Will Origin have to move for the World Cup?

By M1tch / Roar Guru

Queensland prop Steve Price is tackled during Queensland v New South Wales State of Origin Game 3 at Suncorp Stadium in Brisbane, Wednesday, July 15, 2009. AAP Image/Dave Hunt

All the debate about the Australia’s World Cup bid is getting a bit old now, and that’s scary because if we get it we still have another eight or twelve years of this to go!

But it’s interesting looking and hearing at all the different scenarios that the NRL will have to look at to work around a World Cup in Australia. For me, the regular season rounds should most likely be played in regional areas – perhaps it also gives the game a chance to play games in New Zealand and head over to South Africa, so I think it’s fair to say we are pretty well covered in that area.

But it’s the games biggest draw card, the State of Origin, the pinnacle of game, which may need to be played in a suburban ground, perhaps in front of only 25,000 to 30,000, which is a concern.

We have only one alternative, which is move all three matches down south to Melbourne’s Etihad Stadium, which is the mostly likely situation. But it would be hard to see NSW and Queensland fight it out only in Melbourne. It just wouldn’t be Origin!

Taking State of Origin overseas is another option.

But if playing in Melbourne is bad enough, how would it go at Wembley, Giants Stadium or Beijing?

Nah, we couldn’t do it to State of Origin, we just couldn’t.

So that leaves us with one option.

Play Origin after the regular season in late October and into early November.

The hoopla of the World Cup would be long over and stadiums would be back in business.

Spread over three straight weekends, or three fortnights, there are plenty of options for the game to take at that time of the year.

We still have eight or twelve years to think about it, but it’s a decision that needs time to consider every single pro and con.

The Crowd Says:

2010-04-03T03:52:48+00:00

Crosscoder

Roar Guru


Rest easy. I am sure the NRL(with at least 18 teams maybe even 20 teams) will sort out SOO and internationals by 2022.More likely rl internationals will be far more competitive by then, with more countries involved. BTW Folau after all, played for Qld and Jennings for NSW,as did Toupou. 1 SOO in Auckland NZ 1.SOO at Etihad 1 SOO in Hong Kong beamed back to Oz. Chuq. I am all for a WC but: It is the disruption for 8 weeks and the resultant loss in sponsorship,gate takings.Players and offcials still have to be paid P.A.There has to be a compensation package for the code affected.Having a new stadium the next year is one thing,but please bear in mind these new stadiums will also be available to soccer down the line.It's hardly gifting a stadium to sport for exclusive use.FIFA are going to make a motza on the event,in part thanks to the availability of stadiums and the agreement of other codes to relinquish the stadiums they curently use,and go into some sort of winter hibernation. Either the Feds or FIFA has to come to the party down the line,else there are going to be alot of supporters from the other codes ,who currently support the CUP,but may have second ideas knowing their codes have taken a huge financial hit.

2010-04-01T12:58:46+00:00

allblackfan

Guest


More to the point, will there still be a SOO???

2010-03-30T23:03:59+00:00

mushi

Roar Guru


Yes so it may actually end up hurting the profit margins for games at the major stadiums.

2010-03-30T02:48:18+00:00

Ken

Guest


Yes I'm sure the NRL will continue to commercially lease the government owned stadiums at whatever the going rate is whether they are being upgraded or not (as they have for more than a century). This has absolutely zero to do with compensation from FFA/FIFA for voluntarily (and negatively) re-ordering their season to suit another code.

2010-03-30T01:31:59+00:00

Stinger

Guest


With the influx of so many Polynesian players into the NRL, will the State of Origin still be around in 2022?

2010-03-29T05:32:11+00:00

Springs

Roar Guru


Yeah the facilities will be upgraded anyway. And FFA do not pay for them, the money will come from the same people it always does. And a 90k ANZ will be hardly better than an 83k ANZ.

2010-03-29T03:19:01+00:00

Dogz R Barkn

Roar Guru


Or more to the point - it hurts some clubs more than others (but it is an interesting form of equalisation).

2010-03-29T03:01:48+00:00

trent

Guest


I think it should be moved to the end of the season anyway. WC or not it hurts club to much during the season.

AUTHOR

2010-03-29T03:01:05+00:00

M1tch

Roar Guru


Look out for Eden Park after 2011 to go after origin

2010-03-29T02:52:56+00:00

Dan

Guest


I like the idea of taking an Origin to NZ, plus also like the MCG as a venue. Pushing it back a month wouldn't hurt.

2010-03-29T02:29:03+00:00

Dogz R Barkn

Roar Guru


Don't forget that Robina is available during the WC. Then there is the option of using the SCG or the Gabba, both available. And to play one SOO in Melbourne is almost the norm anyway. If Canberra is not part of the bid, that could be another worthy candidate. I actually believe SOO is less of an issue than the regular season - that's where the big disruption is and what will cost the most in terms of los of revenue.

