By Spiro Zavos
March 5th 2009 @ 2:45am
Let’s have a Rugby Union State of Origin
If you can’t beat them, join them. So let’s have a Rugby Union Queensland Vs NSW State of Origin series. The notion was floated by John Connolly in his review of the upcoming Super 14 Waratahs-Reds match at the Sydney Football Stadium.
My original reaction that that Connolly was an old Queensland warhorse who was missing the “It’s great to be an Australian but even better to be a Queenslander” feeling in the days of professional rugby when players switch from one state to another at the drop of a new contract.
In Connolly’s day as a successful Queensland coach, the year was made for the Reds if they defeated NSW, even if every other game was lost.
And in the early years of Super Rugby, this tribal passion for defeating NSW was maintained with the annual clash generally being a Super Rugby match as a dour and ferocious affair.
Most of the biff was dished out by the Reds.
The sainted David Campese, for instance, was whacked in one of the early Super Rugby matches by Damien Smith, just because he was a Waratah.
But the interchange of players to the various Super Rugby franchises, which started with Nathan Grey defecting from Queensland to NSW, has taken much of the tribalism out of the contest.
We’ve now got the Reds stalwart hooker Michael Foley coaching with the Waratahs, and the High Performance manager for the Reds is Ben Whitaker, the brother of the former Waratahs captain Chris Whitaker.
The way to get the tribalism back and restore what was one of Australian rugby’s best annual events (after the Bledisloe Cup Tests) is to bring back a Rugby Union State of Origin.
The rules about eligibility should be strict: only players born in Queensland can play for the Reds, and only players born in NSW can play State of Origin for NSW.
I had a telephone chat with Tony Dempsey, the CEO of the Rugby Union Players Association, about the viability of the concept. “It’s a great concept,” he assured me, “and the main concern about it is when could it be fitted in.”
Working from the Tests dates for this season, for instance, there will be only a limited window of opportunity, he pointed out, between the end of the Super 14 and the first Tests against overseas teams.
Similarly, between the end of these Tests and the start of the Tri-Nations tournament, there is little scope for a major rugby series.
But what about after the Tri-Nations is ended?
In South Africa there is the Currie Cup and in New Zealand the National Provincial Championship for players and spectators in the couple of months before the overseas tour.
In Australia, there is really nothing on in big time rugby. So about what about the Rugby Union State of Origin then?
The series would provide some great rugby for the Australian public and for many of the Wallabies waiting for their overseas tour. And it would also gift some revenue for the ARU to distribute to the use to develop rugby at the grassroots club level.
The public could be drafted in to put forward names of players for selection. And I’ve already pencilled in the names of the first coaches: Rod Macqueen for NSW (he coached NSW in 1991 to an unbeaten season, including matches in Argentina, and then was dumped) and Tim Horan, a Reds great, an Australian selector, and a commentator of note.
The commentators pick themselves: Greg Martin for the Reds and Phil Kearns for NSW.
Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, register you interest and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(64)
Steffy said | March 5th 2009 @ 3:20am | Report comment
Brilliant idea – and play it Denver.
Joh4Canberra said | January 6th 2010 @ 8:04am | Report comment
… or Long Beach, California. Let’s not forget that in 1987 the leaguies experimented with playing State of Origin football in the US.
craig said | March 5th 2009 @ 6:55am | Report comment
Very cynical Steffy.. Do I smell a league supporter getting nervous at the idea that the ARU may go with?? I seem to remember the ARL Kangalose playing in the US a few years back, seemed like a good idea then.
I think it would make great watching. Also since it’s not in any existing contracts the ARU could sell the TV rights for less under the provision that it is shown live nationwide.
Simon said | March 5th 2009 @ 7:47am | Report comment
Why not, if there’s nothing else happening at that time?
I’ve also wondered about the simple concept of a possible v probables match at that time of the year, before the end of year tour, to determine who actually gets to go from a selectors point of view. I think a match like that would also create a lot of interest among the public. The selectors (and the public) could then see who really is deserving of an end of year tour. And the players would be playing for a Wallabies jersey – no greater motivation!
But from a tribalism point of view, Qld especially would relish a state of origin concept.
