It’s time to bring back the AFL State of Origin
Columnist By Michael DiFabrizio, 16 Jan 2010 Michael DiFabrizio is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- AFL, Hall of Fame tribute match, State Of Origin
AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou (R) addresses the media. Slattery Images
Aside from the token gesture that was the Hall of Fame Tribute Match held in 2008, the concept of State of Origin footy has been outside the AFL landscape for over a decade now.
The last true Origin clash was in 1999, when Victoria defeated South Australia by 17 points. In front of only 26,063 fans.
The small turnout at that game, and sub-20,000 crowds in Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth the two years previous, gave a clear indication that it was time to push the concept aside for a bit. To be fair, it just had to happen.
But that shouldn’t mean state football should remain in exile.
Even back in ’99, the official line out of the AFL was that an Origin game would not go ahead in 2000 due to the Olympic Games. They never fully shut the door on Origin.
Even now, the door still seems open. Andrew Demetriou said back in 2008 that he didn’t “think we could kill it off,” adding: “We’ve got to consider how it can be best-used, how effective it could be if we have it perhaps on a cycle.”
Since those comments, however, talk of the concept’s return from AFL House has dropped off.
And it’s unfortunate. Because what’s left to stand in the way of Origin’s return?
Perhaps it’s the idea that it will only lead to the same problems that surfaced in the 90s, but how relevant are those problems now?
Interest in state football began to slow around the same as the VFL went national with the introduction of West Coast, Brisbane and Adelaide. Fans all of the sudden had “their” team represented nationally. More importantly, “their” players were playing against the Vics week in, week out.
These days, the argument that a national competition takes away from state football seems far less relevant.
Support is now well and truly divided in South Australia and Western Australia, just like it was in Victoria during Origin’s stronger years, and players are becoming more and more dispersed.
Just look at some of the AFL’s star forwards – Brisbane’s Jonathan Brown and Brendan Fevola are Victorians, Fremantle’s Matthew Pavlich is a South Australian, St Kilda’s Nick Riewoldt moved to Queensland (from Tasmania) at age nine.
The list goes on. And it will continue to go on, given the amount of transplanted players the Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney clubs are going to require.
Of course, the national competition wasn’t the only issue that brought down Origin.
Dermott Brereton’s revelations in his newspaper column a couple of years ago provide an obvious example of the other flaws Origin matches.
“After playing for Victoria twice, I did my best to withdraw from them. I played in nine by the end of my career and probably withdrew from at least four or five,” Brereton wrote.
And his reasoning?
“It was born out of dedication to my club. Why should you risk injury to yourself for a group of teammates you would be trying to decapitate seven days later?”
The former Hawthorn star’s comments contain two important lessons. The first is that Origin in the past has suffered from overexposure. The second is that players are always going to be conscious of injury and the effect their involvement may have on their clubs.
The solution here is to simply learn from the lessons of the past.
If Origin is brought back, there’s no need for it to be held annually. The novelty – for fans and players – will wear off otherwise.
Likewise, there’s no need for it to be held mid-season. The AFL has put a lot of effort into International Rules, which works well enough because of the timing of it all – it’s held after the season’s finished.
Funnily enough, this also suits both players and (footy-starved) fans.
Origin can provide a (non-hybrid) representative form of the game. It can provide a way to expand the AFL calendar. It can provide an opportunity for rival fans to watch a game supporting the same team. It can provide a homecoming opportunity for players who’ve moved interstate. It can provide further talking points for the media.
Perhaps more importantly, it can provide the return of the Big V, the Croweaters and Sandgropers to the elite level.
Giving the concept a break had to happen. But maybe bringing it back does too?
Recommend this story.
Follow Michael on twitter @mdifabrizio
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- AFL, Hall of Fame tribute match, State Of Origin
January 17th 2010 @ 10:53am
GaryGnu said | January 17th 2010 @ 10:53am | Report comment
Its time to mix a little sport and politics.
