This weekend is “rep week” in rugby league. We have a much-maligned trans-Tasman Test, followed by an irrelevant ‘city versus country’ match and a qualifying match where Samoa play Fiji for a spot in the four nations.
So what is the mood like in the lead up to this seemingly important week? Steve Mascord summed it up in the Sydney Morning Herald by suggesting we not only cancel rep week, but abandon Kangaroos Tests altogether. He suggested we treat them like the NBA’s USA ‘Dream Team’; a side that really only plays to boost the profile of the sport in developing markets.
Mascord is at least partly right here. Rep week is an unnecessary break in momentum at a point when the NRL was just beginning to gather a head of steam.
I was at the Roosters versus Dragons Anzac Day clash – one of three matches on Friday either sold out or close to it – and the entire day was brilliant. From the lead-up with the Anzac Day ceremony, to the atmosphere at the Sydney Football Stadium and the on-field action (from a Roosters perspective at least).
It was just what the NRL needed after a slow start to the season, and definitely left most of us at the match hungry for more days like it. So why follow such a meaningful weekend with such a meaningless one?
It simply doesn’t make sense, either from club perspective or a representative one.
So I agree with Mascord on this count; we should get rid of rep week altogether, as it serves no purpose where it is and just cuts the season up.
That said, I don’t agree with him on the Kangaroos.
It’s popular to bag international rugby league as not being competitive and argue that Origin is where it’s at, but has anyone looked at the winners tables lately? Because last time I checked Queensland hasn’t lost a series since 2005.
Compared to that, the “credibility” of international league suddenly looks a lot less questionable. With a World Cup victory, and two Four Nations/Tri Nations titles to their names since 2005, the Kiwis now have had a more competitive rivalry with the Kangaroos than the Blues have had with Queensland. Shocking, but true.
So what’s the problem with international league if it’s arguably more competitive than the coveted Origin series? Scheduling. This mid-year Test is played at a time that gives the Kiwis a clear handicap, and it’s not like they need one.
In addition, the match comes out of nowhere. The NRL season is just starting to warm up, and all of a sudden there’s this Test that interrupts everything. It’s very poorly thought out from a marketing perspective.
Ideally, the rugby league calendar ought to build up towards the representative season. The NRL should run uninterrupted until it’s completion, and then be followed by a State of Origin series, with the year culminating in a Tri Nations series (no Four Nations, but I’ll get to that).
The year is a little crowded as it is, so how do we achieve that and still have a decent off season?
First, we cut the NRL to 24 rounds and start it at the very end of February/beginning of March, so that it finishes in early September.
After the grand final, there should be a two-week break and then the Origin series should begin, played out on successive weekends. So none of this dislocated nonsense where it takes six weeks to play three games; just three weeks in a row of back to back Origin.
Now, on the last week of Origin you start the international season, the centrepiece of which should be the Tri Nations.
As I said above, the Four Nations should be scrapped. Why? Because it’s trying to do something that is really the role of the Rugby League World Cup; give small nations exposure to the big stage.
That’s fine for a World Cup, but having France or Fiji in a Four Nations tournament makes no sense, as all they do is cop wall-to-wall beatings.
To counter this, there should be a second-tier tournament concurrent with the Tri Nations made up of the developing nations. You could have it involve France, Papua New Guinea, and the PI nations in a Five Nations league.
That would be far more suitable to developing interest in the game in new markets than having one lower tier team in a Four Nations cop 50-plus score lines for a month.
Getting back to the Tri Nations, the currently preferred model of playing in a pool and deciding the trophy with a “final” should be scrapped. A competition with three/four teams doesn’t require a grand final, and having one makes no sense.
A league model is far more suitable, and I’d suggest that the former rugby union Tri Nations model is perfect here. Have each team play home-and-away and decide the champions on points.
In order to maximise space in the calendar, the Tri Nations should start in the final week of Origin with a New Zealand versus England encounter in New Zealand.
This will both help compress the season a little, while also giving England and New Zealand the advantage of more time together.
Following this there should be a one-week break, so Origin can properly conclude and the Australian team get a full two weeks together before playing a match.
This would give the rugby league season a far more rational structure and help return the status of international rugby league to its former pre-Origin era glory.