Greg said | March 5th 2009 @ 8:00am | Report comment
Having a Super Rugby team from NSW & QLD, and then forming origin teams for each State seems a conflict to me. It works in RL because the origin teams only play at origin time. Why not play two further games between the present NSW & QLD Super Rugby teams at the end of the Tri Nations, making a best of 3 games series.
Terry Kidd said | March 5th 2009 @ 8:10am | Report comment
I Like the idea of pure state of origin but would play 2 games each year, one in Brisbane and one in Sydney initially. If the concept developed over the first couple of years games could then be exported to Melbourne, Perth and Canberra. However for development of the concept to truly occur then it would have to be on free to air tv.
Yes I would like to see Elsom, Pocock and Mumm playing against Smith, Waugh and Palu or Burgess, Beale and Giteau at 9, 10 & 12 playing against Genia, Cooper and O’Connor ….. just thinking of the possible match ups makes my mouth water.
Even looser said | March 5th 2009 @ 8:16am | Report comment
Simon’s Possibles versus Probables idea gets my vote. It would be great for Australian Rugby and really give Robbie Deans something to think about come selection time. If Deans coached the Probables who would coach the Possibles? Maybe the highest rated S14 coach should get the gigt. Now that would be great for coaching development.
The Qld V NSW could be easier to sell to the public and possibly a better money spinner. Having said that I’ve not seen much effort by the ARU or the Waratahs to promote this Friday’s game. Maybe I’ve been watching the wrong TV station, reading the wrong newspaper and listening to the wrong radio station. That can happen.
Hoy said | March 5th 2009 @ 8:39am | Report comment
I enjoy the State of Origin concept.
I must say though Terry, Gits is from ACT. Don’t think that counts as NSW does it?
You can’t have the current teams as is, because the passion just wouldn’t be there. It would be better to be state of birth.
The Force could just about play as is for QLD. We have nearly two teams in the super 14.
oikee said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Take a leaf out of the AFL books, they tried the concept and it does not work. First you have to have a reason for a game like this to work. Rugby league has a hundred year history of hatred between states, this is why the game is still so passionally contested even today.
You guys are bonkers if you think you can just create a game from nothing. It would be just another reds verses waratahs game to the public. The only way it might take off is if you played the game before the origin matches. At least you would get a full house to the games. A little bit of biff and it might just work.
Justin said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:12am | Report comment
If its a birth thing I dont know it would work. Too many players not born in either state or in AUS for that matter.
I like Poss v Probs, much more talent on show…
Roger said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:20am | Report comment
No no no, let League have its sole highlight and lets move rugby forwards not backwards. Its rare that I agree with Oikee but he’s right (to some extent), although he conveniently ignores the NSW v QLD Union rivalry having flourished well before league right up to Super 10s.
This may all be a moot discussion given ARU and SANZAR proposal for an Australian conference home and away series.
Also, if I were Brumbies or Force I would not accept this.
If such a game is planned, the question begs…why was the Pacific Nations Cup etc canned when a Probabales and possibles non wallaby teams could have participated, but for $$$ problems?
Brett McKay said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:24am | Report comment
I think the Origin method of selction is the way to go (ie, where senior club or school 1st XV rugby was first played) rather than birth or just the S14 teams, but the problem might come in a few years when guys start genuinely qualifying for WA under ‘origin’ rules. There would already be plenty of guys qualify for ACT now by ‘origin’.
Just throwing the ACT players to NSW, and WA players to Qld seems disrespectful to the development done by ACT and WA, in my mind. (And yes, I realise a lot of those kids would have been plucked from NSW or Qld as youngsters)
But, the concept of a one-off ‘Origin’ State of the Union game has a lot of merit, and I think it could work. And as has been said above, it would have to better than seeing the Wallabies trounce France’s 3rd XV..
M_Dog said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:24am | Report comment
A great idea for Qld and NSW and great for Australian rugby too if you ignore the fact that no one in ACT, NT, Tas, SA or WA would care.
