Gorden Tallis is so right

[Mr Fourex]

I can't believe you're worried about NZ & GB players benefiting from the better systems that are in place in Australia. I hate to break it to you but they already get that from playing in the NRL... you'd have to ban from that too and that would be another mistake.

That's the point. We are already doing our bit to help international RL. We have even let a New Zealand side play in our "National" competition. Doing so has improved NZ's performances on the world stage ten fold.....

Hell, if it helps out GB....I'd allow a GB side to play in the NRL. Obviously travelling might be an issue.

I'm tired of the implication that Australia has to do more for the international game when it's clear that we are already doing more than anybody else

Some thoughts on international eligibility -

http://www.theroar.com.au/2013/04/20/my-letter-to-the-nrl-ceo-part-6-rep-eligibility/

? In which country was the player born? ? two points
? In which country has the player held citizenship for at least the past two years? ? two points
? In which country or countries has the player held at least seven years continuous residency? ? two points
? In which country was the player?s father born? ? two points
? In which country was the player?s mother born? ? two points
? In which country was the player?s paternal grandfather born? ? one point
? In which country was the player?s paternal grandmother born? ? one point
? In which country was the player?s maternal grandfather born? ? one point
? In which country was the player?s maternal grandmother born? ? one point

IMO...there's not enough mention here about the country the player was born AND raised in (in this case Australia)

How 'bout Australia's education system? All the benifits he received from the Australian tax payers dollar .....the benefits he received from our standard of living. The benefits he received from being raised in Australia ....benifits he may not have been so fortunate to receive in his parents or grand parents country

How 'bout he says thanks to the country that placed him in the enviable position of being able to make a shit load of cash by playing a sport he loves to play....

If he was born and raised here, then he's Australian first.....and whatever else 2nd.

 

[docbrown]

I'm tired of the implication that Australia has to do more for the international game when it's clear that we are already doing more than anybody else

We do have to do more because we have the money and resources to do so.

If Fiji/Samoa/Tonga/PNG, hell even New Zealand, had our kind of set up then it would be a different issue but they don't!

We already know what keeping the status quo has gotten us. It's time for the NRL to take its blinkers off and realise that a small investment and change today will pay off larger dividends tomorrow.

IMO...there's not enough mention here about the country the player was born AND raised in (in this case Australia)

Again you're looking at the issue in black and white terms. It's not that simple, not everybody was born and raised in Australia. Some people were born elsewhere and moved here and might've spent the entire life here. Others might have been born here and moved and spent their entire life elsewhere. Some people might be in an Australian family living overseas because of parent's work commitments. Other might be foreigners living in Australia for an extended period because of the same.

 

[docbrown]

why should we?

Because we want to improve the international game which has been held back because the NRL has failed to realise that a stronger international game is better for the sport all round.

You don't see the AFL or Soccer or Rugby Union in Australia going 'hey, screw letting foreigners leach off our training systems'...

 

[Tone83]

Mr xxxx
Don't you see that origin is about celebrating systems and coaching and etc etc and the international game is about nationality. So come origin time you can proudly watch on as a bunch of kiwi and tongan and fijian lads display(with aussies too) how great qld is at developing young talent, then come international games you can proudly watch on aussies display how good australia is at growing talent. Made all the more sweet because there's no question mark on anyones head, and they're beating legit origin stars from other countries, origin stars everyone knows australia developed anyway thank to their presence in origin. Whats not to like?

 

[Joker's Wild]

and you don't ??

So playing amongst the best of the best ......within the confines of representative coaches...managers....management systems (all of which at least in part carry on through to the National side) Being in camp with Ex- super stars of the game ......current super stars of the game.....etc etc etc

....none of this is going to help with a young players development in your opinion ??

Now look who's being ridiculous.......!!!

Why do you think both states have emerging origin squads ??? Yes, that's right, to help develop young potential talent

..young potential talent that then goes and play for New Zealand or GB ??

F*ck that !!

If a player chooses alliance with these countries let those countries come up with the elite talent squads and camps to help them develop.....why should we?

Mate, I dont think it will make all that much difference to be truthful. They are already playing in the most professional RL comp in the world, with and against those same "super stars of the game". So while they might get a little more out of playing SOO, there are hardly going to be enough of them to harm Australian RL at all. In fact, adding players like Marshall and SBW (not that they would be available under the current rules) will likely benefit the young Australian players coming through in the same systems.

I think you are being a little precious about the whole thing really. The NRL benefits hugely by bringing these young foreigners into the comp too. A lot of those guys are hugely marketable and the NRL would be far weaker if it was just an "Australian only" competition.

