My letter to the NRL CEO, Part 6: Rep Eligibility

By code 13 / Roar Guru

Dear Davo Smithy, there’s been a recent spate of Roar articles discussing a potential restructure of rugby league representative matches.

I’m all in favour of injecting life into the international game but we need to consider the impact on the products generating our income, namely State of Origin and the NRL.

To accommodate mid-season tests/tournaments I’ve heard suggestions that revolve around chopping up the NRL with more bye weekends, extending the season into February, cutting the number of NRL games played, hosting internationals while NRL clubs play with rep players missing, scaling back/moving/axing Origin.

All of those are disasters waiting to happen and will have a negative impact financial or on the quality of the sport as a whole.

Let’s keep the ANZAC Test/City versus Country/Under 20s Origin bye weekend and let’s get our closest neighbours – Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Samoa and Tonga and the like playing on that weekend.

But the talk of northern hemisphere Test teams touring (interrupting Super League) and hosting extended international comps over the top of the NRL season is pure fantasy.

The time for extended competitions involving the big three is October to November.

Rather than try and cram them into an already cluttered club season let’s focus instead on improving the quality and spectacle of those international games.

In fact rugby league should be aiming to have a worldwide international window in those months that doesn’t impact upon club football.

Given all the other discussions at the moment I’d rather save that drawn-out debate for another day.

What I’d really like to talk about is representative eligibility and I’d like to make the following assertions:

• If rugby league can increase the quality of international matches then it will have an advantage over other codes as it would possess strong competition at three unique levels (club/state/international).
• It’s a myth that Australian selectors solely require State of Origin to select the Australian squad. There are 201 NRL matches each season. If they can’t pick the Australian squad from watching club league then the selectors should be fired!
• Birth and youth residency aren’t the only considerations that should be examined. Spending your teen years living in, playing football in and representing a state at a non-professional level are just as meaningful.
• There are players who have a genuine connection to both the Origin States and have heritage outside of Australia who are being forced to make a choice between the two.
• Because State of Origin is a bigger spectacle, involves more money and a bigger audience the international game is suffering because of that choice.
• Creating flexibility with the State of Origin eligibility rules will not open the floodgates. You won’t be able to move to Australia for a year and suddenly play Origin. A system of rules can be designed to ensure that only players that meet stringent criteria can represent at both Origin state and countries other than Australia at international level. So with that in mind:

To qualify for City versus Country representation a player must be able to answer ‘NSW City’ or ‘NSW Country’ to the following questions and score at least two points:

• Was the player born in NSW? If so were they born in the NSW City zone or the NSW Country zone? – two points
• Did the player live the majority of their life in NSW prior to age 13? If so did they spend the majority in the NSW City zone or the NSW Country zone? – two points
• Did the player live the majority of their life in NSW after turning 13? If so did they spend the majority in the NSW City zone or the NSW Country zone? – one point
• Did the player play their very first match over the age of 16 years for a regional/state/nationally organized competition in NSW? If so was it in the NSW City zone or the NSW Country zone – one point
• Did the player’s parent play for NSW City or NSW Country? – one point

To qualify for State of Origin representation a player must be able to answer ‘NSW’ or ‘Queensland’ to the following questions and score at least two points:

• In which Australian state was the player born? – two points
• In which Australian state or foreign country did the player live the majority of their life prior to age 13? – two points
• In which Australian state or foreign country did the player live the majority of their life after turning 13? – one point
• In which Australian state or foreign country did the player play their very first match over the age of 16 years for a regional/state/nationally organized competition? – one point
• In which Australian state or foreign country did the player play their very first representative match for Under 23s or below? – one point
• For which Australian state did the player’s parent play? – one point

To qualify for International representation for a specific country a player must be able to answer the following questions and score least 2 points:

• In which country was the player born? – two points
• In which country has the player held citizenship for at least the past two years? – two points
• In which country or countries has the player held at least seven years continuous residency? – two points
• In which country was the player’s father born? – two points
• In which country was the player’s mother born? – two points
• In which country was the player’s paternal grandfather born? – one point
• In which country was the player’s paternal grandmother born? – one point
• In which country was the player’s maternal grandfather born? – one point
• In which country was the player’s maternal grandmother born? – one point

In my opinion players should have at least two grandparents with heritage to be able to play for that particular country.

Obviously there would however be the following conditions:
• Any player that has already played for a representative team prior to the introduction of these rules will be allowed to continue doing so after their implementation.
• Players eligible for City versus Country or State of Origin will be allowed to also play for countries other than Australia if they meet the criteria for both.
• After representing City versus Country or State of Origin a player cannot switch teams in those competitions.
• After representing Australia, New Zealand or England, a player cannot switch between those teams.
• Players from Australia, New Zealand and England can play for countries other than those three if they meet the criteria.
• No player can player for a different country within the same 24-month period.

