How to solve the Origin eligibility confusion
Roar Guru By MG Burbank, 3 Oct 2012 MG Burbank is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- NRL, Rugby League, State Of Origin, Test rugby league
Related coverage
You know the old saying which goes, “If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck.”
James Tamou is a New Zealand duck and, no matter how much Maroon dye is pumped into his jersey next June, so is Josh Papali.
Peter Sterling has it right when he says we must simplify Origin eligibility rules; a player must play for the country in which he was born, if he still retains that country’s citizenship at the time of selection.
Will there be losers in these circumstances? Of course. There will be players who moved to Australia when they were infants who want only to play for the Kangaroos. But tough. The very viability of league’s trans-Tasman rivalry is at stake.
Yet I can understand the motivations of the Tamous’s of this world. Origin may pay somewhere around $50,000 a game next year, so who wouldn’t want to earn that money three times a season?
The answer, therefore, is simple: the ARL and NZRL must come together and ensure a similar level of payment for Tests between the two countries, thereby removing some of the incentive for Kiwi players to ditch their country of origin for someone else.
Of course this won’t placate those players entirely. Origin is league’s biggest stage and elite performers want to confront that challenge.
There is, however, a simple way for the best Kiwi players to provide themselves with a similar platform on which to perform: play for their home nation and take it to the Australians.
A truly competitive annual three-Test series between the two powerhouse league nations could come close to matching Origin as a spectacle. The problem has been the unwillingness of Kiwi players and administrations on either side of the Tasman to give the New Zealand team a chance to be consistently competitive.
The ARLC must act from the assumption that a strong Kiwi team is good for Australian rugby league.
New Zealand has the talent and it no longer has the excuse of fielding players who aren’t experienced at NRL level. The admission of the Warriors in 1995 and the greater presence of Polynesian players in the NRL in recent years has taken care of that.
We must do everything possible to ensure Kiwi players not only play for their rightful country but are well-compensated for doing so- and further compensated for beating Australia.
The presence of Tamou in a green-and-gold jersey answering questions from an interviewer in a thick Kiwi accent earlier this year was ridiculous.
That he was doing so having just played a major role in defeating his own countrymen was outrageous for those who want quality international rugby league.
Recent reports show the ARLC is on the verge of fixing the eligibility aspect of this fiasco. About time.
The Crowd Says (30) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- NRL, Rugby League, State Of Origin, Test rugby league
October 3rd 2012 @ 6:25am
DeanP said | October 3rd 2012 @ 6:25am | Report comment
what utter, ill-informed garbage. Sorry Guru, I don’t want to seem to be offensive, but only a white ocker could come up with such nonsense. To tell a player, who though not born in Oz, grew up there from an early age, played all his football there. His whole life experience, that he can recall, is in Oz, to tell him that he is not “Ozzie” enough to play origin, or for his country, is plain stupid. A great way to encourage an inclusive society Guru! Give yourself an upper cut, champ!
October 3rd 2012 @ 9:28am
MG Burbank said | October 3rd 2012 @ 9:28am | Report comment
Hilarious, Dean. I don’t take the ‘garbage’ charge personally. This has nothing to do with inclusiveness, although I think your heart’s in the right place on that score. There simply must be a way to define eligibility to avoid the situations I have described.
There’s no easy answer, but leaving it as it is (which your way of doing things would ensure) means we have a continuing situation where some players are playing Origin and matches for Australia for money. That can not stand. You either want a competitive Kiwi team or not. I do.
October 3rd 2012 @ 11:33am
DeanP said | October 3rd 2012 @ 11:33am | Report comment
Don’t worry about the Kiwis, they’re not doing too badly. Beale, Foran, Hoffman, Pritchard, all of them Oz born or developed talent. Even Benji got his league education in Oz. These players could have elected Oz, but they chose the Kiwis. You can’t legislate choice. You can only hope players make their choices for the right reasons. What really is hurting origin is the increasingly bitter, often paranoid, and unpleasant nature of some of the NSW v Qld rivalry. From accusations, to silly songs, and unacceptable behaviour by some fans. It shouldn’t matter where you were born. That’s too arbitrary in these modern times. Though he may not be Oz born, Petero is a great Qlder, and a great Ozzie. For me, guys like him represent what origin is about. Shame on those who would disrespect him.
October 3rd 2012 @ 2:33pm
oikee said | October 3rd 2012 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
And get this, you all know or have heard of Kebra Park on the Gold Coast, and look at who won the junior comp this year. ?
The Tigers, and where do they get their players from? Kebra Park, and where do the players come from to get into the Kebra park system, ? Yes, New Zealand.