 

[Mr Fourex]

Mate, I dont think it will make all that much difference to be truthful.

You're being a little disingenuous here JW. What was the point of some of those fringe players playing City V Country on the week end if it wasn't about developing potential rep players.....?

I think you are being a little precious about the whole thing really. The NRL benefits hugely by bringing these young foreigners into the comp too. A lot of those guys are hugely marketable and the NRL would be far weaker if it was just an "Australian only" competition.

But we're not talking about the NRL......it's SOO and National allegiance we're talking about.

As I said earlier, I'm all for a GB side entering the NRL if it helps train pommy players up to an Australian standard and makes the international game stronger. Even Tongan/Fiji/Samoan....PNG etc etc entering the NRL, I have no issue with.

 

[Mr Fourex]

Mr xxxx
Don't you see that origin is about celebrating systems and coaching and etc etc and the international game is about nationality. So come origin time you can proudly watch on as a bunch of kiwi and tongan and fijian lads display(with aussies too) how great qld is at developing young talent, then come international games you can proudly watch on aussies display how good australia is at growing talent. Made all the more sweet because there's no question mark on anyones head, and they're beating legit origin stars from other countries, origin stars everyone knows australia developed anyway thank to their presence in origin. Whats not to like?

Only the fact that Australian aligned players won't be able to get a run in SOO because the teams may be filled (yes, worst case scenario...filled) with players who are aligned with other countries.

When the Australian team is picked......we'll have to look at fringe rep players who have none to little rep experience.

Sure it's nice to help other countries ....but why do we have to hurt ourselves in the process?

 

[ozenzud]

This whole debate about origin eligbility is a crock.

Inglis is about as much a queenslander as I am. At least I've been there on holiday. Matt Rogers, never worked out how he qualified.

But what does it matter anyway? Why do Queenslanders get so worked up about and patriotic about a provincial border? Mind you, everyone north of that border is a redneck I suppose. Why I didn't move there. Couldn't ever have a serious conversation with anyone....ever.

I can understand the provincial issues with Victorians. They are wierd. How you get sit through a full game of that sport and be entertained is beyond me. Mind you, in cricket season they'd be OK. At least you can have a conversation then.

Overall, origin just seems dead set stupid when you don't live in Oz.

As far as saying RL should be an Aussie sport and an Aussie sport only, should go live in the USA. Because that is how the Seppos think and there is 300 million of them and only 20 odd million in Oz. Bit of a difference in sustaining a one country sport.........AFL for you anyone?

 

[Joker's Wild]

This whole debate about origin eligbility is a crock.

Inglis is about as much a queenslander as I am. At least I've been there on holiday. Matt Rogers, never worked out how he qualified.

But what does it matter anyway? Why do Queenslanders get so worked up about and patriotic about a provincial border? Mind you, everyone north of that border is a redneck I suppose. Why I didn't move there. Couldn't ever have a serious conversation with anyone....ever.

I can understand the provincial issues with Victorians. They are wierd. How you get sit through a full game of that sport and be entertained is beyond me. Mind you, in cricket season they'd be OK. At least you can have a conversation then.

Overall, origin just seems dead set stupid when you don't live in Oz.

As far as saying RL should be an Aussie sport and an Aussie sport only, should go live in the USA. Because that is how the Seppos think and there is 300 million of them and only 20 odd million in Oz. Bit of a difference in sustaining a one country sport.........AFL for you anyone?

We are arguing about plenty of topics in here mate, but I can assure you that this is not one of them. Where did you come up with this particular doozy?

 

[Joker's Wild]

You're being a little disingenuous here JW. What was the point of some of those fringe players playing City V Country on the week end if it wasn't about developing potential rep players.....?

Well for starters they need to fill the teams in a fixture that has become more than a little outdated. Ive never buyed into the whole "this gives some young blokes a taste of a rep camp" etc as the CvC games have been largely meaningless to the clubs and players for a long time now. The game is there for the CRL and the bush fans

But we're not talking about the NRL......it's SOO and National allegiance we're talking about.

As I said earlier, I'm all for a GB side entering the NRL if it helps train pommy players up to an Australian standard and makes the international game stronger. Even Tongan/Fiji/Samoan....PNG etc etc entering the NRL, I have no issue with.

Like it or not, SOO has become a huge part of the NRL and impacts on it to a large degree. Im not suggesting opening it up to every player of the game, not at all. I think we need to relax the outdated concept of linking the SOO and Int'l eligibility though, to allow for better top line representation amongst the developing RL world. If players are passionate about Australia they will make themselves eligible, the rest (who will be a small number lets be realistic here) will play for heritage. Take the $$$ out of the decision

 

[Knownothing]

This whole debate about origin eligbility is a crock.