And here I was thinking that John O was hoping to increase participation rates and interest across all of Australia not just 2/7’s of it.
wallythefly said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:24am | Report comment
I’m seeing heaps of support for this concept but I think in a way its a step back. Rugby is trying as much as possible to make itself a more national game (even though it’ll obvioulsy always be well behind AFL in Vic, SA and WA). To me, having this sort of series is a bit of a white flag to the fact that rugby is a NSW and QLD game.
You might say ‘well it is, get used to it,’ but I think there’s been good work in getting more and more support in Perth. One day it’d be fantastic to see more done to get rugby on the map in Melbourne. I accept AFL will always be the number one sport in these cities but I personally think rugby’s competitive advantage over league on a national level is its potential to be more national than league.
Would it not be strange for a QLD born Waratah, firing up against the Reds and whoever else when playing in the Super season and then play against the Tahs for Queensland in this Origin series? Would it not send a signal to rugby supporters in ACT, Perth and yes Melbourne too that rugby is just a NSW and QLD game? What about players born in Canberra (there are a few), Melbourne (like Elsom) and Perth?
Lindommer said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:27am | Report comment
“Reds stalwart hooker Michael Foley”? St Patrick’s College, Strathfield, New South Wales schoolboy representative teams and West Harbour! Went to Queensland only because he was stuck behind Phil Kearns. Saw the light and returned to the bosom of his birthplace.
Spiro, wash your mouth out.
Michael C said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:35am | Report comment
oikee -
in the AFL the SoO concept DID work for some time. Especially through the 1980s.
Remember, the Aust Footy folk started SoO a year before the RL folk back in the 1970s. The Vic vs SA rivalry was especially great.
However, a couple of things served to dismantle it.
The national competition and more than 2 main states.
The national club competition that initially gave us 1 side from WA and 1 from SA that were effectively 80% of their SoO sides. That killed the interest come SoO time.
More than 2 states means you effectively need a tournament. The AFL focus was on the club competition. People didn’t like players getting injured in SoO matches – - and, after all, Australian jumpers weren’t on the line (at least, ‘real’ rep squad positions as compared to ornamental jumpers).
So – despite the fact that before the national comp – the concept worked wonderfully well,
once the national comp came in, the combination of factors worked against rather than for the concept.
Now though – via national draft, 2 teams in each of SA and WA, we’d love to see perhaps every 4 years a decent 2 division SoO tournament. We have one of the best SA origin players who has played his entire career thus far with Fremantle. We have one of the best VIC origin players who has played his entire career thus far with Brisbane, and one of the best Sydney/NSW origin players who has played his entire career thus far for St.Kilda.
The 2nd Division would actually be an important means to illustrate the number of QLD and NSW players spread around the competition.
This I believe is an important aspect when seeking to grow a code. For ARU – - they need some means to highlight players NOT from NSW and QLD. The NRL effectively can only have a 2 state SoO.
The other factor is timing – - when do you fit it in. What is it at the expense of? In the NRL, they have SoO month that effectively tramples over the top of the regular season matches and can seriously hamper the top couple of teams during that time frame.
aeisler said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:56am | Report comment
I am all down for it. But let’s not call it “State of Origin” because the players aren’t playing for the State of Origin like the League players do.
True Tah said | March 5th 2009 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Im not in favour, as someone has already pointed out, it would restrict the national appeal of rugby. I personally think SOO by being the pinnacle of rugby league in the world is not such a good thing for the game.
If it did happen, then I would want rules to apply to both sides, esp re: player eligibility. Qld RL has flouted the rules too many times, Lote Tuqiri played for Fiji at RL WC 2000 and was still able to play for Qld, Craig Smith – NZ international played for QLD, Tonie Carroll, Adrian Lam, etc. Greg Inglis was from near Coffs Harbour yet through crafty plays by the Storm ended up in the Maroon jersey.
I can only imagine what it would have been like to have both Adrian Morley and Sonny Bill Williams together in the sky blue jersey, the Maroons would have been shitting bricks before they left the sheds.
Setgo said | March 5th 2009 @ 10:23am | Report comment
We don’t need it. It’s just another way to focus on the “old school” system. We need a national view, two teams in state of origin is a backward step. Differentiate the product. Think up someting new.
