In the wake of his brilliant 2014, and starring performance in South Sydney’s grand final win, Luke Keary looks set to become the subject of an interstate tug of war for his services.
Last season the decision was made that Luke Keary was eligible only to play for the NSW State Of Origin side, despite his request to be made eligible for Queensland.
Keary, who was born in Ipswich, which is genuinely in Queensland despite jokes from south of the board, played his first junior game of footy in NSW, after moving to the blue state at 10 years of age.
The rules are ridiculously complicated. An image can be found on the NRL website, but to sum it up, a player is eligible for a state based on the below criteria:
Under the rules, Keary must represent NSW, having moved as mentioned when he was 10 years of age. He played the majority of his league in NSW. The majority of his schooling life was spent in NSW.
Is the fact he played most of his junior league in NSW enough to overturn the fact he was born and raised in Queensland?
As someone on social media mentioned earlier “this is State of Origin, not state of selection”. As per the rules Keary must either play for NSW or miss out on Origin selection.
The Player’s Association have come out and thrown their support behind the Rabbitohs youngster, saying they will fight for his right to represent Queensland.
As someone who was born and has lived in NSW my entire life, bar three months, I cannot begin to understand Keary’s thought process.
He was born in Queensland, spent the first 10 years of his life in the state, and has made it very clear he wants to represent the state of his birth.
This is obviously not a decision made to simply enhance his chances of playing rep footy next year. With Johnathan Thurston, Cooper Cronk, Daly Cherry-Evans and Ben Hunt ahead of him in the pecking order, it’s highly unlikely he will feature in the next few years.
If he were to accept his eligibility for NSW, he would be in the reckoning next season as NSW, despite victory, still do not look settled on their halves pairing at State level.
There are a few trains of thought on this issue:
The new rules were put in place to avoid another Greg Inglis situation. Inglis was born and played his first footy in NSW, but was able to represent Queensland on the basis he played his first under 18’s game there.
There have been multiple examples of players representing either state through loopholes, whether it be Tony Carroll and Adrian Lamb playing for Queensland, or James Tamou, or even the great Peter Stirling playing for NSW.
Under the current rules, which cover everyone across the game, Keary is eligible only for NSW and cannot play for Queensland. Rules are rules and if they were able to be bent, they’d be pointless.
Keary must represent NSW.
As someone who was born and raised in Queensland, is that really fair?
Randal Graves
Guest
Just to further clarify, Folau moved to Qld at age 14.
Weary Wanderer
Guest
IF a player is eligible under the criteria to play for both states he makes a choice when he plays in the NRL. IF Keary wanted to play for the Blues Queensland would not want him. WHY make it difficult SOO is about passion for the jumper, it is not Daniel about opportunity of playing SOO it is about wearing MAROON.
Kaks
Roar Guru
Nah. you guys can keep him.
fishes
Guest
Even under the old rules Keary is ONLY eligible for NSW. He should know this. Why open his big mouth? He just shot himself in the foot regarding his rep career. He probably won't even get selected at all now
Rugby League Development Fund
Roar Rookie
If you learn your footy in that state, you play for that state. Parents, grand parents don't and shouldn't matter. I'd really like to see similar rules for international players.
Jordan
Guest
Sort of agree, Should be where you are born, Where you played the majority of your football if the answer lies in both camps then the player should decide. Do you really want someone who feels they should be playing for NSW in the QLD camp? or vice versea ?
Tucker
Guest
Simple. If he's picked for NSW, he won't play. His heart is QLD & no eligibility rules designed by NSW power brokers can change that fact.. Although he could be a good inside man for the Maroons!
Squidward
Roar Rookie
What if there's world war 3 and there's no origin
Adam
Guest
So if the players should do it for free, the broadcaster, organising bodies etc also do it for free?
Dr Yes
Guest
The Inglis case is nothing like the Keary case. Under the newly agreed criteria, Inglis rates NSW:4 QLD:1. Even under the original criteria, he was unambigously NSW. Keary also rates NSW:4 QLD:1 (and under the old criteria, he's also NSW). Except in his case, he's been assigned to the correct state. The whole point about Inglis' case is that he covered up his NSW Hunter rep games and wrote on the form for state eligibility that his first senior game was in Qld.
Dr Yes
Guest
After a couple of decades of contentious cases, both state leagues, plus the national league put in alot of effort to get an agreed definition of 'Origin'. The agreed definition is clearly the best one that's existed, including 6 factors. They're not 'ridiculously complicated', they're very simple. They clearly weight which state players have spent their childhood and league development. They sensibly treat the problem case of being born in one state, spending a couple of months there, but actually living 97% of your life in the other state. Here's how Keary rates: - state of birth (or residence before 13 years of age): QLD - state where majority of games were played from from U/6 to U/18: NSW - state where majority of years where spent at school (K-12): NSW - state of first participation in a Junior Reps Comp: NSW - state of first participation in State reps: NSW (NSWCIS U/18) - state where father played SOO (if he did): N/A This has already been investigated and confirmed via NRL, with no suggestion of errors or anything to challenge. No offence intended, but this really is a non-issue. Keary is not a contentious case. If you don't like it, the only sensible thing is to complain to your own state organisation about their agreed definitions. Asking for exemption from the rules goes against the whole intent of 'Origin' and is a waste of time.
Lachlan
Guest
There is a simple solution; take the term 'State of Origin' seriously. You play for the state in which you were born. I understand that it would mean that players such as Peter Sterling would have played for Queensland despite moving to NSW as a youngster and others such as Tonie Carroll and James Tamou couldn't play at all. But it would be preferable to the farcical situation at present where fans have little faith in the integrity of the process. The other benefit is that international rugby league would rise in both standard and prominence. League has an advantage over AFL because of the (admittedly limited) international aspect of the game, but because Origin is the highest level of the code, Test matches are being devalued. Players want to test themselves in Origin and great Kiwis and Islanders are lost to the lands of their birth.
The Sock Gap
Guest
There is one forgotten thing in all this. When Keary was growing up, the rules were different. He returned to Qld at age 16, at a time when that would have ruled his eligibility as being a QUEENSLANDER. The NRL then retroactively changed his eligibility to being NSWelshman with all the rule changes. He was and should still be eligible to represent Qld.
Benedict Arnold
Guest
That's the humour of it mate, take away the money and suddenly they are no longer passionate or empowered enough to play it. Only the real origin hardcores would play. I reckon the cash plays more of a part in swaying players to origin than the concept of origin itself.
mushi
Guest
Why feel passionate about any community under that train of thought?
mushi
Guest
Why feel passionate about any community under that train of thought?
Luke M
Guest
I think its time for case by case decisions. Inglis should obviously be playing for NSW, and Keary for QLD. Any person with a brain can see this. It can't be that hard to rule on.
gaga
Guest
Joke. Most NRL players would not make themselves available at all if they didn't get paid.
Wascally Wabbit
Guest
Without Hayne ? What if the NFL trial doesn't go to plan, won't he be back at Parra/NSW next year ?
Squidward
Roar Rookie
NSW aren't out of the woods yet. Gonna be a brutal 2015 series and now without hayne