What does this all mean, i will tell you, times are changing yet the game has stood still for way too long.
3 origin teams a must, and maybe even look at a exile team or island origin.
Expand to Adelaide and Perth, bring in another NZ team, Wellington, forget the south island. It is too volitile.
October 3rd 2012 @ 6:48am
peeeko said | October 3rd 2012 @ 6:48am | Report comment
Papali moved to Australia at the age of 6, i think he should be able to play for Australia if he desires. its not an easy issue how about guys like Hoffman,Beale,Nightingale and Pritchard that were born and lived in Australia their whole lives? Australia loses more players that are technically australian to the Kiwis than vice versa. How about Nathan Fien and Brent Webb?
October 3rd 2012 @ 7:08am
Ra said | October 3rd 2012 @ 7:08am | Report comment
We don’t need Papali’i or Tamou.. We need a good ole tour of Aussie, to play consistently together twice weekly for three weeks with test matchs on weeks two and three. We need the opportunity to work our combinations. Even though we have a number of players at the elite level in NRL we are still surrounded by Ozzie players who have combinations at three levels, club, state and international. That is the difference between our two sides. Yes Ozzie have some brilliant players, they always have had, and that’s why we play them – nothing Ive said here has not been mentioned before, except maybe this thought, has Beale ever played halfback or hooker?
October 3rd 2012 @ 9:30am
MG Burbank said | October 3rd 2012 @ 9:30am | Report comment
Again, as I’ve stated in other comments, we have to have a CLEAN CUT rule that ends the conversation, and my solution is the only one that does it. Players may have moved here when they were young but what about their emotional connection to where their parents came from? THat could count for something too.
Australia can do without a few players- the same cannot be said of the Kiwis- they would have been much more competitive with guys like Tonie Carroll, Brad Thorn and Karmichael Hunt.
October 3rd 2012 @ 10:20am
Lovey said | October 3rd 2012 @ 10:20am | Report comment
Yes, but is your place of birth rule across-the-board? Would this not rule out those Kiwis born in Samoa, Tonga etc?
October 3rd 2012 @ 7:11pm
JB said | October 3rd 2012 @ 7:11pm | Report comment
I agree. All you hear is how SOO impacts NZL. The RL world is more than Aus, NZL, and ENG. Others have full TEST status, such as those Pacific Island nations. If those who bemoan the impact of SOO eligibility on the NZL team were serious they would consider the impact that the NZL team has on Samoa, Tonga, and the Cooks. Any criteria that is established should also take a look at both the Aust and the NZL teams and disseminate how many players would then have been available for other nations. You may find that NZL has had a greater impact of non-NZL born players in their TEST teams than either QLD and NSW combined.
October 3rd 2012 @ 7:09am
oikee said | October 3rd 2012 @ 7:09am | Report comment
Papalii is as Maroon as big Mal. He and his family live in Logan and are Australian citizens. His family will be queenslanders.
Your right about one thing, Ricky Stuart started this mess, not Mal, so i think it time Stuart and Tamou were under the spotlight, all this talk of Mal Meninga poaching Kiwis is a load of crap.
Kasiano has rightfully taken his spot in the Kiwi team, Josh will play origin next year for the team he has followed his whole life, the Maroons.
Glad your not running the game MG, you would have Queenslanders in chains kicking and screaming as you sent them back to NZ, a foriegn land.
October 3rd 2012 @ 8:41am
Mals said | October 3rd 2012 @ 8:41am | Report comment
Haha that’s funny Oikee. QLD selectors were picking Kiwis Brad Thorne, Tonie Carroll etc long before Stuart picked Tamou to play for NSW.
October 3rd 2012 @ 9:09am
peeeko said | October 3rd 2012 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Craig smith, Adrian lam
October 3rd 2012 @ 9:32am
MG Burbank said | October 3rd 2012 @ 9:32am | Report comment
Oikee, I don’t care who started this. The point is that some players would moan a little at the start, but that’s a price we should be willing to pay to have a strong Kiwi team full of players who were born there.
October 3rd 2012 @ 8:50am
Lovey said | October 3rd 2012 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Is the issue Origin eligibility or country eligibility? It is not as simple as country of birth, and this is a matter for the international body. As an example Mario Fenech would have been obliged to play for Malta, who probably don’t have a team! I may be wrong, but I think he would have dual citizenship. Similar for Ben Elias, but at least Lebanon have a “team”. I think the desire to play Origin may be more than just the money for some of these blokes. Anyway, the basic problem is confining Origin eligibility to only those who are eligible for, and committed to, Australia. SOO is not a trial for Australia anymore, and will become less so with players born and careers originated in other States. Either Oikee’s idea of expanding on the Origin concept, or let them play Origin if they meet residence rules.