Was reading in a book the other day that John Howard never really pledged public support as Prime Minister for any team in the Rugby League State of Origin despite being born and raised a New South Welshman. This was partly pragmatism as his was a position of national significance that required national patronage. However, it was also rooted in a conviction that the importance of the entity of States (in the Australian context) in peoples lives was diminishing rapidly. It just so happens that I agree with that perception.
I think the AFL should leave it well enough alone. They were the innovators in bringing State of Origin in when the times suited. The AFL were also ahead of the curve somewhat in structuring their national competition around the large population centres and created a mechanism to encourage mobility of the labour force (players) between those cities, breaking down the perceived barriers corresponding with state borders and merely reflecting the reality of the Australian population. As has been stated above there was simply no longer any need for an Origin competition .
The AFL has no need to reintroduce a series/competition based on state allegiances. It would be going back to the future when Australia has clearly moved on. This is an issue that other sporting administrators are going to have to deal with; Cricket is moving to a more metropolitan rather than provincial structure for its T20 competition. Rugby League will have to deal with the selection difficulties that its evolving nature and composition throw up for the Origin concept especially as it reforms its governance structure to one where the NRL clubs may have the ultimate power. Witness the Greg Inglis selection mystery for an example of the problems to be resolved if State of Origin is to maintain its integrity in Rugby League.
If you want to expand the season to create more content for broadcasters there has to be a better way.
January 17th 2010 @ 8:52pm
Foxy Loxy said | January 17th 2010 @ 8:52pm | Report comment
“Rugby League will have to deal with the selection difficulties that its evolving nature and composition throw up for the Origin concept especially as it reforms its governance structure to one where the NRL clubs may have the ultimate power.”
The players and fans wouldn’t stand for that. This isn’t a new issue. It’s been part of the game since it began in Australia. Everyone knows that Origin is a huge $ and publicity earner for the game.
“Witness the Greg Inglis selection mystery for an example of the problems to be resolved if State of Origin is to maintain its integrity in Rugby League.”
The qualification issue is the work of the QRL and NSWRL. Inglis played for a NSW high school and then a Brisbane club. Fans may question how Inglis qualified for Queensland but in the end everyone just accepts that the QRL were doing their job better than the NSWRL. It doesn’t diminish Origin’s integrity. In the end it just adds to the hate between the states.
January 17th 2010 @ 10:17pm
Sam el Perro said | January 17th 2010 @ 10:17pm | Report comment
Pedantry: Getting “back to the future”, if we re-examine the source material (the 1985 film) is actually a good thing. It is that which is necessary to be done!
Back on topic: All of Australia clearly hasn’t moved on (yet?) if the interstate concept is so popular in Queensland and NSW. Might I suggest that you spend some time in Queensland (especially regional Queensland, which constitutes the majority of its population) to discover just how deeply rooted the concept of State identity is.
January 17th 2010 @ 6:45pm
kevin said | January 17th 2010 @ 6:45pm | Report comment
In years past we had an Australian Carnival every four years, playing in one city over two weeks, which meant games played on Saturdays and Tuesdays. I don’t think that would be acceptable these days and it is not feasible to suspend normal matches for more than two weeks: not all clubs can play each other twice at the moment and there are two new teams soon to join the competition.
When State games have been played before or after the season proper the sides have never been anywhere near full strength because players are always just recovering from, or about to have, operations in the off season. Victoria, with its greater depth was always able to cover for these losses much better than other states and consequently many of the matches were one sided.
I say leave it – the AFL has the task ahead of it to make Gold Coast and Western Sydney not just competitive, but also accepted by the folks who pay their cash to go through the gate. If 1987 seemed like the end of the world, the next few years may seem even worse to the traditional supporter. If the intorduction of the new teams is a dazzling success and Andrew Demetriou’s stautus soars into the stratosphere, he may want to bring interstate football back ‘just for something different’. If the next decade is a disaster, his successor may not want to take any risks at all.
