State of Origin: Is dual eligibility the answer?
Roar Pro 
Related coverage
State of Origin is the most anticipated event in the rugby league calendar. The standard of the contest is undisputedly high and the series always provides some of the most enthralling matches of the year.
Yes, State of Origin is considered to be one of rugby league’s greatest assets, but could it also be hindering the sport’s development?
Now, before all you cockroaches and cane toads start furiously commenting in defence of Origin, I am not questioning its success as a rugby league event.
However, when rugby league’s major competitors, such as AFL and rugby union are focused on increasing their foothold across the country and internationally, a contest that essentially only represents two states could be holding back the code.
The disproportionate importance placed on State of Origin is shown by the fact that foreign-born players are willing to sign away a chance to represent their country to play Origin.
Rugby league is not only played in Queensland and NSW, though, and not all players start their careers there.
Yes, the vast majority of NRL players are from these two states but if State of Origin is consistently held up as the epitome of the code, then it is going to become increasingly irrelevant to the rest of the country once the NRL expands.
The problems that came with the staging of Origin I in Melbourne this year are a prime example of this.
A lot of the crowd came from the NRL stronghold states. I would say that those who were from Melbourne were objective third party observers.
Even as a third party observer you can appreciate the quality of Origin clashes, but it’s not like being intimately involved in the outcome.
It’s the same with any sport.
At the time, journalists from the Origin states blamed the all-consuming nature of the AFL in Melbourne for the lack of coverage of the opening match, but when Victoria is not a major player in the event, why would Victorians be interested?
When a contest between two states trumps any other contest, both in the minds of players and those of the greater community, the game’s ability to entrench itself in areas outside of those two states is always going to be undermined.
Obviously when it provides such a commercial advantage for the code, no one is going to change the product that is State of Origin.
Rather than diminishing the significance of Origin, which is probably near impossible, the NRL needs to focus on providing incentives for players to choose national representation.
While tackling the AFL states is a fair way off, there is a way that rugby league can stop itself from becoming irrelevant outside of Queensland and NSW.
A great way to do this, at least at the international level, to allow players to have dual eligibility, rather than making state eligibility and international representation mutually exclusive.
So, New Zealand-born players, such as the Bulldogs’ Sam Kasiano or North Queensland’s James Tamou, who played junior footy in Australia, should be eligible for Origin and for New Zealand duties.
This would mean Origin could still maintain its place as a significant rugby league occasion without diluting the talent pool for international representation.
Furthermore, this could make for better Tests, which could attract a national audience for rugby league, transcending state borders at least a few times a year.
State of Origin was originally established to avoid NSW raiding Queensland talent and yet this is exactly what the two rugby league states are doing to many of Australia’s international neighbours.
Yes, State of Origin is the highlight of the NRL season.
Yes, State Of Origin swells the code’s pockets.
Yes, more than three million people will tune in next Wednesday to watch what is certain to be a thrilling decider in the 2012 series.
But the nature of the beast is that it will always be about NSW and Queensland. This is a problem for rugby league as it attempts to show its relevance to the rest of Australia and across the Tasman.
Passionate about your league? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily league email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
- Explore:
- James Tamou, NRL, Rugby League, State Of Origin
June 27th 2012 @ 4:34pm
Emric said | June 27th 2012 @ 4:34pm | Report comment
Since we’re throwing around Crazy ideas.
How about allow NSW to select from NZ, Tas, NT, and WA
and QLD can also select from Can, Vic, SA and NT.
Problem Solved.
June 27th 2012 @ 5:02pm
dishes said | June 27th 2012 @ 5:02pm | Report comment
NZ needs to try the Origin concept. Either Auckland vs. the rest or North Island Vs. South Island. We don’t know how well this would work, but it has the potential to solve a lot of problems. First, eligibility. Once players play this game they are locked into the NZ system. Secondly, the issue of stand alone weekends. Both Aust. Origin and NZ Origin could be played on one weekend, with all NRL teams having the bye.
I really hope they try it in the near future.
June 27th 2012 @ 5:18pm
Go warriors said | June 27th 2012 @ 5:18pm | Report comment
As far as a NZ type origin series an Auckland vs the rest would probably the best format as close to half of the players come from Auckland and half come from out of Auckland. It would actualy shape up to be a mouthwatering contest.
Some of the players from Auckland would be Shaun Johnson, Kieran Foran, Manu Vatuvei, Kevin Locke, Fuifui Moi Moi, Sam Kasiano and the players from out of Auckland would be Benji Marshall, Isaac Luke, Ben Matulino, Jarred Whareagraves, SKD so as you can see there would be a lot of stars on both sides.
I am not sure if it would take off though.
June 27th 2012 @ 8:32pm
Anakin said | June 27th 2012 @ 8:32pm | Report comment
An NZ “origin” style game would just be a game for the sake of it – it will never get close to the current SOO, and thus is pretty pointless IMO. Origin is based on years and years of rivalry, jealousy, and hatred between NSW & QLD over who is the best at the greatest game of all. No contrived series can replicate that passion.