Along with changes to the international tournament structures (which I will discuss later) I believe that these rules will increase the quality of international rugby league.

You will see more players with professional club/rep skills playing for the small nations, lifting those squads, reducing score margins and creating a boon for grassroots growth.

The Crowd Says:

AUTHOR

2013-04-21T08:15:10+00:00

code 13

Roar Guru


No, I'm not Davo Smithy. I'm just a man with a plan.

2013-04-21T05:25:07+00:00

factual

Guest


Wikipedia - As of April 1, 2013, the United States had a total resident population of 315,712,000 abt 10,712,000 shy of your guesstimate but in the ballpark.

2013-04-21T01:23:30+00:00

Ra

Guest


Juc, the world as we know it today was conquered in the last 500 years by people speaking Anglo; Romanic (i.e. European countries dominated by the Romans) and Germanic languages, and thousands of indigenous languages and cultures still suffer as a result. Amazingly, at one time in the 1990s there were more Maori playing for the Wallabies than playing for the All Blacks, and they talked maybe tongue-in-cheek about wanting to haka when playing the All Blacks, and culturally, they are right. If having those quality players going out to their ancestoral homelands and sharing, language, cultural and sporting knowledge etc with their own people is good for and embraced by those people, then that's gotta be great small steps eh

2013-04-21T01:05:27+00:00

Ra

Guest


and Hutch that's why i think the grandpappy sgate eligibility rule can be a bit tough in this age and in the future. The reason for that is that we are simply so mobile now-a-days as a race of people and the cross-cultural intermingling and intermarriage is so rampant, especially in Australia and what El Masari did for his people, Kevin Iro did for the Cook Islands, and others are doing the same in different sports, especially cricket i.e. Ireland and Netherlands. A Maori boy, whose grandmother being Maori and grandfather Italian represented Italy at two RWC's and 6Nation competitons. I know his grandma. Fantastic stuff !! Apart from that the rest has been mentioned somewhere before around the traps in some form, and offers much as a discussion document. I hope it can put to bed the fiasco of Australia stopping a couple of guys from playing for Tonga in a World Cup, even though the Aussies didn't want them. The Kiwis on the other hand have had a historical link outside of league and sports with our island nations and it shows in our relationships with each other - the Aussies are now thinking less empirically, or being force to do so, and this paper fits with that shift - did you write this yourself did you Davie ?

2013-04-20T22:36:58+00:00

jus de couchon

Guest


International Rugby League is dead and buried . It should be global , but has been mismanaged by by fantasists who have no Idea how to develop the game. The RLWC will be played by Italians and Irishmen with Australian accents.Little wonder the great game is an International joke.

2013-04-20T04:28:49+00:00

Johnno

Guest


code 13, for me the big target to step up to the Tier 1's is France. They have genuine potential . A big population, a wealthy population, a team now in the English Super league, which is developing French talent. And they can also pick at rugby union off-cuts too. USA has potential too, hugh population , a competition is running now, and long term you only have to tap into a small amount if talent for the USA to be reasonably competitive , such is there massive 305 million or so population. Canada and Jamaica are doing okay, as are serbia developing a bit too and Ukraine and Poland. But a Tier system needs ot be set up after the World cup it should be a priority. Your ideas on state of origin representation are interesting and what qualifies to represent the Blues or Maroons. I think though we are all in agreement , we all want international rugby league to thrive. Last night I thought the match, had good energy and atmosphere to it, I think the TV ratings when they come out will surprise a few people and be quite impressive.

AUTHOR

2013-04-20T03:19:43+00:00

code 13

Roar Guru


Under the rules I'm proposing I'd have no problem with Adrian Lam playing for Qld & PNG as he has a legitimate connection to both and would qualify under this points system. Johnno, I'm in total agreement with you on the Tier system and that's what I'm also proposing. There would then also be an opportunity for the Tier 2's to step up to Tier 1 once they start beating the big 3 on a regular basis.

AUTHOR

2013-04-20T03:13:55+00:00

code 13

Roar Guru


Hutch, I have to disagree. Like I said there would be a 24 month buffer period so it eliminates players who only swap countries because they 'missed out'. Choosing to switch would require a long period of consideration, it would be a big decision, hence why I'm against Uate swapping simply because he misses out on the Kangaroos (see my previous comments above). The real reason for allowing switching is because rugby league's growth in other nations has partially been on the back of pro players from the big 3 (Aus,Eng,Nz) who have a genuine heritage connection playing for those nations and kickstarting the game there -- just think of El Masri's pioneering efforts in Lebanon, I doubt we would even have a game there without him. Giving those 'minor' nations a legitimate professional player lifts the game in those nations immensely and stronger international performances spur on grassroots growth.

