State of Origin is irrelevant

[Diesel]

Then it would become irrelevant

Poms and kiwis can have their own. They can work hard at making it work

Ha good call

 

[Springs]

With changes to eligibility rules from this year, how long before the SoO teams aren't the best 34 players on the field.

For arguments sake, SBW, Sam Burgess, Shaun Johnson and Kieren Foran would easily slot into the NSW stating line up.

With more NZers, P.I'ers and players from the UK, it's going to become more apparent that SoO will need to modify itself, especially if the international game becomes more competitive and payments are close to Origin payments. It wouldn't surprise me to see a Barbarians/Exiles style team enter the comp to make it a 3 way comp

State of Origin has never been the best 34 players in the world.
For this year from England you'd have Tomkins, Hall, Sinfield, Graham, Burgess, Watkins, Roby and Ellis at least. From New Zealand there's Nightingale, Perrett, Foran, Luke, Waerea-Hargreaves, Pritchard, Matulino, Marshall, Smith. All of these would be selected over players that play Origin. On form in previous years we have players like Blair, Manu, Moi Moi and Inu that would easily be better than players selected in Origin. Not to mention players like Tamou and Uate having been previously selected in other squads to go on and play Origin. If Origin is the best 34 players then why do we need players from other countries?

Look at the players in Origin that would never deserve to make an Aussie side. Dugan, Merritt, Maloney, Pearce, Reynolds, McQueen, Harrison, Te'o, Papalii, Scott, Buhrer, Creagh, Nielson, Soward, King, Young, Ennis, Lillyman. To say any of these players were top 34 in the world is laughable.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

Nightingale and Perrett :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

State of Origin has never been anywhere near "the best 34 players in the world".

The combined talents of the players in State of Origin currently is inferior to the combined talents of the players in an NZ v Australia test.

Not drawing any other conclusions from those points, just saying.

 

[Joker's Wild]

State of Origin has never been the best 34 players in the world.
For this year from England you'd have Tomkins, Hall, Sinfield, Graham, Burgess, Watkins, Roby and Ellis at least. From New Zealand there's Nightingale, Perrett, Foran, Luke, Waerea-Hargreaves, Pritchard, Matulino, Marshall, Smith. All of these would be selected over players that play Origin. On form in previous years we have players like Blair, Manu, Moi Moi and Inu that would easily be better than players selected in Origin. Not to mention players like Tamou and Uate having been previously selected in other squads to go on and play Origin. If Origin is the best 34 players then why do we need players from other countries?

Look at the players in Origin that would never deserve to make an Aussie side. Dugan, Merritt, Maloney, Pearce, Reynolds, McQueen, Harrison, Te'o, Papalii, Scott, Buhrer, Creagh, Nielson, Soward, King, Young, Ennis, Lillyman. To say any of these players were top 34 in the world is laughable.

Plenty of those fellas would walk into the Kiwis or English side though

Its not about "the 34 best players in the world" anyway, never has been. Im really not sure where or how that myth got started. Its about 2 states who have a fierce rivaly. Its not our fault that the same thing hasnt grown in the intl game.

lol@anyone who thinks SOO will be changed in any major way, ever

 

[taxidriver]

Plenty of those fellas would walk into the Kiwis or English side though

Its not about "the 34 best players in the world" anyway, never has been. Im really not sure where or how that myth got started. Its about 2 states who have a fierce rivaly. Its not our fault that the same thing hasnt grown in the intl game.

lol@anyone who thinks SOO will be changed in any major way, ever

that said, in my opinion the only position where the best player in world (in that position) isn't an Australian is backrow and I'd go with SBW

 

[betcats]

Haha you really don't know anything about Australians do you?

There isn't a Queenslander alive who would rather see NSW win over NZ. I couldn't care less if NZ or England beat us - it's good for the sport for you lot to be competitive - however I'll always care about beating NSW.

This pretty much.


The only test matches I have watched in recent times from start to finish are the ones we have lost. What im about to say will sound silly as AUS arent world champions, but international RL isnt competitive enough to really interest me.

And imo even if SOO was cancelled after this year and the NRL makes developing the international game its main focus in five, even ten years we still probably only have 3 teams that are a chance of winning the world cup.

RL just isnt a very good international sport. Look at all the money in the NFL, how does grid iron go internationally?? For a sport that is basically nonexistent internationally, American football has a massive profile worldwide, the superbowl is one of the biggest sporting events every year.

 

[betcats]

You can argue the the GF is the biggest event yearly for the NRL but the fact that SOO is 3 games over a 7 or 8 week period makes it the biggest event on the NRL calender imo, to call it irrelevant because it isnt 'international' is so stupid.

You will not see two Rugby league sides of that quality play with that intensity anywhere else in the world.

