What Australia needs to do for the World game

[typicalfan]

Hutch I didnt get your intentions about a club sponsored move. No worries.

You can say that about Farrah he is Australian, yeah but he is Lebanese as well, and his first rep footy was for Lebanon, therefore in International RL terms he is Lebanese. No point arguing about that.

I hate the current rules and switching about, as well as the bias for Australia & NZ (ie the rule that you can nominate to be an Aussie player, but in the meantime can play for a 2nd nation while you wait for the Kangaroo call up!!!).

Once a player has nominated for a country, they should stick with that country. Australia should help this by saying once you have played for another country you cannot play for Australia BUT you are still eligible for Origin, if you are an Aussie citizen too. (The origin is a big money earner & prestige game for Oz players. Using it as a weapon in International selection is blatantly unfair to the players)

Make young players think about who they are playing for and why. This is quite idealistic and will only work if international football is run well with good comps, as otherwise what player will nominate for a smaller nation if they never get any good games!

you really dont get it. Robbie Farah only represented Lebanon because it wasnt going to harm his chances of one day playing for Australia, if it had, he would never have done it.

And playing for Queensland makes you a queenslander..ie Australian... not hard

 

[typicalfan]

Then I hope he's given up his Fijian citizenship??? Oh but I bet he hasn't for 'convenient' purposes! Makes the game a layghing stock!

RU is running around with so many ex pat NZ and Aussies its no different. the fact you consider a guy born in fiji but brought up as an Australia ineligable for Australia could be considered even a little like discrimination

 

[roopy]

<H2 id=story>Kangaroos can cash in on victory

November 19, 2008 AUSTRALIA players will get $30,000 each if they win the World Cup - equating to three times the bounty for a premiership victory and $5000 a minute for injured Terry Campese.
The biggest bounty ever offered to an Australian team at club or rep level means men like Kurt Gidley, who was injured in the first game, and Terry Campese, who lasted only six minutes before suffering an eye injury, will get the same pay packet as those who have taken part in every match.
The figure is almost twice what was anticipated before the tournament

</H2>http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,24672216-5016947,00.html

That's what it's about from the players and NRL club's point of view.

This is money keeping our elite players from switching codes, and if the bucks weren't there, they wouldn't give a sh*t about the international game.

 

[VonVolks]

Roopy has it right, and typical fan cant see the woods for the trees.

Money motivates players (as well as national pride) as its their JOB to play RL.
Hence players in Australia want to play SOO for their careers sake & prestige.

The Farah case... if Robbie had wanted to play for Australia AND THOUGHT HE COULD ONE DAY..then he could give up international footy until that call up.

If he thought when he was young "I will play for Lebanon,as I probably wont make Kangaroos" he could commit to Lebanon, but still play State of Origin.

That's how I think it should work.

In theory, its even better for Robbie, as he could play for Lebanon under current rules while staying eligible for Australia as his nominated choice, and also play SOO. However it worked out that while he was free to play for Lebanon when young and "under the radar" as soon as he showed his talent, he was not allowed to play for Lebanon via the threat of ineligibility for SOO.

The system is therefore weighted in favour of Australia massively, and the governing bodies actively work to make it hard for promising Aussies of dual citizenship play for someone else, without hurting their career.

International rep footy and SOO must be clearly separated and the players interests and careers protected.

 

[downo14]

The Fijian born, who had already represented Fiji player!!

You are again missing the point, if Australia looked at a player like Civinoceva and said that they would be able to select a player of equal standing and allow Civinocea to play for Fiji the game of Rugby League would benefit massively.

Its about be selfless for the benefit of the game.

Its not up to Australia to give players away, they have no right to do so, Civonociva is Australian, he has a right to represent Australia, for Australia to try & palm him off would be illegal & would be a breach of Petero's human rights.

The man wants to play for Australia, he's good enough, therefore he can play, he only has one carreer, nobody should dictate what country he has to play for, he came to Australia as a two year old :roll:

 

[marv]

......... palm him off would be illegal & would be a breach of Petero's human rights.