The Link said | March 5th 2009 @ 10:33am | Report comment
aeisler – calling it State of the Union certainly didn’t work in the 90’s. Always co-incidetnal that it had the same name as the annual US Presidential plea to congress for passage of bills, it was a similar plea from the ARU for people to turn up!!
Blinky Bill of Bellingen said | March 5th 2009 @ 11:06am | Report comment
As has been mentioned leave the State of Origin idea for the ARL. Let’s face it, it works best for them. There are far better all embracing options for Rugby that League just can’t manage.
For Rugby it has to be about growing the game and providing more opportunities. Not too sure how to go about replacing the lost opportunity of the ARC but meantime the ARU is I believe closely looking at Brumbies, Reds, Tahs & Force playing each other home and away, and this really sounds the goods.
Having said that, the Probs v Poss concept really gets me excited.
wallythefly said | March 5th 2009 @ 11:48am | Report comment
If this ‘conference’ system in Super rugby gets up and running (see todays rugbyheaven) which sounds pretty good to me that would mean there would already be two NSW v QLD games. The lead up to this game with the pre-game talk has been pretty funny and long may it continue! However there is a chance in my mind of the ARU flogging a good thing to death.
Spiro Zavos said | March 5th 2009 @ 11:56am | Report comment
Where is the tribalism in a Probables-Possible match. I’d like to see a full-blooded NSW v Queensland state of origin contest, with eligibility restricted to birth. Someone born in Canberra, for instance, qualifies for NSW. But someone born in New Zealand or Zambia does not qualify. It may be that this very strict definition of origin might have to be loosened in time, but why not start off with it and apply the standard to the coaching staff as well. This would mean that Michael Foley would be eligible for NSW rather than Queensland.
Chris said | September 30th 2009 @ 9:13am | Report comment
Spiro, Canberra is not in NSW and I can assure you that Canberran’s sure as hell don’t consider themselves New South Welshmen.
Apelu Tielu said | March 6th 2010 @ 9:45am (2 weeks ago) | Report comment
I agree, totally, Chris. ACT can field a competitive team. Spiro needs a lesson in geography.
Also, many top players were born overseas, so well have to be spectators. So what’s the point. The tribalism is not quite there, i think, folks.
katzilla said | March 6th 2010 @ 10:33am (2 weeks ago) | Report comment
Who would play for QLD though Spiro?
They have more NZ born players then the Auckland Blues. Not that thats saying much
oikee said | March 5th 2009 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
Pleased to see that most people are off the idea of a origin type game. As mentioned it has its draw-backs now being experienced by the league origin concept. League is in a position now of having to contend with NZ and Island lads wanting to play the game. So the problem being as someone pointed out, the more players you grow from other states the bigger the problem becomes.
The next problem is any concept being state verse state verse state. We have this in comp games basically so it has no real meaning. Then the next issue is having other countries involved. The super 14 is this really so any concept there is squashed.
Rugby league has the World Club Challenge which to me is growing momentem, this would be what i would look at in the rugby union world. The winner of the super 14 take on the winner of the french or english leagues. This would work and you have instant rivalry. The good thing about the league club challenge is that ozzie teams find it hard to win this comp.
oikee said | March 5th 2009 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
Spiro, it all sounds great on paper but if you have ever been to a origin match you would know one thing. The crowd is passionate about there team because of a generational built in hatred which is passed down to the next generation through stories and taking them to the match. Look i consider myself a normal person , but when origin is on i turn into this rabbid dog like creature who spits venom at anything blue. Now this type of behaviour is then passed on to anyone around me and even my cat is jittery around origin time. Now, I was at the league world cup final and this did not happen to me. Its a curse i think.
But then again i only have to watch choppy close to realise i would not have it any other way.
Now who is going to spit venom at a Union origin game. ? You.
JK said | March 6th 2010 @ 10:26am (2 weeks ago) | Report comment
As I understand Oikee, you are a Kiwi, whilst I’ll give you origin, the thing you need to understand is QLD V NSW rivalry extends to EVERYTHING.
stuff happens said | March 5th 2009 @ 12:52pm | Report comment
What a Yawn – who cares? What difference would it make to the existing development of rugby in Australia?