October 3rd 2012 @ 9:03am
oikee said | October 3rd 2012 @ 9:03am | Report comment
They have to expand on the Origin concept. If you treat it like a proper business, everyone knows that growth brings oppotunities, and that is to add more growth to the concept. The Kiwis coming in will open up new markets and more fans to the growth of the concept. Its a no brainer really.
It also solves the Kiwi international problem.
Plus it can open up a new market space in the middle of the year. You could add junior origins to that as well.
Maybe even q-cup and nsw cup origins, plus we also have a city country game to sell in this time slot. So we could stop the comp and play all the rep games in a 3-4 week period.
It is called natural growth, our game is growing, growing pains have to be dealt with one day, we cant keep ignoring them.
October 3rd 2012 @ 9:36am
MG Burbank said | October 3rd 2012 @ 9:36am | Report comment
State of Origin means ‘state’. I’d love to see competitive WA and VIC teams in the (very very distant) future but until then let’s leave it as is and strengthen the Kiwi team through natural means- like playing Tests against their best possible team.
October 3rd 2012 @ 9:35am
MG Burbank said | October 3rd 2012 @ 9:35am | Report comment
Origin is still a trial. Are you trying to tell me that outstanding performances at Origin level don’t make an impression on Test selectors? Try telling Greg Bird that.
The international rules for minnow nations are irrelevant. I’m talking about players legitimately being from a country, as in having been born there. When Lebanon can legitimately field an indigenous squad capable of conceding less than 70 points in a game, we can address that issue.
October 3rd 2012 @ 10:26am
Worth a Ponder said | October 3rd 2012 @ 10:26am | Report comment
Sterlo is not a good reference point, Quote – “Peter Sterling has it right when he says we must simplify Origin eligibility rules; a player must play for the country in which he was born, if he still retains that country’s citizenship at the time of selection” By his reckoning he should have played for Queensland. Another fly in the ointment is Bob Fulton, a pommie, if still playing would never have had been eligible for NSW.
Precedences have been set since 1980 and will be difficult to denounce BUT one such stipulation and only one that goes somewhere towards simplifying selection is to be an Australian citizen, whether born here or taken up citizenship after qualifying. The we have the ridiculous, but necessary rule on where the player first played senior football or where he really wants to play. It currently like alphabet soup – the letters (rules) are there but ever so jumbled.
A brand new eligibility format ought to be thrashed out NOW – though I doubt any set of rules could be contested in court by a disgruntled player if he felt he was being subjected to unfair selection criteria.
Best of luck with this one MG
October 3rd 2012 @ 10:27am
Lovey said | October 3rd 2012 @ 10:27am | Report comment
No, I don’t mean that. Obviously Origin performances are important in deciding the Australian team, but so is club form. Barba will probably be in the Australian team, as was Cherry-Evans, but no SOO appearances. I more meant that the idea of restricting SOO eligibility to “Australian” players, BECAUSE it was to be preserved as the primary trial for Australia, was weakening.
October 3rd 2012 @ 10:31pm
DFAITBen said | October 3rd 2012 @ 10:31pm | Report comment
“Fewer than 70 teams” MG, not “less”. I would expect more from you. And on the the nationality question, I suggest we only let those players who can trace their roots back to either the original settlers (as defined by the First, Second and Third Fleets), or those who are Aboriginal play for Australia. All the rest are just pretending to be fair dinkum Aussies.
October 5th 2012 @ 1:31am
MG Burbank said | October 5th 2012 @ 1:31am | Report comment
You nailed me on the less/fewer DFAIT. My fiance is constantly correcting me on that. But I must tell you, whoever the heck you are, that wasting precious space on this venerable site correcting my grammar is highly questionable.
Having said that, your idea is tremendous and must be implemented immediately. I would go one step further and say that only those who were actually ON one of the first 3 fleets can play. There must still be a couple of those out there.
October 3rd 2012 @ 11:51am
LT80 said | October 3rd 2012 @ 11:51am | Report comment
Where a player is born should not be the only consideration. As many have pointed out, people who are born in one place and move early in their life don’t necessarily feel loyal to their birth place.
Billy Moore was born in Tenterfield, NSW – should he have played for NSW?
October 3rd 2012 @ 1:52pm
Tony Archers Maroon Underwear said | October 3rd 2012 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
This problem could be solved by scrapping origin altogether…
October 4th 2012 @ 6:30pm
Ian Whitchurch said | October 4th 2012 @ 6:30pm | Report comment
Regrettably, rugby league has that tiger by the ears and cant let go.
