Ronaldo Mulitalo must have been the happiest man in world after Reece Walsh’s injury opened the door for him to make his Queensland debut in Origin 2.
However, in dramatic scenes, an article resurfaced the night before the match indicating the rising star had moved to Australia from New Zealand ten months after he turned 13, thereby making him ineligible to fulfil his dream.
Heartbreaking? Undoubtedly. The right decision? Unfortunately, yes.
You must reside in that particular state before your 13th birthday to pull on the jersey in State of Origin. As Mulitalo even confirmed himself in an appearance on the Bloke in a Bar podcast back in January, he’d narrowly missed the cut – even though he visited Australia prior to his 13th birthday for holidays.
The rules are clear: you must reside in that state. Simply going on a holiday and visiting the Great Barrier Reef doesn’t make you a Queenslander. I once visited the Eiffel Tower – should that enable me to play for France?
It’s a shame it came to this, as the main reason he left New Zealand in the first place was reportedly to play for the Broncos and Queensland, the teams he had supported from childhood. I agree to have his dream taken away from him just hours before the game began was totally wrong; however, for the sake of the integrity of the series, the correct decision was made.
The excuse Mulitalo played under-16s, 18s and even under-20s for Queensland doesn’t wash with me. the QRL should never have let it get so far in the first place without doing their due diligence on his eligibility, and it doesn’t allow to you break the rules again.
Ronaldo Mulitalo scores a try. (Photo by Ian Hitchcock/Getty Images)
The other major excuse – that other players, most notably James Tamou, moved to Australia after his 13th birthday – also falls flat. Yes, under current rules Tamou would never have been able to represent NSW, having been born in New Zealand. However, he had already made his representative debut before the new rules were enforced by the Australian Rugby League Commission in December 2012.
Even Mulitalo’s status as a bona fide Queenslander is blurry. Yes, after moving to Australia, he spent four years in the state – but he has now spent the same amount of time on the Cronulla Sharks’ list, a NSW-based club. Should a player who has spent majority of his life – the better part of 14 years in Mulitalo’s case – and has spent roughly the same amount of time in the sunshine state as he has in NSW, be eligible for Queensland? I don’t think so.
The eligibility rules are in place for a reason. Firstly, so Australian rugby doesn’t make a habit of permanently stealing elite talent from New Zealand or England: what if Sam Burgess had decided not to play for England and play for NSW instead? Where would the buck stop? And secondly, to prevent the states from luring players from elsewhere with the money and prestige State of Origin brings.
Unless you lived and grew up in NSW or Queensland, it’s hard to have the same amount of passion for the series, a major reason why Origin has been so successful for so long.
It was a brutal call, but the NRL was right in not permitting Mulitalo to play for Queensland on Sunday night. The poor bloke should never have had his emotions toyed with like that, or been forced to deal with the fallout from failings that were almost entirely not of his own doing. But in my opinion, the bigger shame is that an eligible Queensland player’s spot was taken for years while Mulitalo played in the junior representative teams.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
Roar Guru
"When do these players/men start taking responsibility for their own actions?" Well now, that is a novel approach Jeff! :stoked:
Rob
Guest
A very bias take on the situation. Okay the QRL needs to own the stuff up. If you bring the Tamou selection into the argument you have to see the precedent was set by NSW Tamou was picked for NZ World Cup team the year before he suddenly became a Blue. The NSW team set a precedent. Queensland were not happy about the Tamou selection so they decided to make a point and picked Te’o. What happened next is Queensland decided to approach Taumalolo and Kasaino and NSW suddenly didn’t like what was happening? When you set a precedent you have to accept the consequences. If you do your history with out bias you may find Qld have decided to do exactly what NSW have done in the past. They didn’t let Rodgers or Sterling play for Queensland so let the games begin. Nagas was exactly the reason Inglis became a Queenslander. There are a stack of overseas and players born in other states. If the rule changed Tamou should have never been named again but he was? Queensland name their team after NSW for a reason? Well that’s my bias Queensland opinion anyway.
AJ73
Roar Rookie
I understand your argument, however, if that is the case about not being born in Australia and arriving after the age of 13, then anyone who represents another country (regardless of the tier) should be barred from playing SOO as well. The tier argument is silly, you should only be allowed to represent one country. If you want to represent a second country, then there needs to be a qualification period say 2 years. Otherwise, it does make a mockery of the World Cup, that players who fail to be selected for Australia, NZ or even England can then represent another country. Maybe you can go "up", but then not back.
matth
Roar Guru
I think most agree that he shouldn’t have been selected. I also think most agree that the way he was excluded was very poor. This should have been dealt with well before he was ever selected. I’m starting to wonder whether the best and simplest way to deal with the eligibility issue is simply as soon as a player is signed by an NRL club they have to state which state they want to play for and then they are locked in from that point. Pretty much, do you want to be considered for QLD, NSW or a first tier international team (I.e. NZ or England). No confusion, no grey areas and it’s all on the player and who they feel they belong to.
Wascally Wabbit
Guest
The QRL officials should have sought clarification on Ronaldo's eligibility BEFORE announcing his selection
The Sports Lover
Roar Rookie
The real villains in this sad episode are the QRL officials who ignored the residency regulations.
Jeff Cook
Roar Rookie
When do these players/men start taking responsibility for their own actions ? On Mulitalo's last two contracts his answer to QLD eligibility question was YES . There was provision for not sure , and he went elsewhere knowing the rules of eligibility . With that. Yes , what about the other young men who have missed rep sides because of his action ? QRL have some answers to how this has gone on for all this time .
Michael_1984
Roar Rookie
Having some specific cut off age of residency is probably too arbitrary. I believe that anyone should be eligible to play for Queensland provided they meet the following two conditions: 1. Officially and publicly declare their rugby league allegiance to Queensland. 2. Provide sufficient grounds for them to be regarded as a Queenslander for State of Origin purposes. This may be being born in the state, their first football they ever formally played (e.g. not backyard football or casual football at lunch time on the school oval) being for a club in the state, first club that they played senior football for (which was what it used to be based on if my memory serves me correct) being a club in the state, being the first state that they have lived in Australia for any reasonable length of time. These are just a few examples - but really any reasonable grounds that they have for being classed as a Queenslander. To be fair, the last item I listed can be quite arbitrary (what exactly constitutes a reasonable length of time?) - and there could be other arbitrary possible grounds that could be given too - but I still think it is better than just picking an arbitrary cut off age that a person starts residing in a state without any reasonable discretion or flexibility. I do understand the case for fixed cut-off points, but I still think a more flexible and holistic approach is needed.
Bill
Guest
Not 100% sure, to the letter of the law sure, but looking to the future, not sure it’s the right call - let the kid play for QLD it’s a line ball decision makes no difference, or no more than half the others playing for Australia in other sports after “nationalizing”. I want a competitive series, it might be a 1-sided affair for the next 3-5 years at this rate, so yeah I agree it needs to have integrity too so I get the point you’re making, just saying don’t be so quick to shut this down. Bill