What Australia does need is a national rugby competiton which in time would help to develop the game outside NSW & Qld which in turn would help to expand the player and audience base.This is the area where AFL, League & now Football have beaten union.
Benjamin Conkey said | March 5th 2009 @ 12:56pm | Report comment
Spiro, I think Union should just be happy with the Reds-Waratahs matches during the season. It works already.
oikee is spot on. RL State-of-Origin works because of the history. Trying to re-create a concept doesn’t work. What about the joke SOO series in the Super League, when they had NSW-Queensland and NZ in a tri-series. I remember the Kiwis got so annoyed because they had a try disallowed in the semi-final to win the match. It was a forward pass from memory..and in the Telegraph the next day they drew a line that showed it clearly went back. NZ thought it was one big conspiracy so NSW & QLD could play in the final!
Worlds Biggest said | March 5th 2009 @ 1:03pm | Report comment
We do need rugby in late September / early to mid October and this or a similar concept is a must to fill that void. Rugby get’s well and truly left behind in September with NRL & AFL Finals.
As for Giteau, wasn’t he born and raised in Queanbeyan which of course is NSW ?.
Roger said | March 5th 2009 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
Aw cmon Spiro, Union had Bledisoe, a much greater rivalry than the mungo sqaud SOO. What better tribalism could somebody want?
I was born near QLD border and it doesnt get any crazier around SOO time than up there..but since King Wally retired its just not the same…and most people just watch it for the fights..which dont occur much anyway!
NRL gets 2M viewers bc it puts it on a cold Winter Wed night which puts it up against House and some CSI! Its an excellent exercise in marketing and nostalgia…thats it!
Benjamin Conkey said | March 5th 2009 @ 1:14pm | Report comment
I must admit that’s the only way they promote SOO these days Roger..by showing past matches. And you’re right it’s always the fights between Spud Carrol and Harragon or the Andrew Johns fight or the numerous crazy 80s fights. Then of course they put the Gladiator music over the top to add suspense and build up. I must admit though, it sucks me in every time! And if the match is a massive anti-climax you always have Roy & HG to fall back on.
But I’m with you. Bledisloe cup..don’t think you can top it. But then again how good was the Haka in the Rugby League WC final? When Australia walked up to within half a metre of the Kiwis..brilliant!
el_capitan said | March 5th 2009 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
Hi everyone. Please see the post in regards to the Tahs Vs Reds for those living in Brisbane. If you can copy and paste this onto an email and pass it onto your mates it would be greatly appreciated. We are trying to get it to be a common event every time the Reds play away.
Thanks
Queensland Rugby Supporters!
Join us to watch the QR Reds take on arch rivals; the NSW Waratahs on the Bundy Bar big screen @ Ballymore this Friday, 6th March.
This is the much hyped game of the season and as it is not at home, join us to come together to watch our action-packed Reds take on the boring Waratahs live and uninterrupted courtesy of the QRU.
Reds Members, guests and families are welcome. Food and beverages will be available to purchase. Open from 4pm. Free parking is available and public transport can deliver you right to our door.
4:30pm – Chiefs v Western Force (live from Waikato Stadium, Hamilton)
6:30pm – QR Reds v Waratahs (live from Sydney Football Stadium)
Here are the basics. We need 50 people to join us to make this a continuing event. If this can become successful, we are anticipating competitions and the ability in the future to meet past, present and future Reds greats! As this is a free event, I urge you all to make the most of this.
Please, check the address list above and forward it to anyone you know who isn’t on it.
NickF said | March 5th 2009 @ 1:41pm | Report comment
I think the concept is great.
Whilst the Super 14 NSW and Qld are based on professionalism and contracts, this would be based on pride and passion, something that is overlooked at times.
Oilee said “First you have to have a reason for a game like this to work”
I hate Queensland, isn’t that enough?
Oikee also said “You guys are bonkers if you think you can just create a game from nothing.” How do you think RL SoO started, pretty much out of nothing. At the time there was NSW v Qld games, where players playing for the NSWRL played for NSW, and that included Queenslanders. Queensland generally lost, and this pissed of Queenslander, and justifiable so. So they “created” SoO out of this, ans they never looked back.
