When Melbourne hosted the first of this year’s State-Of-Origin games, it caused a furore among rugby league fans in NSW.
Traditionally the series is played exclusively in Sydney and Brisbane with the two capitals alternating the home ground for two of the three matches.
Rugby league fans in Sydney, desperate to see NSW stop Queensland attain a record seventh straight series win, were livid because they lost home ground advantage and the chance to attend two of the three matches live.
Of course, its not the first time the game has gone to Melbourne. The last time it went there it was at the expense of a Queensland home game back in 2009.
In fact, that year Queensland were further disadvantaged because Brisbane didn’t play host until the final match.
This year the Melbourne match was sold out and brought record breaking TV ratings nationally and in Victoria for the NRL, even though in the preceding days the local promotion hardly penetrated the AFL saturated Melbourne media.
State-Of-Origin is the ‘Jewel in the Crown’ for the NRL. It was a concept created by the AFL but failed to be successful for them. It has proven to be a perfect concept for league.
Origin’s initial success was due to the passionate way that Queenslanders embraced the opportunity to correct the perceived injustices perpetrated against them by NSW over many decades, but Origin’s long term success is because Australia’s league territory is split evenly between the two states and therefore guarantee high-quality contests.
AFL players and fans didn’t embrace their ‘Origin’ because the Victorian team would dominate the three smaller states. Also, there is no incentive in AFL for players to gain selection in an Australian team through playing for their state.
Since the Melbourne match, there has been reports that Perth would like to bid for an Origin game. There is further speculation about New Zealand’s interest in hosting a game.
One report stated that selling game one to Melbourne was worth $2.5m to the NRL.
So what harm would come from allowing the first match of the series going off to the highest bidder? Sydney and Brisbane would each get to host one game each and alternate between second and third match year to year.
One problem would be time zones if the candidates include Perth and New Zealand. This would almost certainly push the game onto the weekend with a Saturday game for Perth and a Sunday game for New Zealand the best timing for TV in the eastern states.
This would please those who are calling for Origin on a stand alone weekend. Most NRL clubs are in favour of this because their players are either unavailable or backing up, sometimes two days after an Origin match.
There is a twofold benefit for the NRL. There is the extra revenue from the hosting rights and the promotion of the game in a city where league is not the main game.
Two years ago debate raged about Brisbane bidding for the NRL grand final. There was speculation that, as with their broadcasting deals, the NRL had undersold the value of the grand final. Brisbane argued that average crowds at Lang Park were larger than Homebush and as a purpose built football stadium it was an appropriate venue.
They also argued that Brisbane could boast a similar cultural rugby league pedigree as Sydney. Certainly having two cities bidding would drive the price up. Homebush has held the grand final since 1999, before that the Sydney Football Stadium took the grand final from the SCG in 1988.
The best and most logical rugby league ‘event’ type match is a Test match. Scheduled after the AFL grand final in October, the match would not be competing with AFL and would give West Australians and/or Victorians the opportunity to cheer for Australia. This is the advantage that the NRL has over AFL and they should do more to maximise this.
I would support these changes if the revenue is significant enough and is channelled directly into rugby league development and specifically for development in regional ‘grassroots’ areas.
One of the big issues facing the game at the moment is the lack of a quality second tier competition and with it a lack of a professional pathway for players throughout all of NSW. Currently all the NSW cup teams are located in Sydney, with the exception of Wollongong and Newcastle.
The NSW Cup could do with using the Queensland Cup as a model by having a broader geographical spread throughout the state.
The recent publicity about Wagga council signing an agreement with the new AFL Giants whereby they pay to have the Giants play trial games in Wagga is a symptom of the problem that league has in all of regional NSW. The local administrators in these areas are desperate for some higher profile contact with the NRL and NRL players who are often products of non-Sydney junior leagues.
The best boost that could be given to the game in regional NSW would be to have NSW cup teams located in towns like Wagga Wagga, Albury, Dubbo, Queanbeyan, Bathurst/Orange, Tamworth, Maitland and Port Macquarie. The teams would be feeder teams for NRL clubs just as the NSW cup teams are today.
If Wagga had a NSW cup team that featured contracted NRL players on standby for the Cronulla Sharks (for example) then the profile of this team in the town would be enormous.
This in turn would be a huge attraction to young guys to take up the game there. Increases in player numbers and the size of the general league community would then attract private sponsorship and funding from all levels of government.
