Your International Eligibility Criteria

[Philip_Smith007]

Hows this for criteria?

We draw a distinction between our elite countries (where league has a long history and is well developed) and the countries which are aspiring to development.

Nice idea, but still allows for players to be sucked up by Australia that could play for weaker countries.

But....

It needs to be a three way series, to prevent players wanting to identify as Aussies (instead of kiwis, or islanders of different varieties) just so they can get into SOO. The third team could be a barbarians/others, and would include NRL based players not (eligibility-wise) from NSW or Qld, ie other states, other countries, since what makes SOO great is that is basically close to the best 34 players in NRL, bar the Kiwi/Islanders/others. One game in Brissie, one game in Sydney, one game in Melbourne each season, winner is team with most wins or bets points difference if table is tied, makes every minute of every game count, without adding an extra game to the season calendar.

Great idea
They could drop the Anzac test, as there is no point to it, half of NZ players arent available due to playing in England.
NRL /Superleague war in 1997 saw a similar concept which was great, QLD vs NSW vs NZ.
Dont see the loyalist liking it, but change is needed!

 

[East Coast Tiger]

It's simple.
The rules as they are need just two changes.
1) No grandparent rule.
2) Strictly one nation for life.
If the current rules were changed in this way I'd be happy with them. It would mean players would be more likely to be playing for a nation they are truly representative of and that they would play for that country for life.

 

[bender]

It's simple.
The rules as they are need just two changes.
1) No grandparent rule.
2) Strictly one nation for life.
If the current rules were changed in this way I'd be happy with them. It would mean players would be more likely to be playing for a nation they are truly representative of and that they would play for that country for life.

Take away rule no 1 and you are on the right track.

 

[bartman]

Nice idea, but still allows for players to be sucked up by Australia that could play for weaker countries.

You're right, just finished reading how even Morley was offered a NSW spot once he obtained his residency (http://www.smh.com.au/news/league/t...ndshot-at-roos/2006/11/02/1162339987832.html). That's the lengths the states and therefore Australian selectors are willing to go to be or stay dominant.

It's got to be an attitude change about the win-at-all-costs thing with Origin, and it's supposed purity as a link for Australian selection. Bottom line it's a great spectacle, and it would still be that in a three way, with rival passion from the Australia based "outsiders".

Changing to a three-way would give players less reason to trade their heritage for the sake of a blue or maroon jersey, they could still get in on the rep level action and maintain their ability to play for their meaningful country - provided enough regular games of smaller nations were scheduled, and at the right times with league/club approvals to participate.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

You're right, just finished reading how even Morley was offered a NSW spot once he obtained his residency (http://www.smh.com.au/news/league/true-brit-morley-refused-to-give-up-lions-for-an-origin-jersey-andshot-at-roos/2006/11/02/1162339987832.html). That's the lengths the states and therefore Australian selectors are willing to go to be or stay dominant.

It's got to be an attitude change about the win-at-all-costs thing with Origin, and it's supposed purity as a link for Australian selection. Bottom line it's a great spectacle, and it would still be that in a three way, with rival passion from the Australia based "outsiders".

Changing to a three-way would give players less reason to trade their heritage for the sake of a blue or maroon jersey, they could still get in on the rep level action and maintain their ability to play for their meaningful country - provided enough regular games of smaller nations were scheduled, and at the right times with league/club approvals to participate.

I think what we should be hoping for is a continued resurgence of test footy that inspires players to play for their nation first and foremost. Hopefully with a strong Test scene the Karmichael Hunts of the future will choose NZ over Queensland. Plus, TBH, I don't like the idea of including NZ in a Tri-series. It would mean the death of Origin as we know it and would also take a lot away from the test arena. States should play against states and it should be Australia that faces the Kiwis not NSW or Qld.

 

[International RL]

I think what we should be hoping for is a continued resurgence of test footy that inspires players to play for their nation first and foremost. Hopefully with a strong Test scene the Karmichael Hunts of the future will choose NZ over Queensland. Plus, TBH, I don't like the idea of including NZ in a Tri-series. It would mean the death of Origin as we know it and would also take a lot away from the test arena. States should play against states and it should be Australia that faces the Kiwis not NSW or Qld.

Yeah its difficult isn't it. I'm dead against including Kiwis in the origin, because it would cheapen the tests as you have said. Furthermore it would dilute 25 years of history and one of the jewels in rugby leagues crown. The problem is though that despite Origin being one of rugby league's great strengths it is also arguably its achilles heal as the lure to play in it encourages your Karmichael's etc to want to play and therefore have to be kangaroos.

People have suggested letting kiwis play in origin, but that will only further tip the balanced in favour of the blues in terms of player eligibilty/pool.