Why not call the teams NSW Barbarians and Qld Barbarians to differentiat them from their Super 14 counterparts, and link it with a rugby concept at the same time.
By the way I hate Queensland, with a passion. Go the Blues.
Tarpo said | March 5th 2009 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
NickF, on this thread the Blues are a team based in Auckland!
We know what you mean though.
oikee said | March 5th 2009 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
You need a cause. I dont hate NSW as a state or its people.
But for 3 nites a year i turn into a rabbid dog and spit venom. After this win or lose i am a normal person.
oikee said | March 5th 2009 @ 2:44pm | Report comment
I will give you another example, when i watch the Bledisloe Cup i never care less if the Kiwis win, i like the Kiwis and think they are great rugby players. So if we had origin and expanded it to include a Kiwi side i would lose interest because i like the kiwi players and have no beef with them.
On the other hand if a islander or Kiwi player has pleadged his elligence to the cockroaches then he gets the full force of the rabbid dog, venom spitting, that all cockroaches get.
Once again only 3 nites a year, if he was playing for a team i followed he would still be in the good books after the series..
Albert Ross said | March 5th 2009 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
>>just because he was a Waratah.
Surely you jest… it wasn’t just because Campo was a Waratah
>> Probables-Possible
Anyone suggesting this has never paid for a seat at one at Twickenham or Murrayfield and sat through one of these turgid affairs. Players playing selfishly and tentatively to avoid injury is what you get.
RL tried the idea once – it was the game where Dimond whacked Cootes (or didn’t if you have read Reter’s autobio)
True Tah said | March 5th 2009 @ 3:46pm | Report comment
Benjamin C,
when you talk about the “Andrew Johns fight” are you referring to when Jamie Goddard dropped him with a sweet one on the jaw? Thats hardly a fight.
Calexico said | March 5th 2009 @ 3:50pm | Report comment
There is absolutely no way any self-respecting Canberra-born player would want to play for a NSW origin team! It’s not like the NSW Rugy Union has ever done any favours for the ACT.
The Answer said | March 5th 2009 @ 6:08pm | Report comment
Why the hell not, the ARU spend their lives either riding on the rugby league’s coat tails or just copying them so go the whole hog.
ohtani's jacket said | March 5th 2009 @ 6:50pm | Report comment
The Tri-Nations finishes on September the 19th, with the Tokyo Bledisloe Test rumoured to be on October the 31st. That gives you a five week window, but with the All Blacks being pulled from the Air NZ Cup this year, I’m not sure whether Deans would allow his Test players to participate.
Personally I think Australian rugby should be focusing on winning trophies and to that end I think they should push for the extra Bledisloe Test to be a one-off defence.
sheek said | March 5th 2009 @ 7:47pm | Report comment
I’M BLOODY OPPOSED TO THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF STATE OF ORIGIN…..FOR RUGBY!
Now that I’ve got your attention. Look, SOO is fine for rugby league, but rugby union doesn’t need it. We now have 4 viable provinces, unlike the 2 for rugby league.
I much prefer the suggestion of NSW, Qld, ACT & WA playing each other a second time each before the internationals start.
Graham Connors is an Australian country singer. In one of his songs, he has a line that goes something like this – “It’s not where you’re born that counts, but where you want to die”.
None of us have a choice where we are born. But most of us have a choice where we want to die. There are guys out there born In NSW or Qld who now see themselves as ACT or WA.
And for me, that concept is more special than State Of Origin. It’s about choice, not burden of birthright.
Chris said | September 4th 2009 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
Exactly, I was born in the UK, but I don’t support them. I chose to live here, I chose to support Australia… and I’d love to play for them, if I’d been talneted enough.