 

[Springs]

Plenty of those fellas would walk into the Kiwis or English side though

Its not about "the 34 best players in the world" anyway, never has been. Im really not sure where or how that myth got started. Its about 2 states who have a fierce rivaly. Its not our fault that the same thing hasnt grown in the intl game.

lol@anyone who thinks SOO will be changed in any major way, ever

I doubt it. Dugan, Papalii, Te'o maybe. The rest are average. England hopefully got over selecting players like that when Heighington played an awful 2011 Four Nations. With the forward packs England and New Zealand have none of those players would 'walk in'.

Nightingale and Perrett

You might be blind but NSW just played Nathan Merritt on the wing. Australia currently has Boyd and Morris as their wingers. Brett Morris has never performed in Origin. As a NSW fan I'd easily have Nightingale and Perrett over our current wingers. Much better players.

And imo even if SOO was cancelled after this year and the NRL makes developing the international game its main focus in five, even ten years we still probably only have 3 teams that are a chance of winning the world cup.

The NRL can't make PNG, France, Fiji etc produce better players. It will probably be a long time before anyone other than the big 3 nations will have a shot at winning a big comp but there's no point in saying league isn't competitive enough internationally so let's not support it.

You will not see two Rugby league sides of that quality play with that intensity anywhere else in the world.

Yes you will. The difference is in the crowd, the hype and the atmosphere.

 

[Thirty-Three]

But all this aside, the main problem with Origin is it dilutes and ruins the main Rugby League competition in the world for a period of 6 or so weeks. Tell me what other major sporting competition in the world has players not playing for their clubs to play for a state side? Dunno bout you guys but I would rather watch full strength NRL rounds instead of QLD beating NSW again and again and my club losing players to injury/3 matches a year. It makes zero sense and ruins the credibility of the NRL competition. Gifting teams wins etc

 

[betcats]

The NRL can't make PNG, France, Fiji etc produce better players. It will probably be a long time before anyone other than the big 3 nations will have a shot at winning a big comp but there's no point in saying league isn't competitive enough internationally so let's not support it. .

Im not saying that at all, I am just explaining why it isnt the pinnacle of RL and why SOO is far from irelavant.

[/QUOTE]
Yes you will. The difference is in the crowd, the hype and the atmosphere.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. Occasionaly maybe an AUS NZD game reaches origin intensity, occasionaly.

Not trying to sound arrogant but if Australia played with Origin intensity for every game we would loose very little games, even less then currently, and regurlarly rack up massive scores.

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

But all this aside, the main problem with Origin is it dilutes and ruins the main Rugby League competition in the world for a period of 6 or so weeks. Tell me what other major sporting competition in the world has players not playing for their clubs to play for a state side? Dunno bout you guys but I would rather watch full strength NRL rounds instead of QLD beating NSW again and again and my club losing players to injury/3 matches a year. It makes zero sense and ruins the credibility of the NRL competition. Gifting teams wins etc

Yeah, this is the point of this thread. I'd have exactly the same whinge about inernational footy, if it were to the detriment of the club competition.

 

[Joker's Wild]

But all this aside, the main problem with Origin is it dilutes and ruins the main Rugby League competition in the world for a period of 6 or so weeks. Tell me what other major sporting competition in the world has players not playing for their clubs to play for a state side? Dunno bout you guys but I would rather watch full strength NRL rounds instead of QLD beating NSW again and again and my club losing players to injury/3 matches a year. It makes zero sense and ruins the credibility of the NRL competition. Gifting teams wins etc

Kiwi or Pom?

You certainly are neither a NSWelshman or a Qlder

 

[Springs]

Im not saying that at all, I am just explaining why it isnt the pinnacle of RL and why SOO is far from irelavant.

Yes you will. The difference is in the crowd, the hype and the atmosphere.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. Occasionaly maybe an AUS NZD game reaches origin intensity, occasionaly.

Not trying to sound arrogant but if Australia played with Origin intensity for every game we would loose very little games, even less then currently, and regurlarly rack up massive scores.[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying you were saying that. I was just saying there was no point in saying that.

There has been quite a few Aus-NZ games that have been better than Origin matches the past few years. Games 1 and 2 this year were not very good. The Origin intensity you're talking about is not present in every Origin game. Games 1 and 2 in 2011, games 2 and 3 last year yes. Game 3 2010.

You sound very arrogant. You act as if Australia goes out there for a training session. Australia does not go out there and play less intense than they could. That's just stupid reasoning. When the Kiwis/English aren't up to it, they do rack up big scores. When they are up to it, they are very good games. The finals of the 06, 08 and '10 tournaments are as good as any Origin game. It's hard for any game to beat the last World Cup Final on drama and intensity.

 

[betcats]

Yes you will. The difference is in the crowd, the hype and the atmosphere.