A team in Albury as a feeder for the Melbourne Storm would make better geographical sense than the Storm’s current arrangement and it would help greatly in supporting the game in the area of NSW most challenged by the competition with AFL.
The NSW Cup with this structure would be very attractive to regional TV networks and therefore more likely to secure a broadcasting contract. I would continue with the current three conference structure to minimise travel costs.
The obstacle to launching this type of concept as always is money. This is where the revenue from the sale of major NRL events could be directed specifically for a development of this type. Once the teams are firmly established and embraced by their communities they will be better equipped to eventually operate with financial independence.
npollard
Roar Rookie
Timmuh
Roar Guru
Looking at your game from the outside, there does seem to be some truth in this. The NRL seems to "defending its turf" rather than looking for new opportunities. You guys have to get into Perth. Its great for east coast television, a day game in Perth is near prime time on the east coast. Its got sponsorship money lined up everywhere, is attracting people from the east due to the economy in the west, etc. Its not about taking o the AFL and more than the AFL is about taking on Rugby League (even if the Sydney media like to pretend that's all it is). Its about there being an obvious market with the money for your game to thrive in. Adelaide isn't so important in some ways, but is a metropolitan TV market - an important factor as metropolitan viewers are worth far more to television station than regional viewers. Personally, and again I stress I'm viewing it from the outside, I think you guys need three Brisbane teams and a team in Perth (in all cases you may need to wear losses for years, maybe decades, but should emerge stronger for it and increased revemues at league leve should offset the losses made at club level) - but should not be killing Sydney sides. Dropping even the least suported of teams means you lose tens of thousands of supporters forever.
Timmuh
Roar Guru
Inter-state/intercolonial games of Australian Football were played before Rugby League was invented, which was 1908 I believe. These were not "state of origin" games, in either code, but more akin to "state of residency". Use of state of origin for eligibility in those games was used in Australian Football before being adopted and adapted by Rugby League. There is no doubt that League, for a variety of reasons, has been far more successful with the concept than Australian Football was - particularly once clubs started unofficially pulling players out of state squads. I have to admit ignorance on the Darwin game that you talk about, and it may qualify as the first state of origin, just not at the top level of the sport or conceived as an ongpoing concept by the sport's governing bodies - that is, assuming the same had not been done for any other sport prior to that.
Timmuh
Roar Guru
You would get 50k easily, there are around half a million Australians in the UK at any given time. Add a few British league fans and curious locals. And I'm saying this as someone who doesn't really like league; nothing against it, I've tried to get into it and it just doesn't suit me. Like many who grew up outside NSW and Qld, Origin is the one time I will occasionally watch a whole game.
Stanley Seathwaite
Guest
Correct. If you held a State of Origin game at Wembley in London, you would be lucky to get 20,000.
pennypanther
Roar Rookie
WW2 was earlier than 1978...
npollard
Roar Rookie
Hi Brainwashed. I am keen on any concept to help the game in regional areas. Setting up the NSW cup with teams in the main regional centres should build the game long term because there is a constant engagement with the NRL with a pathway for local players. Also there is a trophy with some profile to be won. I think those towns would value it more than the Sydney teams do. I do like the idea of taking 'one off' matches to towns. They do create a spike of interest and the players can visit schools and clubs to promote game which is valuable. I like your idea but what about a 'back to the future' approach and turn our trial matches back into a knockout cup competition and take the matches to the country towns. The AFL does it successfully with a major sponsor and sells the broadcast rites as well. Another case of the AFL maximising their revenue capability.
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League
Guest
The Queensland Cup is a semi-professional competition.
Brainwashed
Guest
There are 9 sydney teams,3 queensland teams,divide sydney teams into groups of 3.One set of 3 Sydney teams as well as 1 Queensland team take a home game to the country in one year and then the next year another group does the same etc.Get rid of City /Country.This gives the country 4 games of exposure and activities as well as 8 teams playing for 2 comp. points oppossed to one game that means nothing and a waste of time.This would also be more viable than every club going to the country every year.I applaud the Bulldogs for taking the Storm game to Mackay and Roosters for going to Darwin.I will say this that transplanting a Sydney team is playing with fire and if Cronulla's development approval gets knocked back than that might be there last option to survive as a stand alone club
Cappuccino
Guest
I disagree- very few cities in the world would attract 50, 000 to an Origin match. Outside of east-coast Australia and parts of England, League is virtually unknown- an origin match played in Europe, or the US, featuring two teams that have no relevance to the local population in a sport that has an extremely low profile internationally? That is not a formula for 50k+ crowds.
