, they buy into it, they
listen and they have a great work ethic.
That said, all agreed there still remained numerous negative features although
there was only partial agreement as to what these are. Thus, a provincial coach
criticised what he regarded as the institutionalisation of players through which
'schoolboys are patterned too quickly'. A club coach suggested that clubs need
to be 'more commercially driven'. Similarly, the former national coach
34Football Studies, vol. 8 no. 1 2005
expressed the opinion that whilst many things are right with the Irish game,
some aspects remain amateur. Another club coach also identified club rugby as
a negative, opining that there are too many senior clubs and claiming that 'the
quality I think is pretty much crap in comparison with what I have experienced
back home in Australia'. The third club coach took a different approach and
ironically argued that bringing foreign players to Ireland would act in the long
term as an obstacle to developing local talent. This contention was supported
by the former national coach who concluded his assessment by saying that
'maybe there are too many foreign players and there is not enough autonomy
for the provinces'. One provincial coach criticised the structure of the season
but recognised that this was a problem that cannot be attributed to or solved by
the Irish alone. Another provincial coach argued that the most lamentable
characteristic of Irish rugby is its inferiority complex especially when faced
with southern hemisphere opposition.
Making a difference?
Having invited the coaches to comment on how they had initially perceived
Irish rugby and to consider the ways in which it had evolved during their time
in the country, it was time to ask them if they felt that they had been influential
in facilitating change. When asked if he had been a major influence in altering
the fortunes of Irish rugby, the former national coach simply answered, 'Yes'.
He added that he had brought 'experience', 'knowing what it's like to win' and
'coal face experience of top coaching and changes in the game'. When asked if
he had made a major impact, a South African born provincial coach answered,
'Oh, yes, I have', although he qualified this by adding that he had been allowed
to have an influence because of the supportive attitude of people in his
province. He went on to explain his own role:
One of my strengths would be the introduction of young players into
professional rugby set ups. I think that is one of the biggest things that I
have offered them and then the other thing is that you always get a good
return on investment if you have a good structure and you have happy
players.
Some of the other interviewees were more modest in their responses. One
provincial coach replied:
I will leave that to others to judge how 1 have been and what I have done,
but I feel that everyone has played a role over the last two years, our
management team which is very, very good and very strong, our squad
of players, the branch and the supporters have all played a role in
ensuring that we have had continuous progression and continuous
improvement in.
35Irish Rugby, Migrant Coaches and Globalisation
He did, however, feel that he had brought new ideas to Ireland as a result of his
previous experience of other countries:
My experiences are that I have travelled to all the major rugby playing
countries in the world and that is important as well, and cross pollination
of ideas is always important and I have obviously come across with ideas
from the southern hemisphere which I'm not saying are any better than
ideas in the northern hemisphere, but they are different and perhaps this
stimulates the thought process so you know I would think that has been a
positive contribution.
Another provincial coach was also initially circumspect:
You can't say oh yes definitely, it's all me. It's not. A coach adds value
to the product. My grandmother could coach . . . and he would still be a
great player, coz he is a great player. I would hope that the fact that when
I took over . . . we were ranked thirty two, now we are ranked two in
Europe, so I would like to think I had a part in that, but I would never
suggest that I am the reason for everything.
Having mentioned the players, the officials and the backroom staff, this
particular coach, however, then added that he had given 'some leadership',
which had allowed the potential to be realised. He clearly believed that a major
contribution would consist of training Irish-born coaches to take the place of
people like himself. A club coach, originally from South Africa expressed the
view that the attributes that he has brought to Irish rugby are 'professionalism,
new ideas, planning and intensity'. He also suggested that his 'expansive
rugby' has had an impact in general. Nevertheless he expressed concern that his
influence is 'not big enough'.
In sum, although some of the coaches were more circumspect than
others, what emerged from the interviews was a general feeling that all of them
believed that they had exerted a positive influence on Irish rugby. But to what
extent might that involve making Irish rugby less distinctive than it has been in
the past? To what extent, that is, did they see themselves as being involved in a
process leading to cultural homogenisation?
Irish rugby and homogenisation
It has long been believed that Irish rugby possesses its own special
characteristics epitomised by players like Keith Wood. The game in Ireland has
been regarded as essentially spontaneous and free flowing, exhibiting none of
the organisational strengths that have been associated with Antipodean or even
English rugby (Tuck, 2005). Exponents of the argument that global exchange
inevitably leads to cultural homogeneity might, however, be inclined to the
36Football Studies, vol. 8 no. 1 2005
view that the global movement of coaches signals the end of national styles of
play. But what do such coaches themselves feel about this line of thought?
The former coach of the Irish national team was in no doubt although he
did not fully answer the question put to him. 'We are already seeing this', he
claimed. 'Countries with the money and finances have benefited hugely from
the input of foreign coaches and players'. But is homogeneity the result? One
provincial coach, originally from South Africa, suggested that homogenisation
is inevitable. 'There will be a globalization of rugby,' he remarked, 'and a
globalisation of ideas'. Furthermore, he believed that this process would
initially be the consequence of the influence on northern hemisphere rugby of
southern hemisphere attitudes although in time there might be the possibility of
increased cross-cultural exchange:
The southern hemisphere coaches coming in here bring with them a
southern hemisphere influence of ideas into the northern hemisphere, and
there is less of a northern hemisphere influence going across to the
southern hemisphere, but that will happen in time and I think you will
get ideas from the northern hemisphere coming across to the southern
hemisphere.