Ben J said | March 5th 2009 @ 8:18pm | Report comment
OJ
I know this thread is about the State of Origin(which from my perspective is an interesting idea) but how do Aus/NZ fans feel about this Hong Kong Bledisloe game being played outside the home countries? Is’nt that what the SOO game is all about, creating revenue inside Aus/NZ?
bennalong said | March 5th 2009 @ 8:49pm | Report comment
Yeah Sheek & Ben J,
State of Origin? Nah.,cynical money spinner……………..AND……. keep the Bledisloe at home!!!!
ohtani's jacket said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:06pm | Report comment
Ben,
I live in Tokyo, so it’s good for me. It’ll be interesting to see where it’s staged and what sort of marketing job they do. The extra Bledisloe fixture will continue unabated. It’s far too lucrative to drop. It’s the same thing with the end of year tour. As much as people bitch and moan about Northern Hemisphere rugby, our unions want their cash.
OldManEmu said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:22pm | Report comment
It would be interesting to see whether Chris Latham, were he still playing, would playfor NSW or Qld.
Andystath said | March 5th 2009 @ 9:53pm | Report comment
Thanks Steffy,only the ARL were stupid enough to throw away 180k on that concept.Latham would have to play NSW as he started at Randwick.Why would you copy an idea?Rugby needs to innovate rather than immitate.Immitation shows a distinct lack of original thought and JON is getting the big$$$ to be innovative and grow the game.
Ben J said | March 5th 2009 @ 10:04pm | Report comment
Australia should have a real hard look at where the game is at the moment and the topdown approach is quite perplexing. Is the SOO there to simply make more money or to develop the game? If its to make money then fine and say so but would it attract a bigger crowd than a traditional Reds/NSW game. If the answer yes then you are in bigger trouble than you can imagine.Fine if it’s a once-off barbarian style celebration match but injuries to key players might be a cause for concern.
What is being done to develop school and clubrugby in Aus? Are the games televised on a regular basis because that is where the future lies.
Billo said | March 6th 2009 @ 12:02am | Report comment
Spiro,
This would be a good idea if there wasn’t already a State of Origin contest in league. To create a rugby State of Origin game would always be to have that game seen as second rate compared to the league game.
The best thing for Australian rugby is to create competitions and events that are uniquely rugby in nature.
One thing I would suggest is to ditch the South Africans from the Super 14, create a fifth Australian franchise in Melbourne to use the new stadium being developed there, and then to have a ten-team competition with the five NZ Super 14 teams. A full season, home and away, would give 18 matches with play-offs to follow, with the potential to bring in other sides from the Pacific Rim.
Part of the problem with the perception of Super 14 in Australia is that most fans are, frankly, not too interested in the South African teams, even though, in my view, they play some great rugby. TV audiences are crucial, and I think they would be higher without the South Africans.
ohtani's jacket said | March 6th 2009 @ 1:53am | Report comment
The NZRU already said they wouldn’t back a trans-tasman competition. They won’t back any form of Super 14 that excludes South Africa. South Africa generates the most revenue under the present agreement, hence the NZRU’s position.
Australian fans might not care about the South African teams, but New Zealanders don’t overly care about the Australian teams and as a NZ rugby supporter there’s no way I’d accept jumping into bed with the Aussies like that.
Knives Out said | March 6th 2009 @ 2:52am | Report comment
I think Ohtani raises a rather significant point. South African rugby has history and tradition, and I think that is more valuable to New Zealand than the Bledisloe and a host of mediocre S14 sides. The whole world is interested in South African rugby, despite some poor results over the last decade, and to that extent Australian rugby supporters seem to drastically over-state their nations own importance on the test stage.
sheek said | March 6th 2009 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Billo,
Thank you, I agree with you. Instead of a state of origin concept, we ought to be concentrating our energies on a national domestic comp.
The S14, despite its revenue appeal, is severely flawed on a range of matters – time zones, 3 countries, Australia has ONLY 2/7’s of the teams, poorly identified regional teams, etc.
Like the Australian cricket 3 team one day tournament, S14 is purely revenue driven, despite being a flawed concept. But then the one day tournament has survived 30 years despite its obvious faults.
The Super concept has its place, but alongside a national comp. And I think it would work better along the lines of a Heineken Cup format.
Simon said | March 6th 2009 @ 10:28am | Report comment
Yeah, I’ve changed my mind on this one. I wouldn’t create a SoO for the above reasons. Roger’s few comments made the best sense to me. I would still try a possibles v probables though.