I'd love to see a player take his nation to court just because he hasnt been selected, what a tool you are, sunshine :lol:

 

[VonVolks]

Agreed about Downo, but Civonaceva is a bad example.

He is an Aussie, who has some Fijian heritage, and could therefore qualify as Fijian. BUT he chose to play for Australia from day one, so good luck to him.

The problems are the players who either switch back and forth, or who want to rep other countries but are stopped because of SOO concerns and so on.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

The fact is Australia has more players playing Rugby League than all the other nations combined!

is this fact?

 

[hutch]

i disagree about playing origin and for another country. if you are a qlder or new south welshman, you are australian as well. if you choose to rep another country, thats great but yuo cant play for an australian state. what needs to be done is meaningful test matches and tournaments at the same time as origin to give players who have a choice between nations an actual choice. as it stands, no nation has every lost players to origin and australia, it is quite the opposite, aus provides players for 9 out of the 10 world cup teams.

 

[Shorty]

That's not a bad idea hutch.
But it would never happen as it would possibly take the interest away from SOO.

What is needed is something of the above excluding Australia - I think that would strengthen the competition a lot.

 

[VonVolks]

What you say makes no sense Hutch. Since when does a local competition based on a STATE have a bearing on international competition. It does now, but my point is it shouldn't. You can have a great SOO compettion, which has no bearing on the Kangaroos.

I'm a Londoner, but I don't feel particularly ENGLISH, but do feel VERY London.

And as for your point about losing players, I give you Robbie Farah. He played for Lebanon, and they lost him for the WC due to the threat of SOO sanction.

Other countries don't want players who are also Australian that are then taken from them the minute the Aussies decide they are too good for another country!!!

 

[mark2]

is this fact?

As reported today Australia has 9 times the registered players that the UK has.

 

[typicalfan]

What you say makes no sense Hutch. Since when does a local competition based on a STATE have a bearing on international competition. It does now, but my point is it shouldn't. You can have a great SOO compettion, which has no bearing on the Kangaroos.

I'm a Londoner, but I don't feel particularly ENGLISH, but do feel VERY London.

And as for your point about losing players, I give you Robbie Farah. He played for Lebanon, and they lost him for the WC due to the threat of SOO sanction.

Other countries don't want players who are also Australian that are then taken from them the minute the Aussies decide they are too good for another country!!!

you miss the point entirely. State of origin is successful because of the tribal nature of the event. It doesnt have the same effect otherwise.

the problem is that while Australia was creating a better game for itself by setting up this event, England were too busy buying Australian players to profit their league, any blind herring would have seen it coming.

 

[VonVolks]

you miss the point entirely.

the problem is that while Australia was creating a better game for itself by setting up this event, England were too busy buying Australian players to profit their league, any blind herring would have seen it coming.

Well that's 2 separate points. I agree with England problem of using too many foreign (ie PI & Australian) players, but the SOO problem is that while Australia might make a better game for itself, it's using it to ruin other countries games, as the Robbie Farrah example shows.

Aussie Kangaroo qualification and SOO qualification should be totally separate, and it doesn't affect the tribal nature of the event at all. The players would still be maroons or blues, whether they were Roo's or Cedars, or Bati's or whatever.

 

[typicalfan]

I think the Robbie Farah examples show how RLIF relax and tighten their rules every now and again for the benefit for itself more so than SOO. The question is should we have stead fast rules without a player getting a second choice or should be allow flexibility on a fulltime basis.

Its an element of the game that needs addressing by at least 2013. I dont care which way they go, surely that would lose the effect SOO has at least to a degree. I dont want SOO becoming Super 14

 

[bender]

I am not really fussed which way is decided with State of Origin. It worked fine when PNG's adrian Lam was allowed to play for Qld and works fine now that it is only open to players available for Australian selection. I must say though, i think it is ridiculous that Qld/nsw players in the ESL are unavailable for selection.

