What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

State Of Origin: Technically Obsolete?

steavis

Juniors
Messages
11
By STEVE MASCORD

THIRTY-Two years ago, State Of Origin was invented as a reaction against economic migration. Today, economic migration is getting even.

The debate over the weekend about who Sam Kasiano should play for and the confusion of Gold Coast’s South Australian product, Brenton Lawrence, over what it all means for him should prove to us all that as an invention, if not as a cashcow, Origin is now obsolete.

In the 1970s, more and more Queenslanders drifted south of the border to play rugby league because the teams there were backed by licensed clubs, in turn powered by something banned in Brisbane – poker machines.

These players moved for the same reason the families of James Tamou and Kasiano probably came to Australia: “a better life” or, more bluntly, cash.

As a result, games between state teams picked on residential grounds were a complete mismatch. They were reduced – by Sydney’s poker machines and more robust economy - to being played on a Tuesday night at Leichhardt Oval with squads assembling the day before.

Senator Ron McAuliffe and ARL patriarch Ken Arthurson coined Origin as an artificial construct against the natural forces at work in this migration. It was specifically aimed at making Queensland competitive by sending players back across the border a few times a year - and achieved its aim spectacularly.

Market forces, like rivers, may take decades or centuries to find their courses again but eventually the diversions - and the animals that build them – wither and die.

The first crack in the dam wall appeared with the emergence of the Brisbane Broncos. Players based in Queensland were representing NSW – something the forefathers of Origin could never have forecast.

Origin was not built for this. At the time of Origin’s – er – origins, Australian-based players rarely represented New Zealand. The Sorensen brothers, Dane and Kurt, were refused releases by Cronulla to play Tests around the same time.

Origin was not built for having a team in Melbourne that sent its NSW recruits to Queensland to play for feeder teams at exactly the age when their state of eligibility was in its infancy. In 1980, no one could imagine teenagers living in Melbourne and flying to Brisbane for a game of suburban football.

In 1980, the level of economic migration to Australia from the Pacific was not what it is today. Nothing like it.

My point is this: Origin has grown into so much of a financial monster that it is now doing the exact thing it was invented to prevent: picking players for a state who are not actually from there.

And it is doing so by using the exact same lure it was intended to nullify – cash.

While NZRL operations manager Tony Kemp rattled the sabre over Kasiano in today’s Sydney Morning Herald, Kiwis chief executive Jim Doyle was more circumspect on the ABC yesterday.

“New Zealand has been the recipient, from a positive perspective, much more so than Australia,” he said.

“We’ve got people like Josh Hoffman, Gerard Beale, Nathan Fien, Jason Nightingale, numerous others, whose history revolves around New Zealand but they weren’t born here.

“There’re a lot of kids over there who were born over here but whose parents left and took them with them when they were young.

“A lot them have grown up more as a New South Welshman or a Queenslander than they have as a Kiwi.

“There is, on the other side, some players who play for the Kiwis at the moment who were actually born in Australia but because of their parents, have grown up more as Kiwis and always wanted to play for the Kiwis.”

The other, less publicised, consequence of Origin’s scorched-earth policy is that it is not only eating up those who would have played for other territories in the past but it is already preventing other important areas for the sport from having any future.

Young Tonumaipea is likely to be the first Victorian-produced Melbourne Storm first grader. But he has already represented NSW at Under 20s level by virtue of the Storm fielding junior rep teams north of the Murray and is more or less committed to the Blues.

Lawrence, in Adelaide as part of a military family, technically a South Australian product and the scorer of an eye-catching Titans try yesterday, wants to play for Queensland. “I go for Queensland,” he said, by way of explanation.

“Because I was born in Mackay, I’ve always supported Queensland.

“I don’t know how it works. We joked about it the other day. With Origin coming up, the boys were talking about it. I was saying ‘I’m from South Australia. Where does that leave me?”

Many rugby league fans would like to think that in 50 or even 100 years, there would be state teams from Western Australia or Victoria full of pros. It seems a natural result of national expansion.

But by gobbling up talent from the rest of the country right now, NSW and Queensland are treading on those tiny chutes of development grass before they even emerge from the dirt.