Broadcasting rights remain a stumbling block for this more logical approach, but in terms of future development and building the appeal of international rugby league, it’s a no-brainer in my view.
code 13
Roar Guru
I have to agree with Scott Woodward. I don't believe the NRL will ever risk shifting State of Origin because a large part of the reason the NRL is worth that price is because of Origin in winter. I would like to see October & November become a proper worldwide international window. In lieu of dropping the Anzac Test every 4th year Australia could play England & New Zealand three times each in Oct/Nov in an extended series format.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
I think some of your points are very valid and they should be looked at. As has been pointed out city/country and NSW/Qld games were a trial for test selection. Well the test is being played before these trials. Scrap the city/country games. Move SOO to end of season. this will not detract from the NRL. It will enhance it. No split rounds, no teams disadvantaged because of Origin with injuries or unavailability. I'd even go further. England v NZ for the weekend of the third SOO. For the first two weeks a round robin series for Tonga, Samoa and Fiji. This may be a way to help reinforce International rugby league. We keep getting told that the RLIF wants to consolidate international football and here is a way to do it. After all Tonga, Samoa and Fiji all do passably well in international rugby. Why not league?
TahDan
Roar Guru
That's a rather bleak outlook on the game Scot... The NRL is now worth over $200 million a season and has a new executive with serious business credentials. There's therefore no reason that in the future the competition can't emulate aspects of the NFL and start dictating its schedule to the broadcasters to at least some degree. It simply requires good management and a director with a pair of balls.
ScottWoodward.me
Roar Guru
Dan, The media control what happens and they will never give up Origin mid season. I am ok with that but not the other rep games.
TahDan
Roar Guru
I'd just like to add for anyone interested, that the gap between Australia and New Zealand is actually very similar to the one between Qld and NSW from a statistical standpoint. If we take the last 10 years - the period from 2004 to 2013 - the average scoreline in Origin is 23-20 to Queensland, while the average scoreline between the Kangaroos and Kiwis over the same period in tournament football is 22-18 to Australia. That's a 4 and 3 point difference in the gaps between the respective sides over a decade. Again, why is Origin so much more respected than test footy anymore? The stats just don't support it. I'd like to point out that I've not included the mid year tests in the stats here for two important reasons: the game goes to nothing and is therefore meaningless to the Kiwis, and they don't have access to all their players, as they often bolster their squad with high performing Super League players. Meanwhile, the Kangaroos are at full strength, and often use the game to push for Origin selection. So there's a complete mismatch in incentives and I don't think it reflects the distance between the two teams.
TahDan
Roar Guru
To be honest I don't see them as issues really... Those surgeries will still take place if they need to, and so it will just mean that fit players are selected. As for the Hangover stuff, that's why I reckon having a week in between is necessary. It'll give the guys a chance to blow off some steam, and then join the Kangaroos camp with a full week to get into gear. Heck, Qld players seem to recover well enough after Origin at the storm and other teams for them to have dominated for a while, so I don't see why it would damage the rep season.
seajay23
Guest
Tahdan, I see your point and in an ideal world it would be great but how would we get over those end-of-season issues I mentioned? The hangover stuff was meant in fun but it would be hard to maintain enthusiasm and I can see a lot of coaches making players unavailable for any post-season rep football. However, maybe it would be worth a try, it really is only a matter of coaches, players and management getting together and putting aside their own self-interest for the overall good of the game; how hard can that be!
TahDan
Roar Guru
Problem with a mid season rep tournament is that it just doesn't allow enough time and kills the flow of the NRL... The reason I'm for a progressive approach, is that it allows each competition to retain momentum and integrity, and provides a natural hierarchy for the year.
seajay23
Guest
Good proposals but I can see a problem with having SOO at the end of the season; players from teams that don't make the semis will have been out of action for over a month, players from grand final teams will still be hungover for a month afterwards and also this is the time when lots of players are having surgery for niggling injuries in preparation for the next season. I would prefer a mid-season representative period (with no premiership games for 3 or 4 weeks) concisting of SOO followed by a test match with either NZ or England. At the same time a tournament could be run with the 'second-tier' teams that have plenty of NRL players; I am thinking of FIji, PNG, Tonga, Samoa and maybe even an Indigenous team (or two; Murri versus Koori would be great fun) and maybe a Maori team with a final on the same weekend as the test. That way we would have plenty of 'product' for TV. But lots of good ideas have been mentioned in this discussion, there is no perfect answer, but what we have now is probably the worst option. Anything to get round of all those rounds with byes and no representative players available, it absolutely kills the season's momentum and the lousy crowds from mid-May to mid-July reflect this.
