As we celebrate 100 State of Origin matches, we’ve enjoyed reliving those classic moments between Queensland and New South Wales. Yet the Origin contest must continue to evolve as a format or risk becoming redundant in today’s sporting landscape.
In a climate where sports and competitions are evolving to meet the changing needs of viewers, Origin is a rare beast that has largely stuck to its format and concept.
Origin invokes a brand of the toughest, most fiercely contested prize in rugby league.
But does Origin risk becoming a record that plays the same song every year, particularly if Queensland keeps winning and nothing changes?
A much more interesting question: will the next 100 matches just feature these two teams?
Test rugby league administrators have rightfully realised the need to adopt new competitions and events – World Cups, Tri-Nations, Four Nations, European and Pacific championships – to keep relevancy.
This allows the product of Test football to remain fresh, dynamic and interesting to fans across the ever-expanding landscape of world rugby league.
Take this approach and apply it to Origin.
The original concept of the State of Origin series was to function as a trial for the Australian team who would tour at the end of the club season. Queensland and New South Wales were the two major associations, so it made sense they were the two teams.
Yet Victoria and Western Australia’s participant numbers are on the rise. In fact, Victorian rugby league has experienced remarkable growth in recent years, particularly in school-based numbers – over 33,000 in 2008. The numbers in senior football has more than double in recent years also, according to the Victorian rugby league.
At NRL level, Mahe Fonua, Drury Low and Young Tonumaipea are all products of the Victorian development system. In another 40 years, surely the number of NRL players from different states will grow even more. What if another Darren Lockyer or Brad Fittler comes along from Perth or Adelaide?
Origin will lose its meaning. Perhaps with the selection of players like Tonie Carroll, Karmichael Hunt and more recently James Tamou and Ben Te’o, it has for some.
If the Australian rugby league wants to expand the concept of ‘state of origin’, they need to recognise that times are changing and not every player will be born – or play junior football – in either Queensland or New South Wales.
Yet State of Origin is a seemingly stubborn product. The most radical ideas throughout its history included playing matches in rugby league-starved Melbourne in the early 1990s. Maybe staging the contest outside of Australia for neutral matches could be as far as the administrators go.
Judging by crowd numbers and excellent TV viewership, Origin is arguably at its peak in terms of a product.
Whether it can sustain this popularity and meaning for sports fans and players in the next 40 years must be something to consider for Australian rugby league administrators.
MM
Guest
In the context of a National Rugby League competition, State of Origin is a dated concept. Why was it born? Queensland developed players playing in the wage lucratuve NSWRL and then playing for NSW against QRL. With a nationalised wage system for rugby league players, State of Origin continues, but its rationale for its development no longer exists. Let's assess Origin for what it really provides - marketing. It is a pure (the purest?) form of rugby league and shows how great the game can be played. How? It removes the constraint of the salary cap. If we accept it is a fantastic peice of marketing, why do we need three games? Why not just the one match and the NRL becomes a much better competition.
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
Thanks for your thoughts Craig!
Craig
Guest
Funny isn't it that the S.O.O concept in the VFL / AFL has almost died (I say almost because a new CEO would surely consider re-booting it when majority of players want to play it and fans would go see it) for essentially the same issue but reversed! There are too many states involved in regular competition to 'justify' a state carnival. When they started messing with Allies, All-Stars and composite NSW/ACT teams (mainly Wagga district born players) to play 'The Big V' and 'Croweaters' and to a lesser extent the 'Sandgropers' then the concept was lost a little. With a state of the art stadium now in Adel and easier fan access than West Lakes, and the soon to be built Burswood Stadium, now would be a good time to explore it again. For the Rugby League version, I could only see this working if it was a triangular series against a NZ origin team but tests already largely cover that market, so it would be in the selling. For now, it works as it does, even if lopsided in recent times.
Christian D'Aloia
Roar Guru
It's true that very few people who play in the U20s Origin game will play real Origin. Look at the NSW and QLD U17s sides from 2005 and see how many of them went on to play Origin, or even first grade. Of course, there is a difference between U20s and U17s. http://www.smh.com.au/news/League/Rugby-league-teams--round-15/2005/06/14/1118645802803.html
Jackson Henry
Guest
Aaron Whitchurch, born in Fremantle, plays for Brisbane?
Johnno
Guest
Frank Pritchard would as would JWH, and Manu Vatuvei. RTS would too. Kasiano too. Sam Moa is awsome player. Jeremy Smith in his prime would of played plenty of SOO, as would Issac Luke, all step up too SOO.
Mango Jack
Guest
I think the 2 are mutually exclusive, Andrew. What makes origin special is the simplicity of 2 rivals going at it 3 times a year. I believe if you introduce other states it will kill it.
Mango Jack
Guest
They'll set ticket prices at whatever they think the market will pay. The Rolling Stones were able to sell out concerts at ridiculous prices in minutes because of the huge demand. Shame, but that's the market for you.
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
Interesting point MC - you will still see it sold out though... does that mean that organisers can still charge huge amounts? Maybe first the first time in a long time, some empty seats?
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
For ever and ever Will? Not a slight chance to include another emerging state?
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
Thanks for your insightful thoughts as always, Johnno. Globalisation certainly plays havoc with the notion of "origin", regardless of code or competition as you say!
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
Interested point Jo about u20's... to me it smacks of trying to capitalise on the brand of Origin, rather than really mean anything as a spectacle.
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
Thanks for your thoughts Mango Jack - I wasn't so much as trying to change it, but don't you think it is too "inward thinking" to really believe that the other states might be in a position in another 300 games to launch a serious bid for a team....not so much about popularity, but rather the growing of the concept of "State of Origin".
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
If they keep winning they will get first dibs!
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
Gareth Widdop was brought through the Victorian system too when he arrived from the UK.
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
Hi Epiquin - the point of the article is to encourage some "out of the box" thinking now that we have reached 100 matches of SOO......it might take another 200 games before the likes of VIC, WA or SA can put enough numbers into a team.. but it could be a reality.
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
"It was pitched that way to the boys in blue but for Qld it has never been about a kangaroo jeresey" Tell that to Darren Lockyer, Mal Meninga, Billy Slater, Cameron Smith, Johnathan Thurston... that would surely disagree.
Jackson Henry
Guest
Left field question - isn't there a bloke Whitchurch who was the first Sandgroper-born player to play in the NRL? If this is true - any relation?
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
Thanks Ben - yes exactly, some great points there.
Andrew Marmont
Roar Guru
That's right Kunming, I was attempting to throw some ideas out there in terms of the future of State of Origin... instead of being a selection for Australia, it has arguably become a spectacle in itself (not a bad thing, but surely morphed from what the concept originally was)