Inglis is about as much a queenslander as I am. At least I've been there on holiday. Matt Rogers, never worked out how he qualified.

Mat Rogers attended The Southport School, that's not a bad start.

 

[parraparraparra]

rogers was a get square for rogers

 

[Tone83]

Only the fact that Australian aligned players won't be able to get a run in SOO because the teams may be filled (yes, worst case scenario...filled) with players who are aligned with other countries.

When the Australian team is picked......we'll have to look at fringe rep players who have none to little rep experience.

Sure it's nice to help other countries ....but why do we have to hurt ourselves in the process?

I think oz would always have the most origin stars on its roster, but if it didn't then tough shit for us frankly, it would just mean we're not the best and if we aren't the best then we shouldn't win. You really want to handicap and hold down the sport just so we keep winning? You should want to even the playing field so our wins mean more.

You don't see your attitude in american basketball and they seem to be doing ok. They develop players from all over the world into great players/all stars and then when the international games roll around they let their stars represent their home countries and that becomes the whole draw of the international game- this country has these 3 nba stars and that country has these 4 nba stars and whats gonna happen when they clash here, then ofcourse the usa team is loaded and dominates but its made a lot funner by having lots of nations with their share of star players from the highest level of competition.

The world of rugby league could work the same way, only difference is the highest level of competition we have is essentially our mid-season all star series. But thats ok, its a great product we're lucky to have and we should use it's strength as a tool to strengthen the international game and international interest.

Another thing is that origin will grow in popularity too with kiwis, fijians and etc tuning in to cheer on their national teams heroes.

 

[Mr Fourex]

I think oz would always have the most origin stars on its roster, but if it didn't then tough shit for us frankly, it would just mean we're not the best and if we aren't the best then we shouldn't win. You really want to handicap and hold down the sport just so we keep winning? You should want to even the playing field so our wins mean more.

Australian victories always mean plenty to me just the way they are.......

You don't see your attitude in american basketball and they seem to be doing ok. They develop players from all over the world into great players/all stars and then when the international games roll around they let their stars represent their home countries and that becomes the whole draw of the international game-

Again.......we/Australia are already doing the same thing. The NRL is supporting plenty of players from other nations. Just like your example of the NBA....

 

[ozenzud]

Mat Rogers attended The Southport School, that's not a bad start.

Didn't he play union then?

 

[deluded pom?]

I think oz would always have the most origin stars on its roster, but if it didn't then tough shit for us frankly, it would just mean we're not the best and if we aren't the best then we shouldn't win. You really want to handicap and hold down the sport just so we keep winning? You should want to even the playing field so our wins mean more.

Great attitude Tone.

 

[RedVee]

What I object to is those who think they should decide that player x should play for a heritage country because of some preconceived notion they ascribe to the way player x looks or because of his surname. Beef no 1.

A lot of these players are Australian and have the right to attempt to play for Australia and in the Australian minor rep games if they want. They may also qualify to play for a heritage nation and they have the right to choose to play for that nation.

IMO they have the right to choose between the options, but that is different to choosing both (all) of the options. Beef no 2.

 

[hutch]

What I object to is those who think they should decide that player x should play for a heritage country because of some preconceived notion they ascribe to the way player x looks or because of his surname. Beef no 1.

A lot of these players are Australian and have the right to attempt to play for Australia and in the Australian minor rep games if they want. They may also qualify to play for a heritage nation and they have the right to choose to play for that nation.

IMO they have the right to choose between the options, but that is different to choosing both (all) of the options. Beef no 2.

Spot on!

 

[deal.with.it]

Agreed.

 

[juro]

As far as I'm concerned, any player who makes it to the NRL (or Super League or any other professional rugby league competition which may happen to come along in the future), they must complete a representative football form, stating which international teams they could possibly qualify for (based on the various criteria - residence, citizenship, grand parents, etc). They should also confirm whether they qualify for any other rep teams (NSW, QLD, etc).

At this point, if they have some claim to representing multiple teams, they nominate their preferred team. This nomination could be updated at any time throughout the player's career. The catch is that the player would need to sit out of rep football for a period of time (say, 3 years) before they could represent their new chosen team.

If a player is eligible for say NSW in SoO, and either Australia or Tonga at the international level, choosing to play for Tonga should not stop him being able to play for NSW. Playing for NSW should not stop him playing for Tonga.