January 17th 2010 @ 8:40pm
Foxy Loxy said | January 17th 2010 @ 8:40pm | Report comment
This is just rubbish that Aussie rules had a successful State of Origin before rugby league stumbled on it in 1980. You can see at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_matches_in_Australian_rules_football#State_of_Origin there was a one-off game in 1977 and then some sort of a tournament between five state teams in 1979.
Origin works in league because it is just two states and because the nature of the game itself is suited to that confrontational passion. Yes that emotion can exist in AFL but with 18 couples spaced out across the oval its not as suited as in league with the tackles and collisions to get the state emotions worked up.
There’s no natural two-horsed split in AFL that can make up two enemy teams the public and players will get emotional about. It simply can’t be done in AFL.
January 17th 2010 @ 9:06pm
Michael C said | January 17th 2010 @ 9:06pm | Report comment
You’ve obviously never seen Football park full of feral ‘croweaters’ baying for Victorian blood…….
SA people would like nothing better than to see SA bigman (drafted by and still at Fremantle) return ‘home’ to lead the Croweaters into mortal combat against the Big V.
However, sometimes I think it meant more for SA than it did for WA.
btw – went to a SoO at Etihad about 3 years ago, and, it was actually a little underwhelming, if it wasn’t for the big hair of Thaiday billowing around when he supposedly got ‘hit’, then it’d've all been a tad tame…..’cos there never appeared any great ‘closing speed’. But, granted, it probably looks more fearsome A. on Tele, and B. when you’re nearer that action in a rectangular venue.
January 18th 2010 @ 9:57am
Redb said | January 18th 2010 @ 9:57am | Report comment
There will be always be a bit more passion from the smaller states, happens in the RL version as well with QLD. I think the Big V though will get tonnes of support, younger fans are far more parochial. The Bushrangers are re-building the Big V along with Melb Victory. Bring back the biggest Big V.
Redb
January 17th 2010 @ 9:39pm
jimbo said | January 17th 2010 @ 9:39pm | Report comment
Thanks for the link Foxy,
I noticed the only time a NSW team played in an AFL SoO tournament in 1990 they beat Victoria 86 to 76.
AFL players Alex Jesalenko, Haydn Bunton Senior, Doug Strang, Gordon Strang, Terry Daniher, Neale Daniher, Anthony Daniher, Wayne Carey, Paul Kelly, Dennis Carroll, Billy Brownless, Troy Luff, Nick Davis, John Longmire, Shane Crawford, Ben Fixter, Richie Vandenberg, Ray Hall, Ricky Quade, Lewis Roberts-Thomson,Kieran Jack, Paul Bevan, Leo Barry, Brett Kirk, Henry Playfair, Jarrad McVeigh, Ben Mathews, Adam Schneider, Dylan Addison, Lenny Hayes, Hamish McIntosh, Ben McGlynn, Justin Koschitzke, Dean Solomon, Mark McVeigh, Daniel Cross, Ryan Houlihan, Cameron Mooney, Brent Staker, Tom Hawkins, David Trotter and Sam Gilbert were all born and raised in NSW.
According to Wikipedia, the AFL claim ownership of the SoO concept of playing with your state of origin as opposed to the state you played in.
They also say in 1977, the first AFL SoO game was played in Perth and Jack Reardon and Senator McAuliffe from the QRL attended and were so impressed they set about establishing the RL SoO series in 1982, which has gone on to be the most popular RL series of games in the world.
January 17th 2010 @ 10:19pm
Sam el Perro said | January 17th 2010 @ 10:19pm | Report comment
To be accurate, they didn’t establish a series, which had been taking place since the first decade of the 20th century, they merely agitated for a change of selection rules.