So, if Origin was an old photocopier or clunky mobile phone, it would be in landfill by now. But it happens to be a very profitable anachronism.

If the reasons for its invention are gone, then so are the impediments to change.

Tonie Carroll, Craig Smith, Lote Tuqiri, Adrian Lam, Aquila Uate and Brad Thorn have put paid to the idea that players who represent other countries can’t play Origin. Sorry, they already have.

With another Queensland team likely to be admitted to the NRL soon, the original reasons for Origin’s birth will become even more remote, antiquated and lost in the mists.

It’s time to wipe the slate clean and configure Origin for a world in which, as Jim Doyle describes it, players loyalties are confused not just by their place of birth, domicile and football club but by how their parents raise them and and how they FEEL.

What’s that answer? That’s for the commission to decide. But for argument’s sake: what if we went the full circle and ended up back where we started – with residency as the prime selection criteria?

Pick a NSW team, including all nationalities, who live in NSW and a Queensland team the same way. OK, allow the Melbourne stars to stay in their current State colours (but allow the next generation to wear the Big V).

Got the teams written out? Pretty good game, eh?
 

Meth

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
35,457
It shouldn't necessarily matter where you were born (Nightingale, Pritchard, Mason etc). If you have a parent/s (not grandparent) that was born in the country you want to play for, I don't have any problem with that.

Tamou is a joke. Kasiano would be a joke. Fien is a joke. Webb is a joke. I don't see why its so hard to distinguish blokes who are selecting their national identity according to which offers them the more lucrative opportunity.
 

Snappy

Coach
Messages
11,844
It will never go back to residency.

They just need to tighten up the critera so there is no confusion at all. Players shouldnt have a choice, they should fit into what the critera dictates.
 

Meth

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
35,457
It will never go back to residency.

They just need to tighten up the critera so there is no confusion at all. Players shouldnt have a choice, they should fit into what the critera dictates.

This

Webb and Fien play for NZ, because they wouldnt make the Australian team.

Tamou and (hypothetically) Kasiano for $$

How about this- if your parents weren't born in Australia, and you weren't born in Australia, and you didn't gain Australian citizenship by the age of 13, you don't play for NSW, QLD or Australia. Simple.
 

Snappy

Coach
Messages
11,844
To elaborate on my earlier post as to why I think it cant/wont ever go back to Residency.

Origin now is what it is. A kids grows up in QLD and all he ever wants to do is play Origin for the Maroons. Coming through the ranks he isn’t the brightest star and gets overlooked by the Qld based NRL squads.

He then gets a lucky break and gets picked up by a Sydney club, and once he gets his chance on the big stage he shines so bright that he gets selected for State of Origin.

But under the new residency rule (hypothetical) he has to play for the Blues. That's blasphemy for a kids who grew up wanting to play for QLD. Going into the game he just can’t muster up the passion usually shown in Origin. The game has lost the spark it once had.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
I agree with Mascord on needing changes but I don't think residency alone cuts it at all levels.

I've posted it before but for the record, here's my suggestion -

Before being eligible for selection in any representative match, a player must be able to answer the following ten questions with relevant documentation -

Ten Eligibility Questions:

1. Note: any answer of the following 3 first question subsections can be substituted and used for the first question's answer
1a) In which region/state/country was the player born?
1b) In which country does the player currently hold citizenship?
1c) In which region/state/country does the player currently hold at least 10 years continuous residency?

2. In which country was the player's father born?

3. In which country was the player's mother born?

4. In which country (or countries) were at least two of the player's grandparents born?

5. In which region/state/country did the player live a major portion (at least 6 years) of their life prior to age 13?

6. In which region/state/country did the player live a major portion (at least 3 years) of their life after turning age 13 and until age 18?

7. In which region/state/country did the player first play a match for 16 year olds (or over) for a regional, state or nationally organised competition?

