State of Origin eligibility pretty simple, when you look at it

There has been vigorous debate in the tribe currently about the eligibility of players for The State of Origin. Over the years we have seen a number of dubious selections regarding players' 'origins'. One such obvious example is the Greg Inglis selection for 'our brothers from the north'. Here was a player who played under 18s for Bowraville on the Mid North coast near Macksville, NSW. Through a complicated process he ends up playing for the toads. As such I have no grief about his decision to play with a supreme rugby league side who have a fortress-like winning mentality and provide us with outstanding contests of speed, strength, skill, passion and theater each season. I come from a sporting family background and have had the honor to represent my state in Rugby. I have always felt that this was a privilege and I still have a sense of pride in my achievement. Throughout my sporting life and later as a fan of A list sporting contests, I have found that the passion of the contest became more intense when participants & spectators had affiliations with the tribe they were representing. I would hope that the wonderful State of Origin series does not lose any of its tribal passions through thoughtless decisions based around profit and player eligibility issues. A possible solution could be that when a footballer reaches the age and level of state representation then that player declares their commitment to the state of their origin. Surely a player who was born in Tumit, for example would select NSW as their representative state. Similarly a player born in Tweed Heads would see himself as a New South Welshman. But this is not the case with the eligibility for Origin process! Why not ask the player, when entering the NRL for their debut game, which is their representative state if they were chosen for such honors. This way, the player nominates which is their representative state upon their entry to the NRL. As a contractual point, players should be held to their choice for the remainder of their careers. Sure they can represent any club, in any code, for any state, but when it came to representative honors they are only eligible for their chosen state. Through this process they can then be selected for further honors for their country. Another concern is the selection of State of Origin teams. Why have a Country/City match if it is not the final step for state representation? This Anzac Test gets in the road each year of a possible Bonanza time for the State Rep fixtures. Leave tests until the end of the season and let the best football happen in the selection games for and the actual State of Origin series. If a player is not Australian and does not have an Australian passport, then he should not be eligible for state or Australian representation. If a player has played for another country he automatically renders himself ineligible to play State of Origin and/or for Australia. The Australian Anthem is also tragically overused and its significance compromised by being sung whenever the 'administrators attempt to trump-up the importance of a game for television power. Let's save the anthem for contests of international magnitude. It is our National Anthem and as such, I believe it should be given the same privilege and respect by being elevated to international contests only. We don't need it at Grand Finals, State of Origins, club games or any important letter opening. What do past Australian Representatives think about the anthem being sung at any ole barbie and touch footy prize-giving? There is nothing more uplifting in sports culture to see thousands of fans and players fervently singing the National Anthems of their respective countries before battle. It has the effect of bringing people together under the same flag,traditions and values which connect us to the past and keep the spirit of unity and national pride alive. It is every parents' right to be able to engender this pride and spirit in their children. They should know of its significance and be part of its continual integrity to future generations. Can we keep the State of Origin a contest between Australian Rugby league players of different states and then pick our National combatants from that contest and then we can proudly sing to our hearts content the Anthem that has been written to celebrate our pride in their achievements on the international sporting arenas.

Yes. The premise of "you represent the state your were born in" is ok...but that rules was easily routed by those that wanted to play for other states. Dunstall did the same. Born in Queensland, he played for the "All Stars" and then lined up for Victoria in that mouth-watering forward line of Ablett, Lockett, Dunstall. The NRL problem is arguably harder due to the Kiwi factor.

Didnt Wayne Carey play for SA (where his father moved) yet was born in Wagga or is that because NSW didnt have a SOO AFL team??

Just by way of comparison...when Australian Footy had SoO, eligibility purely concerned state of birth. So if someone was born in WA, and then moved to SA at age 4, they represented WA at State of Origin. Seemed to work.

Honestly I think it comes down to the majority of answers to 6 questions: Where did you spend the majority of your youth prior to age 5 (country or if Australia, which state)? Where was your father born (country only)? Where was your mother born (country only)? From which country were at least 2 of your natural grandparents born (country only)? Where did you play the majority of your rugby league (from U/6 to U/18) & attended school (if Australian, which state)? Where did you play your first U/15's or above game (for a state or country run comp) or where did you play your first U/15's or above School Rep team (if Australian, which state)? Why these 6 questions 1. Sometime people are born in one country and move to another when they're only a few months or years old. They might grow up with absolutely no memory of that original country yet can get through the 'where were you born' loophole. I'd rather a question that asks where a player spent the majority of their early childhood 2 & 3. You may have been born to parents from another country who moved when young, hence it's important to check the original citizenship of the parents. 4. I don't like the idea that having 1 out of 4 grandparents being from a certain country can qualify you for some minnow. It should be at least 2 parents which would prove a strong heritage link 5. This address where the majority of your primary & high school level youth was spent 6. Where did you first choose to represent a specific area Now before anyone criticises this out of hand, I ask you to take a number of players - Uate, El Masri, Inglis and others - and see if it meets the "common sense" requirements. I mean you might add "where were you born" as a 7th seperate question but I disagree that it's the be all and end all.