January 17th 2010 @ 10:27pm
Foxy Loxy said | January 17th 2010 @ 10:27pm | Report comment
Never thought of it like that. You’re right. Australian rules didn’t give rugby league the idea of the two states playing each other — they had been doing that every year since the code began. They just changed the selection rules. I think I read somewhere or was it Johnny Gibbs on 2UE said that in the early years of league’s Origin that NSW were still choosing some of the Queensland players at Sydney clubs on the old method of residency.
January 17th 2010 @ 10:52pm
jimbo said | January 17th 2010 @ 10:52pm | Report comment
Fair enough,
but the article and discussion is about State of Origin and not just interstate games – but we digress again and argue about which code is better.
By the way, the first interstate football matches were in 1883 –
the first interstate Rugby match in Brisbane; Queensland beating NSW 12-11 at Eagle Farm Racecourse
and the first Association Football match also in 1883 was played between Victoria and NSW on Parramatta Common in Sydney, won 5-3 by Victoria.
January 18th 2010 @ 4:54am
Michael C said | January 18th 2010 @ 4:54am | Report comment
Jimbo -
the first ‘Association Football’ match. Congrats on using disambiguous terminology!!!
For the record – Jimbo, twas not ‘interstate’, but, twas ‘intercolonial’,
and
1 July 1879 – First representative intercolonial football, which got underway in Melbourne (Vic def SA by 7 goals to 0).
1879 and 1881, Victoria met South Australia twice per season, winning all six encounters easily, (aggregate tally of 32 goals to just 5.
January 17th 2010 @ 11:43pm
Beast-A-Tron said | January 17th 2010 @ 11:43pm | Report comment
“Yes that emotion can exist in AFL but with 18 couples spaced out across the oval its not as suited as in league with the tackles and collisions to get the state emotions worked up.”
Tackles and collisions occur in football matches, which you seem to infer exist only in league. You suggest the structure of league (line of scrimmage) is conducive to “confrontational passion”, or at least more so than other sports which lack similar structure. Nothing you have written so far confirms this hypothesis.
January 18th 2010 @ 4:58am
Michael C said | January 18th 2010 @ 4:58am | Report comment
BaT, his statement is obvioiusly silly when we consider that those 18 couples are all opposing players, X vs Y, side by side, across the field,
it is actually the Rugby scenario of 2 opposing forces on opposite sides of the paddock that lacks direct accountability, and the RL scenario that lacks direct contest for possession, so much of RL is uncontested, even the RU guys recognise this and have been trying to push this ‘line’ in Melbourne to promote the coming of the Rebels,
anyway, in Aust footy, there’s field wide ‘contests’ and 360 degree collissions in Aust Footy that RL fellows would have zero comprehension of from their own on field experiences.
January 18th 2010 @ 9:53am
Redb said | January 18th 2010 @ 9:53am | Report comment
Michael D,
Totally agree would love to see AFL SOO back in a Vic v SA or WA format, perhaps every 2 years. Post season makes more sense as any injuries can be recovered from in the pre season.
The AFL will need full club support first though.
Redb
January 18th 2010 @ 11:32am
Jason Cave said | January 18th 2010 @ 11:32am | Report comment
After all, can you imagine ie WA v Vic; Lance Franklin is playing for WA and Matthew Scarlett is representing the big V. The ball goes down the WA forward line, Franklin is tackled from behind by Scarlett, bang Franklin does his knee, out 12 months. Then how will Hawthorn have to explain to their supporters & sponsors why their no.1 player is out for an extended period. And it would probably cost the Hawks in the long run too.
Yet this scenario happened in the 1989 State of Origin between Victoria & South Australia at the MCG. Early in the third quarter, SA’s Tony Hall was tackled from behind by Victoria’s Andy Collins-and both Hall and Collins were playing for Hawthorn in the then VFL home & away comp. Hall did his knee, was out for 12 months, and wasn’t the same player again even after appearing for the Adelaide Crows towards the end of his career.
January 18th 2010 @ 2:45pm
Roman said | January 18th 2010 @ 2:45pm | Report comment
Thank god that the All Australian Team havent got a country to play against that would just make it even more difficult for an AFL SoO event.