8. In which region/state/country did the player first play a representative match for Under 23s or below?

9. Does the player have at least one parent of Indigenous or Torres Strait Islander heritage?

10. Does the player have at least one parent of Melanesian, Polynesian or Micronesian heritage?

Four Categories of Representation:

Players can therefore be eligible for multiple categories (a player can qualify for all four if they meet the relevant criteria) -

Category A - (All Stars Heritage Teams)

To play for corresponding Indigenous All Stars or Islander All Stars team(s) the player must be able to answer the relevant corresponding question (Questions 9 or 10 or both) with yes.

Category B - (Regional Representative Teams)

To play for City vs Country, Auckland vs Rest of NZ, War of the Roses, Affiliated States Origin or State of Origin -

A player must be able to answer at least 3 out of the 5 related questions with the same answer (Birth or Residency, Childhood Years, Teenage Years, First Club Side, First Rep Side)

Category C - (Tri-Nations Teams)

To play for a Tri-Nations team (Australia, New Zealand or England) or the Exiles -

A player must be able to answer at least 4 out of the 8 related questions with the same answer (Birth or Citizenship or Residency, Father, Mother, 2 Grandparents, Childhood Years, Teenage Years, First Club Side, First Rep Side)

Category D - (Other International Teams)

To play for any other international teams (all other remaining nations) -

A player must be able to answer at least 3 out of 8 related questions with the same answer
(Birth or Citizenship or Residency, Father, Mother, 2 Grandparents, Childhood Years, Teenage Years, First Club Side, First Rep Side)

Restrictions on Representation:

Category A - (All Stars Heritage Teams)

Players eligible for Category A can play for any Category A team (e.g. they can play for both All Stars teams [on separate occasions] if eligible and wish to do so).

This category has no further restrictions that impact on the other categories (e.g. they can play for Indigenous All Stars and New Zealand if eligible for both under Category C rules etc).

Category B - (Regional Representative Teams)

Players eligible for any Category B teams can only play for the first team in which they are selected in any of the 5 competitions listed (e.g. they can only play for City OR Country, Auckland OR Rest of NZ, NSW OR QLD, NT OR WA OR SA OR VIC OR TAS) and cannot switch teams in those individual competitions after their first match in that competition.

If eligible, a player can play for multiple category B teams but in separate competitions (e.g. they can play for Country AND Auckland AND NSW AND SA if eligible under Category B rules etc).

Note: remember though that they need to be able to answer at least 3 out of the 5 questions with the same answer for each case so it is highly unlikely that any player would achieve such a feat.

Playing in a Category B teams has no further restrictions that impacts upon the other categories (e.g. they can play for NSW AND Fiji etc if eligible under the Category A, C &/or D rules)

Category C - (Tri-Nations Teams)

Players eligible for a Category C team can only play for the first Category C team in which they are selected and cannot switch teams amongst Category C after their first match (e.g. they can only play for Australia OR New Zealand OR England if eligible).

Category C imposes no restrictions on Category C players being eligible for Category A or B teams (e.g. they can play for Australia AND NSW AND Indigenous if eligible under Category A &/or B rules etc).

Category C players cannot play for a Category D team within 2 years of playing for a Category C team (e.g. they can play for Australia but must then wait at least 24 months before playing for USA etc).

Category D - (Other International Teams)

Players eligible for a Category D team can only play for the Category D team in which they are selected and cannot switch teams amongst Category D once they play their first match (e.g. they can only play for USA OR Norway etc).

Category D imposes no restrictions on Category D players being eligible for Category A or B teams (e.g. they can play for both USA AND Indigenous AND NSW if eligible etc).

Category D players cannot play for a Category C team within 2 years of playing for a category D team (e.g. they can play for USA but must then wait a least 24 months before playing for England etc).
 
Last edited:

RHCP

Bench
Messages
4,784
If you haven't spent the majority of your life in the state (within reason), you aren't eligible, unless your parents were born there.

Does it need to be any more complex than that?
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
If you haven't spent the majority of your life in the state (within reason), you aren't eligible, unless your parents were born there.

Does it need to be any more complex than that?

In my opinion - yes it does. It's not flexible enough - note that you say yourself "within reason".

Hypothetical scenario. Kid lives in NSW from birth to teens. Plays his senior level club game for QLD. Makes the Under 16 or 18s QLD state team.