Michael/Brisbane
Guest
Ah the ol' Brisbane is boring line.. I hear this used as to why AFL crowds are huge in Melbourne, yet there's arguably more to do in Melbourne than Sydney. At the end of the day Sydney is the odd man out.
steve b
Guest
yeh the new home of .NRL we get bigger crowds thats because Brisbane is boring and they get sick of punting cane toads of the lawn they have to do something !!!
npollard
Roar Rookie
Hi Pennypanther. Both Rugby League and Australian Rules were experiencing the same issue with interstate matches through the 1970s. There was more money for players in the VFL and the NSWRL so all the best players ended up in Sydney/Melbourne. A West Australian who was frustrated by the Victorian team which had a number of players originally from WA, beating the WA team, suggested the 'Origin' concept. In 1977 the first WA V Victoria match was played under 'Origin' selection rules. Ron McCaulife the QRL chairman of the time loved the idea and in 1980 it was trialled. As they say the rest is history....
oikee
Guest
I think rugby league has got to do more to promote games around the country. Being pro-active is the way forward. David Gallop running out to Wagga was just plain silly. If AFL take a game to Wagga, take games to Adelaide and Geelong, if they play at Blacktown, take a Kangaroo Kiwi game to the MCG. And add 2 new teams, and move a Sydney team, do some possitive things for a change. Our game never seems to be possitive, always negative, notice this anyone. The excitemnt of adding new teams will keep the game excited for many years.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
Inter-colonial games in Australian Football were played as far back as the 1870s. But putting that aside, it is well documented that the concept, including the actual name, was first used in a game between Victoria and WA, with the express intention that WA players plying their trade in the VFL would return to represent WA. League took up the concept in 1980, noting that up to that point, rep clashes were between the NSWRL and the QRL. You really need to research this a bit more. This is what Jack Galloway writes in his book: "Origin: Rugby League's Greatest Contest, 1980-2002" (pg 10): "Leon Larkin, a West Australian, was also involved in International Sports Management and he invited Maranta to watch a unique game of Australian Rules to be played in Perth. The Australian Rules situation in Perth was analagous to that of Rugby League in Queensland. The local competition struggled while being bled dry by wealthy Victorian clubs. In an attempt to instil some competitiveness into the annual interstate games, a match was to be played at the end of the 1978 season with Western Australians who played in Victoria being eligible for selection in their home state. "...with his partner, Wayne Reid, he travelled to Perth and was one of 40,000 people who attended Subiaco Oval to watch the West Australian team defeat the Victorians in the first state of origin football match of any code played in Australia. " Now if people know what happened thereafter, they'd know that it wasn't a straightforward idea to get up in League - there was opposition initially on both sides of the border - but that's a story for another day.
Daz
Guest
Yes we know RL is huge in Brisbane and QLD but if the game is to grow we need to focus on other areas outside of NSW and QLD. Perth is a must followed by either Adelaide or a 2nd NZ team. We need to attract more fans to our sport that dont currently watch it. Qld will watch the NRL regardless of how many QLD teams there are.
pennypanther
Roar Rookie
State of Origin was never created by AFL that is the biggest misconception going around!! Prove to me where AFL created it? League has been playing State vs State since its inception, not to mention that in WW2 a game of Rugby League was played in Darwin, the teams were NSW and QLD, where you were born thats who you played for. So that is technically the very first ever SOO!
Michael/Brisbane
Guest
Yeah there is more to it than crowds, such as his first point. Hands down QLD is the new home of rugby league.
Mikey
Guest
turbodewd that is because there are only 3 QLD teams as opposed to 9 teams just in Sydney. There is more to it than just crowds otherwise PNG would have a team.
turbodewd
Guest
Brisbane is unquestionably the new home of RL in Australia. It deserves a GF every 2nd or 3rd year or if theres a Qld team in the GF. Recent SOO ratings showed Brisbane almost matching Sydney's ratings...amazing considering its less than half the size. For the record Im from Canberra. And Qld NRL regular season crowds are always better than NSW ones too.