2010-03-29T02:19:43+00:00

Chuq

Roar Pro


I'm not literally saying they should pay cash to the FFA. My point is that the AFL/NRL expect compensation to come from FFA/FIFA because they may have to play a small fraction of their matches in smaller venues for a 8 weeks - but will gladly accept the venues which they will continue to use for years on end receiving upgrades (both facilities and capacity wise) without considering who is responsible for those upgrades occurring.

2010-03-29T01:46:32+00:00

Bam Bam

Roar Guru


Ummm, I doubt the FFA will upgrade the Suncorp Stadium and lets remember its the government who paid for Suncorp, so it would be them again paying for the expansion if there is one. So compensation goes to them.

2010-03-29T01:18:54+00:00

Rabbitz

Guest


Dan An interesting point, that might also to be to do with timing. Right now AFL, NRL and ARU are looking like they are approaching the negotiations "in good faith", i.e. they get the moral high ground when FIFA start to turn the screws. Later when the sh*t-storm brews they can , as you say, be seen to be trying to protect "Aussie" games from an agressive interloper. They can also grab the "under-dog" status in a David vs Goliath battle. So the later they can leave the "see you in court" move the better I guess. (From their perspective).

2010-03-28T23:57:27+00:00

Chuq

Roar Pro


Compensation for smaller crowds? Ok, so the following year, when the SoO is played at a 60k Lang Park and a 90k Stadium Australia – both updated due to the WC – the extra income from the additional seats should go back to FFA, right? It can’t be all one way.

2010-03-28T21:54:59+00:00

Dan

Guest


Interesting hypothesis Scott, but there are a few things that possibly poke a few holes in the "urban jungle" perspective. For instance, why is it that in Welsh soccer fans can be very violent, but their Rugby fans are all quite well behaved (despite Rugby being a working class game in Wales?). Moreover, Japan is an even more intensely urban country than England, but neither its soccer nor its baseball fans need segregation or police escorts. Do you think fan violence is almost a cultural aspect of English (and dare I say European) soccer?

2010-03-28T21:53:52+00:00

Fivehole

Guest


Spot on Rob. SCG is the obvious answer. Not a perfect solution, but the SOO used to be played there in its infancy before the SFS opened i believe

2010-03-28T21:44:48+00:00

Scott

Guest


Yeah, very much so. Union's stronghold is the south, and the population is much more dense than the north. The segregation is shocking. I went to the League 3 playoff final last year at Wembley, and it literally was a case of, fans of different teams went through different entrances, were split by police (as you say) in the grounds, and took different trains there & home. Even to the point of, where I used to live in Fulham, there was a designated pub for 'away' fans only, which had police protection around it. Quite pathetic. Keep this in mind though. I'm not condoning the thuggish behaviour 1 bit. I'm hating seeing it start to creep into the A-League - we just don't need it here. And it's a massive wrap to us as Australians that we don't need that here. You can go to the pub with opposition fans, share a beer, go to the game, leave together, and share a beer after. But the difference is in society in general. So many of the football fans in the UK live a lifestyle we wouldn't dream of. Their homes are cramped, the streets are drab, no public spaces (apart from football fields) - basically concrete jungles. They see their football team as their 1 outlet for life. Hence the passion. Sadly, as well, because of the way they live, hence the violence.

2010-03-28T21:17:13+00:00

Dan

Guest


So is that also why Rugby Union is more popular than League then? It doesn't have any association with the Northern Identity? I suppose that's not too different from why AFL has trouble in Sydney and League has trouble in melbourne... though I think it's less to do with either having an undesirable identity and more to do with a simple rivalry. I am aware of course that Soccer is an enormously popular sport in England (it's virtually all you watch in real terms), but there's no denying that there's a quite sizable and very conspicuous number of soccer fans in England that are violent thugs. Why else do you segregate fans over there? It may not be as bad as it once was, but you still can't walk into a lot of pubs with certain jerseys without fear of being bashed and the increased policed presence at games just means that rival team's "hooligan battles" are carried out a different places. I guess I assumed that this violence would have been such bad publicity for the game over the years (particularly given how messed up it was in the 70s and 80s) that the other two rugby codes could take some advantage. Perhaps this does show the difference between the two countries; In Australia this very image, coupled with the very ethnic nature of the violence in the Australian soccer context, turned the mainstream public away from the game for the better part of 50 years (though admittedly the fact that the macho Australian identity of much of the 20th century also considered it to be a "girls game" had a lot to do with it to). Perhaps it comes down to people in Australia preferring their aggression and violence to be predominantly on the field, while Englishmen prefer to have it among the fans?

2010-03-28T20:32:01+00:00

Scott

Guest


Simple really. There's nothing else really exposed in the media. It is nothing but football, football, football. It is such an entrenched part of the English psyche, and an English weekend (Premiership, championship, league 1, league 2, league 3, northern & southern conferences, and then further down the order). No other sport can challenge it. Probably the closest is union, but even that is a distant second...

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar