Gregor Paul: Ponder this - Can NZRU legally deny McAlister?

There is something the New Zealand Rugby Union board will have to decide if they refuse to make Luke McAlister immediately eligible for the All Blacks - would that be legal?

It doesn't seem so. A collective agreement is in place for all New Zealand's professional players. Could it really be legal to have 140 players employed on one basis and McAlister on another?

Wouldn't it be a restraint of trade if he was told he can't immediately play for the All Blacks when he returns in May? And wouldn't it be considered discriminatory to brand him ineligible?

He would be penalised for a decision he made in 2007 to go overseas, yet both Leon MacDonald and Troy Flavell made the same decisions a few years back and both were able to slot into the All Blacks immediately.

Those two players went to Japan so they returned in time to play Super Rugby and fulfil the requirement of having appeared in the preceding domestic competition before All Black selection in June.

It could even be argued, then, that McAlister would be discriminated against not for having gone overseas, but for having gone specifically to England.

The reasons why the NZRU created this ruling are almost fair enough. They didn't want those players who stayed at home to feel betrayed when it came to All Black selection.

If they had slugged their guts out through a Super Rugby campaign, it would be soul-destroying to miss out to some bloke who had been playing in England. It was a message to those who went offshore, that if they chose the money ahead of the jersey, it wouldn't be so easy to get the jersey back.

Really, though, when it was put in place in 2003, no one envisaged the current market. At that time the typical player going offshore was just past his best. He was in the autumn of his career and looking for one last major contract, knowing that he would never be coming back.

Then it all changed. Players like McAlister, Aaron Mauger, Carl Hayman and Sam Tuitupou decided to leave in their mid-20s. The offshore stint was no longer a means to top up the pension fund - it was more of an intriguing interlude with the option of a return home and the resumption of a test career very likely.

The existing rule about eligibility belongs to a different age. It has been made to look awkward and ill-conceived.

The best course of action would be to scrap it and for everyone to understand that being eligible is no guarantee of selection.

There will not be an influx of returning players fast-tracked into the All Blacks simply because they are eligible.

Surely the best solution in the case of McAlister is to grant him an exemption and say he is eligible for All Black selection the day he comes home.

It will then be up to All Black coach Graham Henry to determine whether McAlister is worthy of selection. That is what Henry and his team are paid to do - make decisions about who are the best players in this country.

They also have a track record - much to the chagrin of the old school - of pushing welfare to the top of the agenda.

Given that McAlister will be coming home with a full season behind him, it might be that Henry would rather the 25-year-old took some time out in June, conditioned in July and then played some games for Harbour (or whatever province he signs for) in August.

McAlister could then come into the All Black frame for the final two Tri Nations tests on September 12 and 19, assuming Henry thought there was merit in calling him up.

If the NZRU board have faith in Henry and his ability to select the right players, to manage their expectations and communicate clearly his longer term plans for them, then they have to scrap the existing eligibility ruling.