Your scenario - he's automatically forced to play for New South Wales even though he may not have lived there for 5 or more years.

What I'm suggesting for Origin is 3 out of 5
- Birth or 10 year residency
- Childhood
- Teenage Years
- First 16 years side
- First Rep Side

My scenario
- Birth - NSW
- Childhood - NSW
- Teenage - Could qualify for either depending how long he lived there
- 16 years side - QLD
- First Rep Side - QLD

Under what I'm suggesting that sort of player would get a choice and rightly so.
 

Jason Maher

Immortal
Messages
35,981
I haven't lived in NSW for 13 years. Hypothetically, if I were anything more than the worst player to ever lace on a boot, I'd rather make myself a eunuch with a plastic spoon than represent my state of residency. Which is pretty much what Snappy was getting at.
 

Joker's Wild

Coach
Messages
17,894
I haven't lived in NSW for 13 years. Hypothetically, if I were anything more than the worst player to ever lace on a boot, I'd rather make myself a eunuch with a plastic spoon than represent my state of residency. Which is pretty much what Snappy was getting at.

Abso-f**king-lutely

Id be going along the lines of up until the age of 16 you need to have spent a minimum of 10 years living in either state to be eligible. This would rule out plenty of current players but I think it is the fairest and truest way
 

DC_fan

Coach
Messages
11,980
Its no longer about origin, probably hasnt been for sometime. State of Origin is dead.

Should now be called State of Anywhere.
 

MacDougall

First Grade
Messages
5,744
Being eligible for State of Origin shouldn't exclude you from representing your country of birth. It's possible to be a New Zealand born Queenslander (it's actually downright common) just like it's possible to be an England born New South Welshman and these players should be allowed to represent the state that they've spent a portion of their life in as well as the country in which their heritage lies. In the case of a hypothetical New Zealand born footballer that moved to Woodridge at the age of 14 and played junior footy there, nominating for Qld at the age of 23 (when he has spent a lot of his life in Qld) should be encouraged, not at the sacrifice of him representing a country that he would have more allegiance to than Australia.
 

I Bleed Maroon

Referee
Messages
26,057
Gotta love these media shills who want to get noticed quick by attacking what's popular. Parasites.

Don't fix what's not broken.
 

Tweed Titan

Bench
Messages
3,323
People that move interstate at age 13-15 and then pledge allegiance to where they moved are f*cking liars.

I think from about age 6 I knew I was a blue and nothing would ever change that.
 

MacDougall

First Grade
Messages
5,744
I think there are certain cases that are different to that. My Dad (the traitorous slime) was born in Sydney, raised in Sydney and has spent the past 30 years in Grafton but is and always has been a Queensland supporter.

Greg Inglis being a North Coast indigenous kid would have grown up a Maroons supporter I guarantee it. He wouldn't have wanted to play for NSW. It's trickier than everyone speaks of.
 

Tigger Madness

Juniors
Messages
866
Being eligible for State of Origin shouldn't exclude you from representing your country of birth. It's possible to be a New Zealand born Queenslander (it's actually downright common) just like it's possible to be an England born New South Welshman and these players should be allowed to represent the state that they've spent a portion of their life in as well as the country in which their heritage lies. In the case of a hypothetical New Zealand born footballer that moved to Woodridge at the age of 14 and played junior footy there, nominating for Qld at the age of 23 (when he has spent a lot of his life in Qld) should be encouraged, not at the sacrifice of him representing a country that he would have more allegiance to than Australia.

This is the only way forward imo
 

mberg

Juniors
Messages
61
It will never go back to residency.

They just need to tighten up the critera so there is no confusion at all. Players shouldnt have a choice, they should fit into what the critera dictates.
if this was the case then greg inglis would not be playing for queensland
 

mberg

Juniors
Messages
61
People that move interstate at age 13-15 and then pledge allegiance to where they moved are f*cking liars.

I think from about age 6 I knew I was a blue and nothing would ever change that.
my family moved from N.S.W. to queensland when i was 5 now after 47 years its GO THE BLUES,its state of origin.
 
Top