State against state! Mate against mate! NSW versus QLD! Blue verse Maroon! Every year the NRL State of Origin clash brings out a fierce passion and loyalty within players and supporters alike.
Yet, the recent dispute over the state allegiance of Sydney Roosters rising star Martin Kennedy has led many a fan to question the truth behind this so-called loyalty.
The annual three-game series divides Australia’s sporting landscape in half; you either support Queensland or New South Wales. The player’s eligibility for either state is determined through where they first played senior rugby league.
The recent dispute brought to the surface the ineffectiveness of these laws and has shown the true nature of the State of Origin selection process to be less than reputable. These laws need to be changed in order to preserve the passion that categorises the state versus state encounter.
The current laws have encountered controversy in that if a player is born and raised in one state and then plays their first senior game in another, then they are eligible to represent that state.
Prominent players like Peter Stirling, Ken Nagas, Matt Rogers, Israel Folau, as well as many more, have managed to utilise this loophole and represent another state.
Current star Greg Inglis caused a lot of controversy when he was selected for his first Origin game, while initially allowed to be eligible for Queensland, it was determined that he had in fact played his first senior game in NSW.
Footy Show host as well as former Queensland player and coach, Paul ‘Fatty’ Vautin even once stated that Coffs Harbor was “close enough” when determining a players eligibility for Queensland. These flimsy eligibility laws have devalued the State of Origin passion to the point where there is as much loyalty to a player’s state as there is loyalty to player’s club team, i.e. none.
So how does the NRL change the rules so that players represent their true home and not just the one they happened to be in when they first played senior footy?
Many pundits believe that the rules should be where your born is where you play. So, born in NSW, play for NSW.
Though this doesn’t account for players who move while they are still young and raises the question of where a player is raised.
Should it be where a player grows up? Again this merely adds more complications to the matter, with players needing to prove where they have lived throughout their life.
I believe the players should nominate the state that they want to represent; the state that they feel is their home.
Now, I have come to terms with the fact that I will never play State of Origin, barring some absolute miracle (fingers crossed), yet as I see myself as a Queenslander I would nominate to play for them.
As I live in Canberra, and have done nearly my whole life, under the current laws I would be forced to play for NSW. As a proud Queenslander whose veins run thick with Maroon blood, the thought of wearing that blue jersey sickens me.
I believe that this honesty system is the best policy because if the players are as passionate as they say, then they will play for one state and one state only – their home.
Tony Franklin
Guest
There is really only one way to be fair to all parties with this argument. Throw out the current system and everything else before it. We need a new system that is fair to the most important of all those involved, the Player. Current systems ignore what the Player wants and instead tells him [or her] which State they will play for. We are letting one ignorant bureaucrat after another try to become 'famous' for inventing the perfect system. Here is my say - Let the player decide by ticking a box for Qld [ ] or NSW [ ] when they are signing all necessary paperwork to be registered with the NRL. Now how simple was that? This way, the Player decides his future. BUT WE NEED MORE - We also need to allow international players [like the Burgess brothers] and those wanting to represent other nations [like Adrian Lam or the many Polynesians] to be eligible for State of Origin consideration after 3-5 continuous years of NRL competition. QLD vs NSW???? I am a proud Qlder and love State of Origin. I would hate to have to told my son must play for NSW. I would not be proud of him for that. This is why Greg Inglis wanted to be a Qlder. Just ask the current Roosters five-eight who wants to play for Qld but has been told he can only play for NSW, and they still don't pick him. WTF!!! Let us have him if you don't really want him. Here is another way to look at it - find me any Qlder who would prefer to play for NSW. Can you even think of one? Hence why Qld wins most of their games with many less players to pick from. OMG!!! I think I just let it slip what being a Qlder is all about - that being treated treated less than someone from NSW and being told by NSW how fair the rules are for all. If anyone can think of any Qlder who argued they wanted to play for NSW then you are doing better than me.
Geoff Clarke
Guest
I am a big believer in where your born, that's who you play for, that is my view in any professional sport!
jeznez
Guest
Disagree on the eligibilty mate, this is a NSW v Qld thing, if you aren't eligible for Oz then you shouldn't be eligible for one of our states. The beauty of Origin compared to other 'All Star' style matches is that it is a meaningful match with a heightened level of passion compared to the main competition. If you look at Cricket All Star matches or the NBA All Star games they are basically hit and giggle stuff, allowing players who aren't ready to spill blood for the jersey will cheapen the contest and ruin it.
jeznez
Guest
Island of Origin? Or would the South Island be unable to fill a team?
Republican
Guest
I don't understand how a Kiwi gets to play state of origin? Apparently one such bloke chose to play for NZ in the Test rather than in the current origin series, which seems to me to be a contradiction in terms. Surely state of origin should only apply to Australians with the criteria being where they were blooded in the code of League apart from the fact that Kiwis are not even Australians!
Llewy Denny
Guest
Good idea Gus, however would this open the door for players to be swayed by large salaries and bonuses rather than the state they feel a true connection to. In saying this though the current system does not work and needs shake up as you say. You are starting to touch on themes of nature vs nuture, where you are raised (perhaps where you learn rugby league) vs where you were born. A distinction needs to be made, and this distinction should be the players choice. MD
st penguin
Guest
I'd blame the parents!