I think though that one thing to consider is that SOO weekends really are the best hope for minnow nations to run concurrent test matches. So allowing their playersto rep for Qld/NSW might actually take this away from them and devalue the minnow jerseys.

I think that htis problem is best fixed with the one nation for life unless there are exceptional circumstances. Exceptional circumstances would only really be if the change is from a large country to minnow country. Sure a handful of players may not have switched to the minnow nations, although i dont see anyone really in the European sides who wouldnot have played. But more importantly, those players will be allowed to play for and improve with that nation. It allows the nations to concentrate on identifying eligible youth which will only help them in the long term.

 

[bobbis]

The gulf in playing numbers is exactly why Australia is so much better, its a miracle New Zealand is as competitive as they are.

You can't force players to play for countries other than Australia, and it simply wouldn't be right.

Even if you convince some Australians to play for other nations, how many could you convince? I'm sure more than 90% would opt for Australia, certainly the most talented would opt for Australia. Much like this world cup those that don't choose Australia would in the majority be doing so because they aren't good enough.

In reality getting as many Aussies as possible to fill the teams of other nations is just a short term suppliment for real development. I honestly can't see anyone beating Australia due to the use of Aussie expats. Australians aren't gods at football, they're superior at rugby league because theres a massive gulf in playing numbers. The only real long term solution is to build player numbers in other countries. If you build teams of Aussies competing in the colours of other countries all it will breed is a false sense of competitiveness, and honestly I think theres a tremendous chance that you'll stifle growth in the process. When you field a team of 17 players none of which were even born in that country theres a strong chance you'll disenfranchise supporters in that country as well as block representative pathways for developing nations.

 

[hutch]

The gulf in playing numbers is exactly why Australia is so much better, its a miracle New Zealand is as competitive as they are.

You can't force players to play for countries other than Australia, and it simply wouldn't be right.

Even if you convince some Australians to play for other nations, how many could you convince? I'm sure more than 90% would opt for Australia, certainly the most talented would opt for Australia. Much like this world cup those that don't choose Australia would in the majority be doing so because they aren't good enough.

In reality getting as many Aussies as possible to fill the teams of other nations is just a short term suppliment for real development. I honestly can't see anyone beating Australia due to the use of Aussie expats. Australians aren't gods at football, they're superior at rugby league because theres a massive gulf in playing numbers. The only real long term solution is to build player numbers in other countries. If you build teams of Aussies competing in the colours of other countries all it will breed is a false sense of competitiveness, and honestly I think theres a tremendous chance that you'll stifle growth in the process. When you field a team of 17 players none of which were even born in that country theres a strong chance you'll disenfranchise supporters in that country as well as block representative pathways for developing nations.

great post, and you're spot on. i think playing numbers are quite important, but so are the programs we have in place that breed rugby league players, and also the fact that we are a competitive and active nation.

as it stands, we do provide a lot of players for other countries, but do hardly anything to promote rugby league in these countries. we are quite happy to bring over young kiwis at an early age for the nrl, or provide the nz kiwis with a bunch of players who were born or brought up here, but are reluctant to put a second nrl side over there or even develop or fund rugby league domestically in nz.

same as the pacific, love and co think the future of rugby league is bright in the pacific because there are heaps of polynesians playing in the toyota cup and junior ranks here in australia, while ignoring the fact that they have never brought over any actual tongans or samoans from the islands, or even tried to develop the game there. the current tongan team was a heritage team full of players who missed out on their first country, but looked good on paper so the problem was ignored even more. the fact that they got the domestic rule scrapped shows they arent overly interested in developing rugby league in that country. the rlif should have enforced the rule, and should now be working towards making rugby league the sport of choice for kids in tonga. players such as hayne for fiji, jennings for tonga etc may improve the team short term, but dont do much for long term development especially when they abandon their world cup team because they achieve their dream of playing for australia.