It was the Russian’s second try and inspired England to their first ever victory against New Zealand, etching Obolensky his name into the rugby folklore of his adopted country. Yet it might never have come to pass.

The biography, by rugby journalist Hugh Godwin, chronicles the remarkable backstory that brought the striking blond winger to Twickenham, after his family had been forced to flee St Petersburg in 1919 at the height of the Russian revolution.

Despite living in England since the age of two, the selection of the 19-year-old Oxford University student created a storm of controversy over his eligibility.

Obolensky would have easily qualified under today’s rules, which allows a player to play for his adopted country with the extended residency from three to five years that comes into force next month, yet there was public outcry over the rights of a Russian prince to play for England.

The book reveals for the first time that there was even a formal proposal put to the full committee of the Rugby Football Union to prevent his selection, which if it had been approved, would have changed sporting history.

The uncovered minutes of the meeting, which was held before the final trial match, show that the relevant item was headed ‘International Players’s qualification’ and stated simply that “Prince A Obolensky, who had been selected for England against The Rest, was not qualified to play for England”.

An amendment was also moved that “he be not qualified until his is a naturalised British subject.’

No details of the debate survives, but thankfully the minutes noted only that ‘The amendment was put to the vote and lost. The original motion was then voted on and lost.’

Obolensky would only go on to win four caps for England, despite playing for the Lions and the Barbarians. He joined the Royal Air Force to serve his adopted country and died at the controls of a Hurricane in March 1940, aged just 24.

And it is a tale that serves as a reminder to the extent to which the landscape of international rugby has changed utterly since his exhilarating debut.

The pressure to deliver results and the financial consequences since the game turned professional in 1995 has, at times, pushed the boundaries far beyond natural migration, with some countries actively recruiting ‘project players’ with the intention of bolstering their playing pool through residency qualification.

Which takes us to World Rugby’s bold decision last week to bring a greater sense of equilibrium to the pressures generated by the immense variations between nations in the financial rewards for playing Test rugby.

Action had already been taken to extend the residency rule from three to five years (which comes into force next month) and the second step is an attempt to free up those players who had been capped by their adopted country only to be discarded swiftly afterwards.

The new ‘Rule 8’ amendment could have the greatest impact of all, both in the short and long-term development of international rugby. From January, players who had not played international rugby for three years, will be allowed to transfer to another country if they were born there or have a parent or grandparent born in that country.

The immediate impact should lead to a host of Pacific Island players returning to the countries of their birth, which should have thrilling consequences for the World Cup in France.

Tonga, who are likely to be in the same pool as Ireland, Scotland and South Africa, look set to be boosted by the return of Charles Piutau, Israel Folau, Ngani Laumape, and Vaea Fifita. Samoa’s squad could now include Lima Sopoaga, Julian Savea, Victor Vito, Steven Luatua and former England wing Denny Solomona.