A few good points here. Since reading about James Tamou I've been thinking a bit about Origin eligibility rules too. The way I see it - it really does link closely to international eligibility rules. In that respect there's a couple of things that need to be tidied up. Firstly - the rules for Origin and the rules for International Footy need to be different. Origin is very complicated because Australia has such a transient population. The way I see it there should be a series of standards you have to meet - rather than one set rule. 1 Firstly there can be no grey area in regards to where you played your first senior footy (senior defined as playing for an Under Sixteens team). The moment you set on the paddock in an Under 16's division in NSW you have removed yourself from consideration for QLD. End of story. Notice however that I did not mention your birthday - I mentioned the day you played Under 16's footy. Whether you be 15 or even 14 at the time is irrelevant - you've played senior footy. What is important to realise is that you don't have a choice about it. If you played your first senior footy in QLD and desperately want to play for NSW - too bad. You either play for the State you're eligible for or you don't play. Simple as that. Greg Inglis - born and raised in Kempsey NSW and playing his first senior footy at Hunter Sports High in Newcastle - would be a NSW player or nothing at all. Simple. 2 However let's make State representation MEAN something. Firstly you should be a resident of that State and by able to prove you have lived there a majority of your life - regardless of where you were born. If you were born and raised in NZ and played junior footy over there and senior footy in Australia - too bad! You are not eligible for Origin. You do not meet the standards. You can play for NZ or not at all. 3 Remove the rule that you have to play for Australia if you play Origin. Let players like the Minichello's and the Hayne's play for countries like Italy and Fiji - it's only going to help grow Rugby League. international rules do NOT have to be the same as Origin rules - because the aims are different and there's no shortage of decent talent in NSW and QLD. There you go - some ideas to mull over.

I had this argument with my uncle last year. He is born and bred in NSW, and believed that where you are born should be the be all and end all of selection. I put to him that since I was born in Adelaide, I would not be (hypothetically) eligible to play for Queensland, even though I moved to Townsville at age 2? I think for SoO, it is very complicated, and comes down to where you grew up and spent the majority of time playing your junior footy. As for Internationals, it should be based on citizenship only. You can play for any country that you are a citizen of. If you have dual citizenship, then you get to pick. Simple.

Didnt he play jnrs in N.Z ?

Do you think people who grew up in Canberra or ACT should be allowed to play in origin?? E.g. Dugan and campese?

Why should Hayne and Williams not play for NSW? They're both born and raised in Sydney. I agree Uate shouldn't be playing, but Hayne and Williams are as Aussie as anyone (they have Pacific Islander heritage). And it's not just NSW picking non Aussies. What about Jason Taumalolo and Sam Kasiano being eligible for QLD. Picking non-Aussies is like wrestling in the ruck. No one wants to see it, but both teams do it to keep up with the other.

MG what's your fascination with Tony Williams. Born in Sydney, all junior footy in Sydney. Him playing for the Kiwis is actually what you are arguing against, is it not?

you know tony williams was born in NSW

Research says he arrive at the age of 10 furthermore Karmichael has been travelling on a Australian passport since he was 12. I had replied to a similar story last week acknowledging New Zealand Rugby Union has numerous Samoan born players aligning themselves with the All Blacks and not Samoa.By your logic Michael Jones should have represented Samoa Wille O for Tonga &; Petro for Fiji and not Australia. Polynesian born NZers and abroad like Hunt tend to represent their adopted country base on the results of opportunities & development. Expat non/indigenous Kiwi's living here play against Australia due to culture,business & sporting rivalry thats existed well before polynesian settlement both here & NZ. A central data base needs to be set up in NZ monitoring any movements of registered players participating in clubs here and overseas.Australian base NZRL Development officers need to identify these special players and offer workshops or training programmes in NZ to counter resources offer by the QRL & NSWRL.

"It’s very simple: you play for the country in which you were born." Bad idea, many people are born in one place but spend their formative years somewhere else.