I disagree. Occasionaly maybe an AUS NZD game reaches origin intensity, occasionaly.

Not trying to sound arrogant but if Australia played with Origin intensity for every game we would loose very little games, even less then currently, and regurlarly rack up massive scores.[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying you were saying that. I was just saying there was no point in saying that.

There has been quite a few Aus-NZ games that have been better than Origin matches the past few years. Games 1 and 2 this year were not very good. The Origin intensity you're talking about is not present in every Origin game. Games 1 and 2 in 2011, games 2 and 3 last year yes. Game 3 2010.

You sound very arrogant. You act as if Australia goes out there for a training session. Australia does not go out there and play less intense than they could. That's just stupid reasoning. When the Kiwis/English aren't up to it, they do rack up big scores. When they are up to it, they are very good games. The finals of the 06, 08 and '10 tournaments are as good as any Origin game. It's hard for any game to beat the last World Cup Final on drama and intensity.[/QUOTE]





Personally I cannot recall any international game of footy that matches origin for intensity and atmosphere.

When the kangaroos are concerned I probably am arrogant but thats because 7/10 times we play the Kiwis we could probably drop a gear and still win or go close...then occassionaly AUS play poor or NZD plays good and we get a competitive footy match.

Why is the international game so important???

Beyond 3 countries the standard is shit house and even from those 3 good teams there is one that has dominated the other 2 for a long time.

It doesnt raise as much revenue or get as much publicity as origin, the games are rarely better games of footy then origin, and the attendence and tv ratings cannot come close to origin.

Seriously having inernational competition is good for Rugby league but far from vital imo.

The NFL has still managed to conquer the US sports market without an international competition.

 

[betcats]

Im not against international footy, I just don't think it is as important people make out.

The states of NSW and QLD made rugby league into the game it is today.

 

[Thirty-Three]

Kiwi or Pom?

You certainly are neither a NSWelshman or a Qlder

lived in NSW for 25 years actually. So if you care more about the NRL/club than an origin competition that doesn't mean you're an NSWelsman? why can't Origin at the very least be on stand alone weekends so my club doesn't lose players? I don't understand how people accept a competition that is so heavily compromised by representative stuff. Doesn't happen in any other sports to my knowledge. it can be the difference between a team making the finals or not.

 

[Joker's Wild]

lived in NSW for 25 years actually. So if you care more about the NRL/club than an origin competition that doesn't mean you're an NSWelsman? why can't Origin at the very least be on stand alone weekends so my club doesn't lose players? I don't understand how people accept a competition that is so heavily compromised by representative stuff. Doesn't happen in any other sports to my knowledge. it can be the difference between a team making the finals or not.

Quite frankly, it doesnt in my opinion but each to their own

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

You might be blind but NSW just played Nathan Merritt on the wing. Australia currently has Boyd and Morris as their wingers. Brett Morris has never performed in Origin. As a NSW fan I'd easily have Nightingale and Perrett over our current wingers. Much better players.

You might be blind but Nathan Merritt was only selected due to injuries and suspension.

Sam Perrett :lol:

 

[Springs]

You might be blind but Nathan Merritt was only selected due to injuries and suspension.

Sam Perrett :lol:

Hmm yes, I'd wonder why a Roosters fan would hate a player that quit his club mid-season and went to the Bulldogs :sarcasm:

Personally I cannot recall any international game of footy that matches origin for intensity and atmosphere.

When the kangaroos are concerned I probably am arrogant but thats because 7/10 times we play the Kiwis we could probably drop a gear and still win or go close...then occassionaly AUS play poor or NZD plays good and we get a competitive footy match.

Why is the international game so important???

Beyond 3 countries the standard is shit house and even from those 3 good teams there is one that has dominated the other 2 for a long time.

It doesnt raise as much revenue or get as much publicity as origin, the games are rarely better games of footy then origin, and the attendence and tv ratings cannot come close to origin.

Seriously having inernational competition is good for Rugby league but far from vital imo.

The NFL has still managed to conquer the US sports market without an international competition

That's just your opinion. There have been plenty of tests that have been much better than many Origin games. If you want atmosphere look up the haka before the 08 world cup final.

The international game is important because rugby league exists outside of Australia. We are trying to make it a viable global sport. If you don't care about that then just go back to your cave.

Saying beyond 3 countries the standard is shit is like saying beyond 2 states the standard is shit. How exactly does having 2 competitive states make it better than 3 competitive countries? Your point about the Aussies being able to drop a gear is true in ANZAC tests, not tournaments. From 2005-12 the games in tournaments have been Aus 7, NZ 4 and 1 draw. Compared to QLD 16, NSW 8 in the same time period.

As for the NFL, once again, rugby league exists outside of Australia. We aren't just trying to dominate the Australian sports market.