January 19th 2010 @ 8:50pm
Beaver fever said | January 19th 2010 @ 8:50pm | Report comment
Fair enough that you dont like football, but try your trolling on other sites.
Seen you post the same thing several times, smacks of cultural cringe that because a sport lacks a international face it is not worthy of support.
January 19th 2010 @ 10:24pm
Roman said | January 19th 2010 @ 10:24pm | Report comment
Your wrong again Beaver fever I love football its Aussie Rules that I dont like – I was picked to play Aussie Rules in the school boys country (thats rural country not Australian) I have played both and I can troll where I like and if you dont like the facts – AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou is the biggest BS out.
January 19th 2010 @ 10:37pm
Beaver fever said | January 19th 2010 @ 10:37pm | Report comment
What exactly am i wrong about roman and just what are the facts, i await you to set me straight.
January 18th 2010 @ 6:13pm
Brian said | January 18th 2010 @ 6:13pm | Report comment
There are two underltying reasons why there’s no SOO
1. If the competition is fair dinkum the Vics will win easily (Vic populations has grown a lot faster than SA since 1980s) so where is the interest in that?
2. There is no time to play it. Post season is not an option if its fair dinkum. Even if Gary Ablett celebrated his GF win with some glasses of water those who missed the finals would be waiting 5 weeks for a couple of games
January 22nd 2010 @ 11:21am
Jonathan said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:21am | Report comment
One of the problems AFL has with Origin is the fact that the sport is far more diversified than League. In League you can pretty much guarantee that you’ll be seeing the best players when NSW-QLD turn out but in an AFL version any game between two sides will inevitably leave some of the best players on the sidelines. Even taking the big three (SA, WA and Victoria) into account will be excluding some of the games best, like Nick Riewoldt and Cyril Rioli, and many of the best players of the past 20 years have been from outside these traditional Aussie Rules states – Wayne Carey, Paul Kelly, Shane Crawford, James Hird, Micheal Long, Micheal Voss, Matthew Richardson and Nathan Buckley just to name a few.
Another issue you have is the fact that Origin is only a big draw when you’re playing Victoria.
I’d love to see it re-introduced in some form; I remember attending the 1986 SOO game at Subi between WA and Victoria and it was the best, highest quality game I ever saw (won by a magnificent WA team by 3 points). Maybe in a carnival format, with a qualifying comp for the lesser states played once every four years to make it special. The Qualifiers could be played the previous year maybe
Year One:
Group One
Victoria
South Australia
Western Australia
and one of NSW, ACT, QLD, TAS, NT who play qualifiers.
The qualifying team plays the home team while the other two group teams play each other. Lets say the qualifier is Tassie and the carnival is in Adelaide.
SA V TAS
WA V VIC
SA and VIC WIN and play in the final.
WA plays TAS and the loser goes back into qualifiers.
March 15th 2010 @ 5:17pm
Charlie said | March 15th 2010 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
SA,WA,VIC and the interstate all strars. Players that wish to play for there state can, as opposed to playing in the NAB cup which is a joke. I love the game of footy but watching second rate footy before the start of the regular season is another thing.
Being 29 years of age I loved watching the state of origin when I was a nipper. Not only you got to see the best of the best you saw how beautiful the game can be played.
Bring back the state of origin, give us WCE supporters something to look foward to this year.
April 5th 2010 @ 12:00am
AA said | April 5th 2010 @ 12:00am | Report comment
Fully support the return of this concept to the AFL. Been championing this idea for a while.
June 18th 2010 @ 4:59pm
Don said | June 18th 2010 @ 4:59pm | Report comment
I always have a laugh about the AFL trying to find new ways to give the World Champions from Geelong another level to aspire to.
While waiting for the World Cup vs. South Africa, Dubai and Shanghai is on hold, I think Blondes vs. Brunettes or Blue Eyes vs. the Rest would take the game to new meaningful heights.