Terry Kidd said | March 6th 2009 @ 10:36am | Report comment
Yeah, I’ve had a change of mind too. I’ve got to admit that SOO is too limiting and excludes quite a few players especially when we are trying to grow the game. I don’t like the Poss v Probs concept either, I reckon they are a waste of time. But I do like the concept of the S14 franchises Tahs, Reds, Brumbies & Force playing each other home and away, make it an annual thing for the ARU Cup. Play local rugby matches as curtain raisers, with schoolboy games as pre-curtain raisers. Possibly get the franchises to form 2nd 15s from their academies and play those as well. Make it a festival of rugby over 4-5 weeks in each of the major centres.
Put it on free to air telly. Promote the games. It could eventually grow its own tradition and build a genuine interstate rivalry, and it could grow as a fifth franchise is introduced. Thoughts?
The Link said | March 6th 2009 @ 10:47am | Report comment
sheek, being a bit cute there, can’t count the ACT for Union and not League. Raiders were around for 14 years before the Brumbies.
TonyClubCollaroy said | March 8th 2009 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
Wowww Andystath… you usually write jibba jabba
here but i have to agree with you about the NRL state of origin rules …..as with steffy that is a life long journey educating her. good luck.
canberrabear said | March 14th 2009 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Geeze, sorry Spiro, but I hate the idea! It only benefits NSW and QLD supporters. You forget that the Brumbies and Force are also supported by large fan bases. Their fans would take great offence at their players pulling on a blue or red jumper each year. I think the problems lies within the culture of the Reds and Waratahs. The Brumbies have a very loyal bunch of players and tribal supporter base.
Even if this concept did take off, why couldn’t the ACT be included? Remember, the ACT represents ACT and southern/NSW. If you use the same qualification rules as league (place of birth or first senior rugby game), the Brumbies would field a strong team, including -
Shep, Faingaa, Henderson, Kimlin, Salvi, Henjak, Gits, Tyrone Smith, Norton-Knight, A Faingaa, Fainifo, Halangahu etc.
These guys would step up to try and beat the bastards from NSW!
young gun said | April 15th 2009 @ 8:31am | Report comment
i still agree with the concept of the possibles vs probables matchand i can name 2 teames right now
1-alexander
2-tpn
3-baxter
4-horwill
5-sharpe
6-mumm
7-smith
8-palu
9-burgess
10-gituea
11-tuquiri
12-barnes
13-mortlok
14-mitchell
15-aac
16-frier
17-henderson
18-kimlin
19-hoiles
20-lucas
21-tahu
22-ioane
the other team
1-robinson
2-moore
3-dunning
4-caldwell
5-mcmeniman
6-waugh
7-pockock
8-brown
9-sheean
10-cooper
11-hynes
12-oconer
13-cross
14-turner
15-shepard
16-hardman
17-kefu
18-tohmson
19-mowen
20-holmes
21-beale
22-gerrard
PuntPal said | September 4th 2009 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
HAHAHAHAHA!
Oh mate – if Union tried to create its own State of Origin it would be hillarious! They wont do it because it would show once and for all what a boring and antiquated game Union really is.
Thanks for giving me a good lunch time laugh!
Chris said | September 4th 2009 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
Stupid idea. The reason why League has been slow to develop outside of NSW and QLD, is because the pinnacle of the sport in this country is between these two states only. How can someone from outside of those states get involved? They watch it for entertainment value but they lack the passion because they see the game as a NSW and QLD only sport, they are not represented.
In AFL the State of Origin concept was dropped for a number of reason, one of which was because it was dominated by Victoria, so they developed the ‘Others team’. Back in those days, Victoria’s success cemented in my mind (rightly or wrongly) that its primarily a Victorian sport and that’s where the talent pool lay. The recent success of AFL’s expansion has ridden on the ability to make all communities feel included. NSW and QLD are beginning to see it as the AFL not the VFL.
A Union State of Origin is a massive step backwards, that will disengage follows in ACT, WA and Victoria, at a time we are trying to expand the Code.
The League State of Origin is a great spectacle that Union will find hard to emulate. Union should be an innovator, not a follower.