In a dramatic turn of events, Laijipa Naulivou has been reinstated as Fiji Rugby’s Director of Rugby, just weeks after her controversial dismissal. The decision, which has sent shockwaves through the rugby community, has reignited fierce debates over leadership, inclusivity, and the future of Fiji Rugby.
Naulivou was initially removed from her position following remarks about same-sex relationships in women’s rugby, which were widely condemned as discriminatory. The Fiji Rugby Union (FRU) took swift action, emphasizing their commitment to inclusion and equality. However, her unexpected return suggests a power struggle behind the scenes, raising questions about who truly controls the direction of Fijian rugby.
Sources close to the FRU indicate that pressure from key stakeholders and internal lobbying played a significant role in Naulivou’s reinstatement. Some influential figures within the union reportedly argued that her dismissal was “too hasty” and that her expertise in the sport outweighed the controversy surrounding her comments.
The announcement has sparked mixed reactions among fans and players. While some supporters believe Naulivou’s return will bring stability and experience to the sport, others feel betrayed by what they see as a step backward for inclusivity in Fijian rugby. Social media platforms have been flooded with divided opinions, with hashtags both celebrating and condemning the decision trending online.
Women’s rugby players, in particular, have voiced concerns over what this means for the team’s environment. Several former and current players have expressed disappointment, with one anonymous player stating, “This sends a message that our voices don’t matter.” On the other hand, a few players have defended Naulivou, emphasizing her technical skills and leadership in the sport.
The FRU has yet to release a detailed statement explaining the sudden reversal, but insiders suggest that political and financial factors may have influenced the decision. Some reports indicate that major sponsors and board members exerted pressure on the union, threatening financial consequences if Naulivou was not brought back.
This unexpected twist has also caught the attention of Fiji’s government, with officials calling for greater transparency in the FRU’s decision-making. A sports ministry representative stated, “This is not just about one person—it’s about the values we uphold in Fijian sports.”
As the dust settles, one thing is clear: Naulivou’s return is far from just another administrative change. It has reignited national discussions on leadership, values, and the future of Fijian rugby. Whether this decision will strengthen or divide the sport further remains to be seen.
For now, all eyes are on Naulivou. Will she address the controversy head-on, or will her return deepen the divide? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain—Fiji Rugby will never be the same again.
About The Author