Whatever the precise factors involved, this particular coach was in no doubt
that rugby 'will be a more homogeneous game due to the movement of
coaches'. Similarly, when asked if the movement of coaches in rugby would
cause greater homogeneity in playing styles, a club coach, originally from
Australia, replied, 'It has to, doesn't it?' He went on to explain:
The reason that England has progressed as quickly as it has is because it
has had a whole series of foreign coaches in its Premiership, and added
another dimension which it previously didn't have in the English game, a
more competitive and different style and different ways of playing as
opposed to ten man rugby how England may have played previously.
Another provincial coach from South Africa agreed but was also keen to
take account of local sensibilities. Using a European example, he commented
that 'if you go to France, you know, some coaches would say that this is the
only way to play':
in South Africa you would always have a specific style and in France
you have something very different. You can only work with what you
have so you are not going to change boys in the west of Ireland into
South Africans and neither do you change South Africans into Irish
people.
37Irish Rugby, Migrant Coaches and Globalisation
Nevertheless, globalisation makes an undeniable impact inasmuch as the
movement of rugby coaches 'teaches everybody that it is a world game that's
got even bigger, and not just the small area which you are from'. But this need
not mean 'everybody playing the same and doing things the same way'. Indeed
he challenged any notion that he himself is a typical South African coach,
claiming that he has 'always tried to play a world game'.
One of the club coaches noted, however, that coaches do bring with them
their own national styles. Adding a note of controversy, not least given his own
South African background, he expanded upon this assertion:
For example the Aussies do a lot of run arounds and emphasise
continuity and at international level they are very conservative. England
have become more expansive in the past few years. New Zealand play a
rucking style and the South Africans are a bunch of bullies.
Despite his earlier comments on national playing styles, he went on to say that,
as a coach, he is 'not a fan of one style of play'. His emphasis is on
adaptability. Because other coaches appear to think the same way, they do not
necessarily import their national styles of play, preferring to place their
individual coaching signature on the sides with which they are associated. An
Australian born provincial coach expressed concern that the opportunities for
coaches to make their own individual impact might become increasingly rare.
'Australia now play more like New Zealand', he claimed, 'it's boring, there's
no expansion about the game, there is no decision making or creativity which
was always the Australians' hallmark'. Nevertheless he expressed the view that
international networking would lead to new ideas and that his own provincial
team had demonstrated 'a new way of thinking, an adoption of some other
forms to new parts of the sport which is great for rugby union'.
In general, therefore, the coaches agreed that greater homogeneity is
inevitable. Several qualified this, however, by emphasising the ways in which
the cross-fertilisation of ideas about how the game should be played would lead
to innovation. To that extent they appeared to underline the 'diminishing
contrasts, increasing varieties' thesis. Only one coach, a New Zealander
working with a provincial side, argued unequivocally for the retention of
national styles of play, as 'it is important for each country to keep its identity':
You only have to look at the South Africans who jumped on the
bandwagon, and then New Zealand also got sucked into trying to play
like the Aussies. That was never New Zealand's style of rugby . . . The
conditions in New Zealand don't allow us to play like the Aussies for a
starter, and certainly in the northern hemisphere the conditions certainly
don't allow for a running style of rugby at this time of year so why try to
go down that line.
38Football Studies, vol. 8 no. 1 2005
This particular coach insisted that 'countries realise that they have their own
standard and should go down them lines'. Hence, he observed, 'whilst I have a
few ideas about changing things I don't believe that I should be changing the
whole structure of club rugby or Irish rugby'. For this coach, the important task
was for there to be 'a balance between what a coach brings from his own
background and applying it to certain facets which already exist'.
The views of these coaches tended to reproduce the state of confusion in
intellectual circles regarding the impact of global forces. Some clearly believe
that homogenisation is unavoidable. But there was also some support for what
might be termed the glocalisation thesis according to which global thinking
about rugby will necessarily be adjusted to local conditions. Finally the view
remains in some quarters that national playing styles will be able to resist
homogenisation regardless of the global movement of coaches.
Conclusion
Interestingly, regardless of how they viewed their own contribution to Irish
rugby, almost all of the coaches claimed that they had learned a great deal as a
consequence of working in Ireland. Whilst allowing for the fact they may have
regarded this as a diplomatic point to make, their comments go some way
towards challenging the belief that a homogeneous global approach, originating
in the southern hemisphere, has already attained hegemonic status. One
provincial coach admitted: 'I have had to coach in a completely different
environment from which I have coached before and I think it has been very
positive for me'. Another agreed: 'I have certainly learned a lot and it has given
me a broader vision of how the game should be played'. But what do their
experiences and their personal reflections on those experiences add to our
understanding of the globalisation debate.