Michael
Guest
You've completely misinterpreted the article. No player would throw their allegiance behind a team just because they are winning. For starters, it would be so hard to get picked if a team had been together for 5 years. I agree you shouldn't just choose who you want to play for. But I doubt that would happen. What Angus is trying to get at is...No rule or authority body (NRL) should tell you who you should play for, it should be your decision. If that means making a decision at the start of your career 17/18 years old, so be it.
League_Coach101
Guest
My understanding is that ORIGIN eligibility is defined by the club where you first played club or school Rugby League at Sixteens level - is this correct? If so - then why is this confusing? It should be abundantly clear - if you can't remember who you played for at Under Sixteen level then you've probably got bigger problems than trying to decide what State to play for (like maybe where you left your car keys... or your wallet... or your toothbrush...) As for Greg Inglis - well everyone knows he should be a NSW player - that's obvious. That however is something NSW should have realised and sorted out years ago - too late to fix it now. The rules seem fairly clear - I'm not sure why they are so hard to follow. I would also endorse the idea of removing the requirement that in order to play Origin you also have to be available to play for Australia. International selection is a separate thing - it shouldn't be part of Origin.
oikee
Guest
Its all about the cash, you get paid good money for playing origin. This is why NZ needs to start there own origin type game. Origin is becoming a world brand, its play in other parts of the world, i just read Serbia has a origin game.
oikee
Guest
Well said.
Djsinnema
Guest
I am under the impression that the problem is caused by the New Zealend players. Some are there ones who create murky rule interpretations, In bids to boost their profile. It is however simple to fix. Enforse only 2 ways to declare elegibility. 1) Your place of birth is actually within the boundries of your declared State 2) The location of your junior club being within the boundries of chosen state. (You can choose any club you like as long as you made 1 appearance before you had turned 19. Senior/Senior Reeserve befpre deadline counts and canot include apearence in NRL premiership, or National Under 20)
Jorganiser
Guest
Gentlemen. Please. It is easy to be 'witty' via the interweb where you are anonymous. The facts are that people are born in one place and often have to move interstate. That goes north and south of the Tweed. I heard Idris say that his favourite player when growing up was Hodges. My point is that your SOO orientation is (or should be) in your DNA. Boys are born in NSW and love the Maroons. The opposite applies as well. As long as you can prove a tie to a state, you should be able to nominate. Birthplace, residence - whatever. When you are contracted by a NRL club, you send in your SOO choice with your rego papers. What about players born in Melbourne or OS? There is a rule in place and until it is changed, that's how it works. Whose fault is it that GI is playing for QLD? The player or the NSWRL officials who didn't snap him up when he was carving up QLD Cup? If you bring in all these hard and fast 'play for where you were born' rules, SOO wouldn't be as good as it is. And what about pre-1980? All the top QLD players were playing for NSW. That's how the whole thing started. QLD didn't make the rules. It goes both ways. When QLD was low on quality at times over the last 30 years, players would put their hand up to play for QLD. In the middle of a golden era, they are still putting their hands up to get in the team. QLD has a siege mentality for SOO. NSW needs to pick on form, in position and not worry about if he is 'not a SOO type of player'. They play each other every week. All that being said, with two games in QLD, we should win three again. The worrying part for the roaches is that both JT and Lockyer are injury free and firing.
Mark
Guest
It's not called the 'NRL State of Origin'. The NRL has nothing to do with it. It's actually the ARL State of Origin.
Chris K
Guest
If you support One Nation and like Bob Catter, and wish things were back to the joe bjelke days and are below average intelligence by league player standards, then you are a certified queenslander. Players who do not fulfill the eligibility laws should be subject to a bandwagoner test, which includes questions covering basic geography skills and last visit to the state and other XXXX related questions. If player fails, he will no longer be eligible for origin for either state. In fact I think Qld supporters in NSW should be subject to this test unless suitable identification in regards to their place of birth is presented. Failure in this test will result in you being stripped of a valid opinion
mona
Guest
if you'd die before wearing a blue jersey and are generally amazing you're a Queenslander if you have devil horns and a black hole where a heart/soul/decency should be then you're a New South Welshmen. That's not hard. My problem with the born in/play for proposal is that what if you're true blue Queenslander/NSWelshmen parents move to NSW/Qld and you're born there, but are raised as a Queenslander/NSWelshmen. It would be an act of extraordinary cruelty to then force you to play for the state you're in.
oikee
Guest
You get a little piece of paper, you write down who you wish to play for, no matter if you were born on the moon. If it says Queensland, then your a queenslander and will be forever a queenslander, no mateer if you go back to live on the moon. You will be loved by queenslanders forever. End of story. If i live in England, i am still a queenslander. I will die a queenslander. Thanks for bringing this post up, now i know what i will inscript of my gravestone.
Al from ctown
Guest
Your a canberran yet you say your a queenslander? You see? Your the problem... If your born there play there... If you don't have the passion, don't play. Simple. Everyone wants to be a queenslander because they are winning... If nsw had 5 in a row they would want to be new south Welshman.... If it's left where you are born that's it... No one can fudge things... Pick and choose... Pft.. Maybe I'll pretend I'm a kiwi and play for them cause they are winning too... Ridiculous. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.