AUTHOR

2013-04-20T03:04:54+00:00

code 13

Roar Guru


I disagree. The international eligibility rules I'm proposing are actually pretty simple and force players to prove a high degree of heritage or dedication to that nation. So basically - BIRTH or CITIZENSHIP or LONG TERM RESIDENCY or ONE PARENTAL BIRTH or TWO GRANDPARENTS BIRTH = Automatic Qualification. I believe that requiring players to have at least two grandparents with heritage will remove the more farcical "loose" eligibility selections that have occurred previously. As for Uate, I do not believe players can/should switch nations between the period of World Cup Qualifications and the World Cup itself and rightfully so. By using a 24 month ban period it forces players to think long and hard about their affiliations. Under this proposal if Uate genuinely wanted to represent Fiji and NSW he would be able to do so as he meets the criteria for both. Fiji would more likely be his first choice instead of an afterthought if he fails Kangaroos contention. That in itself not only lifts the quality of the Fijian side but also gives the Fijian national team the respect it needs if international rugby league is to be taken seriously.

AUTHOR

2013-04-20T02:53:26+00:00

code 13

Roar Guru


Yes. This is not about the relevance of city vs country rather a better method of addressing players that can have multiple allegiances.

AUTHOR

2013-04-20T02:51:41+00:00

code 13

Roar Guru


"One keeps hearing about eligibility for Origin and National team selection based upon City verse Country games" This article is about eligibility rules rather than the legitimacy of City vs Country as selection trial. I would suggest that City vs Country should be reserved for players that haven't played in Tests, Origin & All Stars within the past year. That makes it a proper "probables vs possibles" game in everything but name.

2013-04-20T01:16:20+00:00

Johnno

Guest


Adrian Lam stuff we are going to far back for my knowledge on eligibility rules, that was in the 1990's. Craig Smith also played for QLD then played for the kiwis so that's another one. And Tony Carroll comeback and played for kiwis. My view is this. Once you play for the aussies,kiwis, or palms, you can't play for any of those other 2 countries. You pick you stick. In other word's Tier 1 countries. Rugby league should make an official Tier set up. But I have no problem with players playing for any other country any place, anywhere anytime. France/Italy/Irleand/Wales/Scotland/PNG/Fiji/Samoa/Tonga.

2013-04-20T01:06:54+00:00

Snowmann

Guest


Can somebody explain the Adrian Lam situation to me?.. How was it possible for him to play and captain Queensland but then play for PNG?.. Isn't that the situation we are talking about?.

2013-04-19T23:35:53+00:00

Johnno

Guest


Well if you enjoy some short term world cup floggings, then go for it. It;s much better int he bigger picture to be loose on eligibility for a world cup in a developing sport like rugby league, then downy he track tighten the rules. Fiji/Samoa/Tonga, no players would play for them or the good ones, if eligibility rules were not loose, because unlike rugby union, league doesn't have a lot of dedicated rep weekends. It's a club based sport. And most of the guys who play for the developing teams all have cultural heritage to these teams so it's not manufactured.

2013-04-19T23:21:17+00:00

hutch

Guest


Switching between nations ruins all credibility and inhibits the 'minor' nations from developing their player pool. Allowing players to play for another nation after 'missing out' on their preferred nation is not how international sport works. We need stricter rules regarding switching nations and meaningful tests and tournaments for all nations in order for international rugby league to grow. Start thinking long term and stop looking for a quick fix with manufactured national teams.

2013-04-19T23:10:35+00:00

Johnno

Guest


A good article but to be honest, your plan is overkill and way to complicated. Just keep it simple. A point's system for sports eligibility can get really complicated. I defiantly think in a world cup year a player should be allowed to flip flop. Far example if Uate, can't make the aussy team he should able to play for Fiji. And same say for Felite Mateo be allowed to play for Tonga.

2013-04-19T22:52:33+00:00

amilia

Guest


Based on premierships won (not stripped) and a major dominance I would say it's actually manly Also more than 50% of premierships won in the last decade have been by new south Wales teams

2013-04-19T21:49:12+00:00

The Spectator

Roar Guru


The most succeccful team in that same period isnt mel and i believe the eligability statement above was talking on points of eligibility not relevance .

2013-04-19T21:02:46+00:00

Noel Edwards

Guest


One keeps hearing about eligibility for Origin and National team selection based upon City verse Country games, these games only apply to NSW, when will NSW realise that rugby League doesnt centre on NSW. the best team over the last several years is from Melbourne, followed by Brisbane Rugby League will never become a national game, most people realise NRL and ARL are really another name for the NSW Ruby League.

Read more at The Roar