TahDan
Roar Guru
Ideally I'd like there to be a follow on without a break too, but I think both the players and the fans would revolt against it. People want there to be at least some time to lap up the glory of a Grand Final win, and the players need to as well. If you had them go straight into an international match, they'd be seriously underdone with players involved in the GF still getting their heads in order after a massive weekend.
TahDan
Roar Guru
This. I had sent this to a friend of mine, who said he wasn't too sure about the claims that International League was as competitive as Origin, but for the last decade at least, this has largely been a problem of ingrained bias against international league. Journalists and fans put the results of international and Origin matches into a pre-fabricated context that fits the existing attitudes to the respective tournaments. So the Kangaroos getting thumped 24-0 in a Tri Nations, or losing the RLWC on home turf means they're having an 'off-day', whilst a walk-over victory by Queensland in an Origin decider like 34-6 is framed as simply being a result that will make NSW hungrier in next year's series. I just don't get it, and I wonder how many more Qld victories and Kiwi victories necessary for the narrative to change.
Jack
Guest
To be honest, this proposal makes a lot of sense in my view. In the last 10 years Origin has been quite a bit more one-sided than International Rugby League, so why does this notion of Origin being the pinnacle of competitive representative football persist? TahDan is right, it's mostly down to a lack of emphasis and poor structuring that the international season fails to reach its full potential. This is partly a narrative issue. People see one big scoreline by the Kangaroos and claim International League isn't competitive, yet 8 straight victories by Qld in Origin is just good fodder for the rivalry. So the NRL needs to change the way it talks about international League and follow that up by treating it with more respect in the calendar.
turbodewd
Guest
I also cant believe the NRL is still in low def. Its embarassing. Every man and his dog has a 50" TV, and it looks ordinary.
Jack
Guest
They used to play this match on ANZAC day, but no one was interested and the RSL objected to calling it the "ANZAC Test", so it was shifted and renamed. The problem with it is that as a one-off mid season it just feels so meaningless. If it were competitive, things would be different, but thanks to the fact the Kiwis can't select a full strength side without players from the ESL, it's not.
Griffo
Guest
I think it's good to have the ANZAC Test at this time of year to remember that our two countries share this tradition but I think if rugby league is genuine about this then it should be played on ANZAC Day. Also I haven't heard a good explanation as to why this fixture disadvantages New Zealand more than Australia. On another note everybody knows that this rep weekend is a chance for the rep players to get a good hit out before State of Origin. New South Wales have the City v Country game and Queensland have the ANZAC Test.
Freddy from Bondi
Guest
I like it as well. The origin period absolutely decimates some teams (i.e. Melbourne) and really detracts from the fairness of the competition. Plus, the SoO should be a trial for the national team. I wish Rugby Legague would do best by the fans and not just be the play-thing of the broadcasters...even if this means taking less cash in the TV rights. * All matches should be live on either Fox Sports or Nine. Delayed telecasts full of ads in this day ad age are embarrassing! * All mathes should be in HD * Brisbane shouldnt get the advantage of Friday night games each week * All teams should get exposure on FTA TV * No games should be played concurrently... i.e. spread more games out over the weekend incl. saturday afternoon football. The AFL does this well (admittedly the different time zones help), but whenever you flick around the TV channels on a weekend, there always seems to be a live AFL game on somewhere. Give the game back to the fans and not alter the game to cater for wholly for Gyngall's ratings benefits!
Chris morrison
Guest
Love this idea. Slightly shorter season. No Rep footy at all during the season. A couple of small changes,I think the rep season should begin the weekend immediately following the GF no need for a 2 week break. Start the rep season with state of origin series on back to back weeks. Then immediately follow this up with your tri-nations and five nations model playing the 1st fixture of this on the last origin weekend. Unless of course it is a World Cup year in which obviously just the World Cup will be played. Meaning all footy would be complete by mid October. The off season then gives players a solid few months off playing. Before a nines tournament is played in mid Feb over 1 weekend. All stars game the following weekend. Season begins again in March.