But you can minimise the damage by saying ‘Origin are exhibition games, and do not affect Test selection in any way’.
October 3rd 2012 @ 6:45pm
Geordie said | October 3rd 2012 @ 6:45pm | Report comment
If the player is NZ born but an naturalized Aus citizen then he should play for Australia. If he is a long time permanent resident but still a NZ citizen then it’s the Kiwis for him. Saying that I also believe that if they play their first senior game in Qld or NSW then they should be able to represent that state and NZ. Benji Marshall is as much a Qlder as he is a Kiwi.
October 4th 2012 @ 10:45pm
Sylvester said | October 4th 2012 @ 10:45pm | Report comment
I agree with this point. Why can’t you be a proud Queenslander and a Kiwi? I don’t see the need for the two to be mutually exclusive.
October 3rd 2012 @ 8:00pm
Dave said | October 3rd 2012 @ 8:00pm | Report comment
MG you are absolutely correct. To show your conviction you should find Stirlo, look him straight in the eye and tell him he is a traitor and should have played for Queensland. You first champ.
October 4th 2012 @ 1:47pm
bjt said | October 4th 2012 @ 1:47pm | Report comment
The whole idea of birth location determining eligibility is rubbish, and it’s foolish to continue to harp on about it. The idea that someone could be born in one place, live the majority of their lives in another and not be allowed to represent that area is ridiculous, and plain stupid. Why are we so arrogant to think that only league has this issue?
Why isn’t there an article written about the Mo Farah winning a gold for the British? Was he born in the UK?
Get over this “where he was born” idea, as it is idiotic and never going to happen. You’re basically saying that people who weren’t born in Australia, have no right to be Australians.
Why not look at New Zealand rugby league and start asking questions there? Do they have a national comp to develop local players? Queensland does. NSW does. WA does. VIC does. What is New Zealand doing to develop the game and players in their own country?
Picking a Kiwi like Papali who’s been through the Australia development system, Australia money spent to get him where he is, lived in Australia the majority of his life, can you tell me what NZ have done to deserve his services?
New Zealand is the country stealing player and I have no sympathy for their “plight”. If they actually did something for rugby league and developed the sport in their country it would go a long way to providing a leg to stand on when whinging about pinched players.
October 4th 2012 @ 5:33pm
V to the e said | October 4th 2012 @ 5:33pm | Report comment
I don’t understand why people just can’t understand it , if you move to aus . Live our life style , enjoy our sunshine , play our great game of rugby league , except a rep jnr jersey when in ur heart u no u don’t support what that jersey means , when u no that boy that might b smaller besides u bleeds for , well I don’t know what to say , basic joist I’m getting is come to qld cause the opportunity is greater make the jnr qld , aus teams ( benji ) that the qld n aus rugby league invest money in , n then say nah bro I’m a kiwi , ,,,,,,, what would u like to bend me over as well , get a grip , 8 boys I can think of that was in the last Nzl team picked , that were born n learnt there skills in aus !! But give us sht about kas n papal, u can have kas , but papal Said t him self , wouldn’t feel right the time n money nested in me here were it was more promising ! Well said mate respect
October 8th 2012 @ 1:34am
CJW72 said | October 8th 2012 @ 1:34am | Report comment
Papilli also said that he wouldn’t feel right playing against the Kiwis.. And that he’d like to do both. As did Tamou . The ARL embrace the best kiwi talent because it is good for the game and in turn great viewing which = more revenue. Unfortunately they seem to think that this also means that these players are fair game for SOO and Kangaroos selection. I don’t buy this whole well Aus invested so they should be paid back bs. They invested because it suited their business to have the best talent, nothing else. To throw the problem all back on NZRL as their problem in a rabid Rugby Union dominated country is ridiculous.. Bring back 3 test series, I still can’t see why we accept these token one off tests. The ALL Blacks play 11 times this year and are yet to drop a game.. what do NZ league fans get? 2 one off tests.. They will always favour the team that has played together in combinations consistently, need I expand on this any further? Kiwis always perform better over a series for the same reasons. Also addressing the oft heard justification for poaching Kiwi sworn talent to play SOO & then Kangaroos etc . Australian born Kiwi selections such as Beale Hoffman etc. if your parents spoke German at home but you were born in Australia, isn’t it more likely that you would still consider yourself German? Also every Kiwi RL fan has a state of Origin team they choose to follow, but you NEVER get to choose your home team. When it comes to RL Your either a Kiwi or your a Kangaroo at heart. I know plenty of Kiwis who are true queenslanders , none would extend that support to the Kangaroos when playing the Kiwis..