June 27th 2012 @ 6:17pm
langou said | June 27th 2012 @ 6:17pm | Report comment
Can someone clear this up for me? Is it the State you are born in that you play for or is it the State that you first played Rugby in or something completely different ? Sorry for my ignorance, I am not much of a Rugby fan
June 27th 2012 @ 8:39pm
Anakin said | June 27th 2012 @ 8:39pm | Report comment
The eligibility rules are where one played their first senior football.
This is the contentious issue, when a player such Greg Inglis who was born and raised in NSW, was signed by the Melbourne Storm, and then sent to play with the Storm’s feeder club in Brisbane. Low & behold, he’s now technically a “Qlder”. I wonder if anyone had asked GI when he signed for the Storm – and not on the rep radar – whether he believed he was a Canetoad (having never lived in Qld!) or a cockroach what his answer would have been back then???
June 27th 2012 @ 7:10pm
Lancashire said | June 27th 2012 @ 7:10pm | Report comment
It’s the requirement (is it?) that only players eligible to play for Australia can play Origin that’s holding it back by forcing players to decide on their national alleigance. Both States keep trying to strengthen by affiliating players who shouldn’t be involved.
Back to the original post, it should simply be that if you were born in one or other State you can play for that State, if not you can’t. Born in NZ, Samoa, Britain, wherever then you’re not eligible at all.
June 27th 2012 @ 7:15pm
Charlie said | June 27th 2012 @ 7:15pm | Report comment
State of Origin is different to a State of Birth Competition.
Why so? Why did SOO come about?
Because the weathy NSW clubs took the cream of QLD players to play in the Sydney Competition. All clubs still do this.
NSW then used these same players to defeat the Resident QLD Teams and then declare their superiority.
QLD said that it was only because of the poached QLD players that NSW kept winning but this was always denied by NSW.
So Senator Ron Macuallif and his NSW counterpart convinced the League to play a STATE OF ORIGIN GAME to answer the question.
Could NSW defeat QLD without poaching the best of the QLD players?
After 30 years the answer is very very clear.
But if anyone wants to talk about a State of Birth Competition then this is DIFFERENT to the Sate of Origin concept that was originally suggested to silence the NSW followers.
Leave State of Origin alone and if you want an answer to another Question such as “Which team made up of only NSW or QLD born player would win then get 2 more Senators to convince the League to start another State of Birth Competition.
But leave STATE OF ORIGIN alone.
Regards
June 27th 2012 @ 7:33pm
Donnytwo said | June 27th 2012 @ 7:33pm | Report comment
Leave eligibility the way it is. If Tamou wants to play for NSW and AustrAlia, even though he is Maori, born and raised in NZ, then good for him. He has to look himself in the mirror every morning knowing he is comfortable with his decision. I wish him well. Like wise Ben Te’o.
As previously mentioned, Benji plaed for Australian Schoolboys. It wasn’t until he faced the haka that he realised what a big mistake he made. Others like Foran and Waerea-Hargreaves spent considerable time in Oz, but realised deep down they’re Kiwis.
The shame of it for SOO is you dont have the best players in the NRL because Kiwis (and Poms) are excluded. Maybe SBW would never have left League if he had SOO as a carrot to stick around for.
June 27th 2012 @ 8:50pm
Midfielder said | June 27th 2012 @ 8:50pm | Report comment
Gotta say playing players in SOO born in other countries who play RL overseas has a certain smell to it… makes folk like myself who watch SOO and some NRL to not watch SOO… maybe I am usual but I think not … remember the value of SOO is its gets people who are not NRL folk to watch… not dissimilar to a Socceroo big match…
Get people like me to loose respect and the value of SOO is weaken as a media product …
June 27th 2012 @ 10:40pm
Dan said | June 27th 2012 @ 10:40pm | Report comment
Where you’re born
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
June 28th 2012 @ 8:24am
Noel said | June 28th 2012 @ 8:24am | Report comment
Not a good Idea . Origin is between NSW and QLD , and nothing else . I acknowledge that we need to bring International competition to the fore in importance in the League calender , however it cannot be done by diluting the content of origin by introducing players with dubious credentials for entry . (1) Hands off Origin , (2) Vigorous promotion of the International competition to get the current opposition quality up to a standard where they are competitive , and the play attractive to spectators , both live , and viewing . This will take time but must be done to promote the code to the level where other countries have the desire to play . Where is the vision to make the game Global .
June 28th 2012 @ 8:37am
Noel said | June 28th 2012 @ 8:37am | Report comment
The first requirement for Origin is be Australian , followed by where you first played your Senior rugby league controlled game . Leave it alone . A State of Birth cannot work because people resident in any country could inadvertently have a child born in this country whilst being here temporally . No , leave it alone , and promote the national competition to a level where all players will have the same burning desire to play for their Country at the level that