The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Can the Blues really pick the same 17 for Origin 2?

NSW Blues players celebrate during Game I of the 2013 State of Origin rugby league series. (AAP Image/Tracey Nearmy
Roar Guru
7th June, 2013
53
1701 Reads

One thing that wasn’t lost in the euphoria of the New South Wales dressing room after State of Origin 1 was the fact that only 16 of the 17 combatants saw action.

It’s tough being the team man, but Josh Reynolds made, and continues to make, all the right noises.

Blues coach Laurie Daley has already guaranteed, fitness permitting, he’ll be a part of the side that tries to end Queensland’s seven-year stranglehold on the interstate series.

How Reynolds has handled being called into camp in the most awkward of circumstances – forced to go through a train-off against South Sydney five-eighth John Sutton, before eventually being selected for what he believed would be the biggest moment of his career – has been admirable.

Being the eternal fountain of positivity is difficult though and surely has a used-by date.

It was clear from the outset, given Daley called Reynolds and Sutton in at the same time, that the rookie Blues coach isn’t quite sure how to fill that remaining spot on the bench.

His comment after the game that he just couldn’t get the tough Bulldogs star into the game should throw into question the whole concept of the State of Origin utility.

There’s no questioning the skill and will of players like Kurt Gidley and Reynolds when they’re given set roles and time to shine, but what did NSW gain from having Reynolds on the bench?

Advertisement

The only thing it showed was that they could beat their opponents with 16-men.

Towards the end of the game, as the Maroons tried to mount one of their trademark comebacks, the Blues looked out on their feet.

Yes, they gallantly defended their line like their lives depended on it and the ultimate credit is due to them for doing so.

Still, Daley didn’t see the need to throw Reynolds into the game to soak up the impact of some charging Queensland forwards.

Yes, it would’ve taken up a vital interchange, but would he have made the same decision if he had an extra forward or second-rower at his service on the bench?

As soon as Gidley was ruled out of the game, most of his players, while differing in the identity of the replacement, were unanimous in their belief that a forward should’ve been called into camp instead of another utility.

It’s only natural to want to cover for every if, but and maybe that may arise during a contest that is more likely than any other to produce injuries.

Advertisement

But if an injury that has forced Robbie Farah to miss a fortnight of action isn’t the cue for Reynolds to take to the field, then what is?

close