Origin destined for weekends
By Craig Bellamy | June 05, 2008 12:00am
FOR all the excitement, all the build-up and hoop-la, there are problems with State of Origin as it stands at the moment.
Now, before I get accused of jumping on a bandwagon, let me state that I have always been a supporter of Origin clashes being played on stand-alone weekends. I said as much during the last camp. And I'm saying it here again.
I don't profess to having all the answers - I can only offer my thoughts and opinions. But, in the wake of the NRL announcing it would hold a conference to discuss the key issues, there are some points I would like raised.
Playing Origins on stand-alone weekends, like the NRL did in 2001 (and from the outside looking in it appeared to be a remarkable success), is the major one of those.
Why?
In my mind there are three glaringly obvious reasons.
1. The welfare of our leading players; 2. Clubs are unfairly penalised - on two fronts; 3. Fans miss out on seeing the clubs at full-strength.
I am aware of the arguments against moving Origin but none of them inspire me into wanting to keep the status quo. Critics of change will debate that - and this is just one of their arguments, by scheduling Origin games on stand-alone weekends, with club fixtures suspended, it will lengthen our season.
True. It will lengthen the number of weeks the competition is played over. But will it increase the number of games we are playing? No.
Will it decrease the workload placed on our marquee players during this taxing time? Yes.
REASON NO.1: Player welfare
Danny Buderus and Craig Fitzgibbon, two of the New South Wales players in camp with me this week, are obvious examples. For four or five years in a row, Danny and Craig played every club game, every Origin, while backing-up after the interstate matches, before finals and international series. By the end of it they were spent. Craig had lost his legs while Danny was battling persistent injury. It's no coincidence then that, with Craig missing Origin over the past few seasons, and Danny not playing for his country, both have got their grunt back. It's a huge ask playing Origin mid-week then backing up for your club. If we want to take the stress - both mental and physical - off our leading players then we have to change. Add a week at the start and end of the season but cut out that mid-year battle-load. That's the crux of the issue. The intensity of the workload on our leading players is far too great. If it stays the same it will shorten careers, or force more, of the calibre of a Michael Crocker, to go overseas - no question.
REASON NO.2: Penalising clubs
This is a double whammy.
Some teams - and, yes, the Melbourne Storm is one of these, are hugely disadvantaged. We have nine players involved in Origin and the likelihood is that all of them will miss three club games. Add injuries to that and it is a huge hurdle to overcome. The second hit clubs take relates to the salary cap. Let's use our captain at Melbourne, Cameron Smith, as an example. Say, and these are all hypothetical figures, Cameron earns $240,000 for a season. Over 24 games that is $10,000 a game excluding any bonuses that may be paid. Now if Cameron, who is a permanent fixture for Queensland, misses three games during the Origin period, then that is $30,000 the Storm is being short-changed. On top of that we may have to rest him later in the year because of the Origin demands on his body. Add the extra match payments and bonuses you may have to pay to players who replace him at club level and, potentially, it could cost you one or two quality first grade players. Yes, there are some salary cap exemptions, but it is all too grey for my liking. Clubs at the moment don't whinge about it. But it is something the NRL has to look at.
REASON NO.3: The fans
I'm speaking on their behalf, and I hope they don't mind, but I'm pretty sure fans pay their money to see their teams field their best possible line-ups. It's not happening at the moment.
