Frank_Grimes
First Grade
- Messages
- 7,018
So, I presume that you are all for eligible non-Australians playing Origin and still representing countries other than Australia then?
Yep, "100%". I've said many times in fact.
So, I presume that you are all for eligible non-Australians playing Origin and still representing countries other than Australia then?
Prostitutes must be more expensive in NZ. Its serious money. As far as I understand it SOO money is 50k a game
Yep, "100%". I've said many times in fact.
Thanks.
I respect that, even though I don't want New Zealands playing Origin. To me, it's for Australians.
But at least you're consistent and reasonable in your view.
So let me get this straight - Kiwis here would have had no problem with Papalii representing NZ AFTER he's already represented QLD, but have massive problems with him switching to QLD after playing for the junior kiwis?
Right.
Its fine by me if Any aussie who plays for the warriors represents Auckland in an Auckland
V Wellington rep match and then goes off to play for Australia if they like. No dramas whatsoever
I've always held the view that the concept of State of Origin is about the QRL and the NSWRL. It matters not where the player was born, but what system put the time and money into making them the player they are today. It's that organisation's right to showcase what they helped create.
I can't really see them ever changing the eligibility rules however.
I suppose I could get in behind that. It would be better than having this argument every month or two.
Yep, but as I said, I just can't see it happening. For all the hype the ARLC has turned out to be much ado about nothing with the same dinosaurs and their archaic views being perpetuated. Change is clearly not on the agenda.
Oh sure you wanker..
2 wrongs = right ?
I don't think anyone believes that 2 wrongs equals a right, but papalli is not necessarily a wrong. The choice is his to make, he has links to both countries and has every right to choose Australia as he is also an Australian.
The majority of players with links to NZ and Australia choose NZ and they always will. Why do kiwis get so precious over these things? Will you be as upset when NZ pick Konrad Hurrell in the next few years? Or we're you upset when you picked other so called new zealanders despite dodgy links such as Webb, fien, Ben Roberts, frank Pritchard, fui fui, jake Webster, josh hoffman?
Hutch, I certainly dont blame the players in this, and that includes Webby and Fein.
He can't even remember living in NZ lol.
What if a player was born in Malta and moved to Australia when they were one and was entirely developed by NSWRL and an NRL club while having a connection to NSW. Should they be robbed of playing for the state they feel they belong to because of such ludicrous rules.
Here are the facts. Josh Papalii was entirely developed by QRL and the Raiders, Papalii represented Queensland at school boy level and uttered the quote about being entirely Queenslander. Then the hopeless wankers at New Zealand Rugby League who cannot produce a decent player themselves started putting the hooks in. Trying to pressure him based on his family connections with New Zealand. The right decision has been made. He is now going to play rep league with the people who developed him and who he actually remembers living in their country.
All the kiwi supporters in this thread are being precious. Why do they want someone playing for them who literally cannot remember living in their country ? That they haven't put a red cent into developing.
The NRL, ARL, QRL, NSWRL and any other league body are run by a bunch of c**k smoking amateurs. I will not waste another minute watching or discussing nor a dollar more supporting the 13 man game! Rugby Union is a far more professional outfit which I hope stamps out league and steals all of its talent as it approaches the next Olympic games just as those incestious canetoads and cockroaches did the Kiwis.