I think you're right ECT that we need to keep building up the international game. But the main point is that the administrators have to stop being suck selfish short sighted wankers and NOT pick these guys. They should of said to Karmichael...sorry pal, we know you're 'eligible' but...you're not going to get a jersey. Ever.

There needs to be some sort of agreement/directive from the top administrators to have this happen. Otherwise we will never get where we should be in the international arena.

I'm glad the kiwis in the aftermath of the fein debacle have managed to get the issue of players being 'ruled out' on the table for discussion. THats one of international rugby league's biggest problems as well.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Yeah its difficult isn't it. I'm dead against including Kiwis in the origin, because it would cheapen the tests as you have said. Furthermore it would dilute 25 years of history and one of the jewels in rugby leagues crown. The problem is though that despite Origin being one of rugby league's great strengths it is also arguably its achilles heal as the lure to play in it encourages your Karmichael's etc to want to play and therefore have to be kangaroos.

People have suggested letting kiwis play in origin, but that will only further tip the balanced in favour of the blues in terms of player eligibilty/pool.

I think you're right ECT that we need to keep building up the international game. But the main point is that the administrators have to stop being suck selfish short sighted wankers and NOT pick these guys. They should of said to Karmichael...sorry pal, we know you're 'eligible' but...you're not going to get a jersey. Ever.

There needs to be some sort of agreement/directive from the top administrators to have this happen. Otherwise we will never get where we should be in the international arena.

I'm glad the kiwis in the aftermath of the fein debacle have managed to get the issue of players being 'ruled out' on the table for discussion. THats one of international rugby league's biggest problems as well.

Agree with all of that except the Hunt bit. I actually think he has every right to play for Australia if that's what he wants. He is perfectly eligible and it was his decision to make. No one can tell a player what his nationality is.

 

[International RL]

I understand your point ECT...BUT

He was very close to playing for NZ just before the ANZAC test so then Australia went out and picked him. At the time it was highly questionable he was there on merit.

To me that is bad selfish policy.

Yes he wanted to play for Australia, but it had more to do with origin than anything else.

He's Australian now. If he finds out that in 2 years time Inglis is permanently keeping him out of origin and tests...HE CANNOT EVER be allowed to play for NZ.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

I understand your point ECT...BUT

He was very close to playing for NZ just before the ANZAC test so then Australia went out and picked him. At the time it was highly questionable he was there on merit.

To me that is bad selfish policy.

Yes he wanted to play for Australia, but it had more to do with origin than anything else.

He's Australian now. If he finds out that in 2 years time Inglis is permanently keeping him out of origin and tests...HE CANNOT EVER be allowed to play for NZ.

Agreed. I think the ARL definitely picked him to ensure he couldn't change his mind and I wouldn't be surprised if Maitua and Kaufusi were picked for the same reasons (not that either of them are really likely to play fior NZ). Obviously Origin played a part but I do believe he wanted to play for Australia. In any case he has made that choice now and he will have to stick to it.

 

[International RL]

Agreed. I think the ARL definitely picked him to ensure he couldn't change his mind and I wouldn't be surprised if Maitua and Kaufusi were picked for the same reasons (not that either of them are really likely to play fior NZ). Obviously Origin played a part but I do believe he wanted to play for Australia. In any case he has made that choice now and he will have to stick to it.

Yep.


Hopefully NZ can get marshall and SBW on the field together some stage soon. I think the kiwis can be an awesome side that plays a great brand of footy. That alone should hopefully stop future 'Hunts' from deciding to play for NZ. Thats the greatest concern IMO.

The world cup might help as well.

 

[icewind]

Brilliant!
Put yourself in the situation either as yourself or as one of your children, you have grown up in your country, born and breed their, you have had the dream since a little child to play for your country, you make it in the NRL or Super League and after a couple of seasons you are in contention for a position in your country’s team.
But someone who hasn’t lived their whole life in the country, but has residency/citizenship after 2-3 years and is selected infront of you or your son.

How does that leave you feeling? Or your child?
Different story now?

"someone who hasn't lived their whole life in the country".

lets see it from the other side of the coin. you want more players to come OVER to the nrl. That is, move to Australia, spend possibly half their lives there, then represent their country of birth, while, another person who has lived in England all his life, born and breed their, has had the dream since a little child to play for England, is pushed aside for the guy who went to an overseas competition.

Also, for the NRL player selected, he's spent years and years in the Australian competition, has largely that competition to thank for the rugby league career he has, then to go back on his adopted country and play AGAINST the country that did far more for him than his country of birth.

 

[icewind]

All this, for 'the good of the game'.


Is it arrogant to suggest that for true international rivalry, each nation should be preparing their players for international battle, as opposed to sending them to the NRL to 'train them up', possibly for years, then to have those players who possibly have preferred the Australian culture, battle just as fiercely against a team that represents a country they have grown to cherish.