Sam Kasiano

[Coxy]

Agreed. But I'd still let them say QLD and NZ :P But too bad if you want to play for Australia later. Can't do it.

ACT is "counted" as NSW.
And if and when WA comes back into the fold and start producing players (or Storm finally produce a local) do we exclude Victorians and WA from Origin? IMO yes.

 

[mrslong]

Too many grey areas. What if you were born in nz to Aussie parents & moved back to aus as a teen. You'd prob have identified as an Aussie. And vice versa.

Also think we need a father/son rule, can anyone imagine sonny Lockyer playing for nsw in 20 years cos his old man got a gig in nrl media? Ghastly!

 

[Ari Gold]

If players choosing Origin for money is the central problem just stop paying players to play Origin and make test payments worth more (assuming we persist with such futile exercises). That should ensure guys only do it for the passion then.

 

[anzac7]

Had about 6 different replies in my head when reading through this thread - it's a tough one..

 

[Porthoz]

I just don't get why an Origin player has to pledge allegiance to Australia.
As long as his footy roots are in one of the Origin states, he should be able to play for his country of choice (as long as he's eligible) AND his State of Origin!

 

[anzac7]

Now I can see why the officials are having trouble with where/how to draw the line...

 

[Bucking Beads]

It can't be your actual State of Origin but it should be the first game of League over the age of 16 rule. The problem with Kasiano and Tamou is that they didn't really choose to play Origin they were head hunted. Players must sign a contract once they sign their first contract as to which state/country they want to play for.

 

[Big Pete]

Victorian and WA juniors are considered Blues because they play their first senior footy for them and they're Australian.

 

[anzac7]

It can't be your actual State of Origin but it should be the first game of League over the age of 16 rule. The problem with Kasiano and Tamou is that they didn't really choose to play Origin they were head hunted. Players must sign a contract once they sign their first contract as to which state/country they want to play for.

Exactly right, was just about to note that. QLD and NSW scouters are just as much to blame if what the media is saying is true, these guys were agressively pursued by each respective camp. I mean they are good players, but surely the camps have enough talent to scout who don't have 'questionable' eligibility backgrounds?

http://www.sportal.com.au/league-news-display/origin-faces-kiwi-conundrum-182860

 

[OXY-351]

It just seems like players pledge their allegiance to whichever team they think will be the highest rep honor they can acheive. Eg, Tamou thought he'd probably only play for NZ, so declared allegiance to them, yet when he gets wind that he might play for the blues, and then potentially AUS, he says he's a blue.

 

[Hamm.0]

In Porthoz's son's case, it's a bit hard because IIRC they're Dutch, and Holland doesn't have a Rugby League team yet.
But suppose they did. Would you deny Porthoz's boy the opportunity to play for QLD and the country of his heritage?
I just think that's ridiculous, whether he's an Australian citizen or not. And I think it's ridiculous that you HAVE to make yourself available for Australia to play Origin. It doesn't make sense in this age of multiculturalism.

Of course not. Porthoz's boy would be eligible for QLD as his son is/would be a citizen of Australia. So long as the Netherlands (Holland is only a region of the Netherlands Coxy, you culturally insensitive twat :-)) remain a minnow nation, the ARL/RLIF would have no problem with allowing Porthoz's son to represent the Netherlands, QLD and Australia. However if the time comes that the Netherlands are a powerhouse of RL and it actually affects Australia's chance of winning games, than Porthoz's son would (and SHOULD) have to choose his allegiances.

The ARL/RLIF should not care if someone wants to be a Tonga, Samoa, PNG, Fiji rep. and also rep. QLD/NSW. However, NZ and UK players are different and so they should be. NZ is more than competitive therefore players should choose who they represent.

 

[Hamm.0]

Honestly if i could play origin and play for Fiji id pick fiji anyday of the week

No offence Viti that's your choice and I respect your right to it.

That said; this is a perfect example of why I believe a person has to pledge allegiance to Australia to have allegiance to a state. QLD isn't a country and SoO is a representative game.

To play for the team you choose because it's what you (the individual) want, is called club football. IMO, it cheapens the entire concept of representative sport to be able to pick at what levels you represent.

 

[Coxy]

Its time we grow up and realise states are minor.

 

[Qlder]

I really don't know what to say.

Yeah it would be politically correct to say everyone should have a chance to represent their own country and QLD/NSW, but it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Coxy, I usually agree with your posts, but mate I just cant agree. Benji playing for QLD? Then watch him do the haka in an ANZAC Test?.......COME ON! thats pitiful.

It will turn from State of Origin, a game pitting two states against each other, hatred, competitiveness, toughness into an AllStar match.

I love Thorn, however seeing him carve up against the Wallabies kills me. Its either State of Origin and represent Australia, or represent another country and no State of origin.

EASY. Sign your allegiance when you sign your first contract. If someone is Dutch, raised in the QLD system, well when he becomes an Australian citizen, sure play for QLD. But no Holland, your an Australian now cowboy. This ain't a pick and mix bag.

You just can't pick and choose to suit yourself.

 

[Viti]

No offence Viti that's your choice and I respect your right to it.

That said; this is a perfect example of why I believe a person has to pledge allegiance to Australia to have allegiance to a state. QLD isn't a country and SoO is a representative game.

To play for the team you choose because it's what you (the individual) want, is called club football. IMO, it cheapens the entire concept of representative sport to be able to pick at what levels you represent.

Thats fair enough but the thing i dont understand is why playing state of origin has to be linked with playing for australia

 

[Qlder]

And this bullshit about blokes who can't decide at 20 years old who to represent at SOO. You obviously lack the passion to play in such a rep match so we dont want you then!

 

[Bucking Beads]

Thats fair enough but the thing i dont understand is why playing state of origin has to be linked with playing for australia

Because QLD and NSW are states of Australia.

 

[Alec]

There needs to be a bigger incentive to play for NZ. More money, more games, their own north vs south game...whatever. It needs to have greater or equal to rewards compared to playing for Australia. That way you'll have players who want to play Origin and for Australia playing that, and players who want to play for NZ playing that. It'll help the international competition improve too. As it stands, there aren't really any perks in playing for NZ at the moment.