This article has sought to examine the reflections of a group of people
whose lives have become intimately bound up with the globalisation of sport.
These coaches may legitimately be seen as front line combatants in the ongoing
struggle involving the global, the national and the local. In the first instance, it
is undeniable that these men are part of the global movement of sporting labour.
Their reasons for becoming migrants are varied, some of them 'returning' to
the land of their ancestors, all of them expressing some degree of missionary
zeal. Nevertheless a desire to improve their material lot at least in the long
term, by advancing their coaching careers, is certainly a major factor in each
case. In answering questions about homogenisation and about the impact on
Irish rugby of foreign coaches, all of them understood the issues involved. They
acknowledged the pressure to adopt playing styles that have proved successful
and therein lies the very real possibility of an emergent global style of play. Yet
partly because of an appreciation of their own national backgrounds and partly
as a consequence of their experiences in Ireland, they were also conscious of
the importance of local circumstances and national traits. Given that these are
39Irish Rugby, Migrant Coaches and Globalisation
men who possess considerable power to make regional and national ways of
playing conform to a global style, their appreciation that this would be difficult
and perhaps even undesirable suggests that heterogeneity in world rugby union
is likely to persist well into the future. As labour migrants with key roles to
play, these coaches could easily be seen as being in the vanguard of
globalisation and of the cultural homogenisation that is often associated with it.
It is highly significant, therefore, that few, if any, of them are willing to
contribute unequivocally to what for some commentators would be regarded as
globalisation's logical conclusion.
REFERENCES
Appadurai, A. (1990). Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural
economy. Theory, Culture and Society; 7 (2/3), 295-310.
Bairner, A. (2001). Sport, nationalism, and globalization. European and North
American perspectives. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Bairner, A. (2005). Sport and the nation in a global world. In L. Allison (Ed.),
The global politics of sport (pp. 87-100). London: Routledge.
Bale, J. & Maguire, J. (Eds.) (1994). The global sports arena: Athletic talent
migration in an interdependent world. London: Frank Cass.
Donnelly, P. (1996). The local and the global: Globalization in the sociology of
sport. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 20(3), 239-57.
Harvey, J., Rail, G. & Thibault, L. (1996). Globalization and sport: Sketching a
theoretical model for empirical analysis. Journal of Sport and Social
Issues, 20(3), 258-77.
Howat, G. (1975). Learie Constantine. London: George Allen and Unwin.
Klein, A. (1991). Sugarball. The American game, the Dominican dream. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Lanfranchi, P. & Taylor, M. (2001). Moving with the ball. The migration of
professional footballers. Oxford: Berg.
Magee, J. & Sugden, J. (2002). 'The world at their feet'. Professional football
and international labor migration. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 26
(4), 421-37.
Maguire, J. (1994a). Sport, identity politics, and globalization: Diminishing
contracts and increasing varieties. Sociology of Sport Journal, 11(4), 398-
427.
Maguire, J. (1994b). Preliminary observations on globalisation and the
migration of sports labour. Sociological Review, 42(3), 452-80.
Maguire, J. (1996). Blade runners: Canadian migrants and global ice-hockey
trails. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 20(3), 335-60.
Maguire, J. (1999). Global sport. Identities, societies, civilizations. London:
Polity Press.
40Football Studies, vol. 8 no. 1 2005
Maguire, J., Jarvie, G., Mansfield, L. & Bradley, J. (2002). Sport worlds. A
sociological perspective. Champaign: Human Kinetics.
Maguire, J. & Stead, D. (1996). 'Far Pavilions'? Cricket migrants, foreign
sojourn and contested identities. International Review for the Sociology of
Sport, 31(1), 1-25.
Maguire, J. & Stead, D. (1998). Border crossings: Soccer labour migration and
the European Union. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 33
(1), 59-73.
Miller, T., Lawrence, G., McKay, J. & Rowe, D. (2001). Globalization and
sport. Playing the world. London: Sage Publications.
Pienaar, F. (1999). Rainbow warrior. London: HarperCollins.
Ritzer, G. (2004). The globalization of nothing. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge
Press.
Robertson, R. (1995). Glocalization: Time-space and homogeneity-
heterogeneity. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash & R. Robertson (Eds.), Global
modernities (pp. 25-44). London: Sage.
Ross, A. (1983). Ranji. Prince of Cricketers. London: Collins.
Rowe, D. (2003). Sport and the repudiation of the global, International Review
for the Sociology of Sport, 38(3), 281-94.
Schirato, T. & Webb, J. (2003). Understanding globalization. London: Sage.
Seddon, S. (1999). Steve Bloomer. The story of football's first superstar.
Derby: Breedon Books.
Stead, D. & Maguire, J. (2000). 'Rite de passage' or passage to riches? The
motivation and objectives of Nordic/Scandinavian players in English
league soccer. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 24(1), 36-60.
Tuck, J. (2005). Rugby union and national identity politics. In A. Bairner (Ed.)
Sport and the Irish. Histories, identities, issues (pp. 105-22). Dublin:
University College Dublin Press.
Urry, J. (2003). Global complexity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
41You can also read
