The word 'origin' is defined in many dictionaries as meaning:
*The first stage of existence
*beginning
*ancestry
*foundation
*birth
With this in mind, I hereby put forward my crazy idea to put an end to all this debate over Origin eligibility.
After much researching and digging around, mostly in my wallet, I came across an amazing document, which I already knew existed for every other human being.
Way back in time, further than we can remember, there was a time when we were all extracted from
our hosts in a bloodied and agonising moment, known as birth. There were people who actually recorded all of these instances, detailing such information as name, sex, length and weight of the new life, as well as place of birth.
This information all proves to be very helpful for my point.
You play Origin for the state you were born in. If you were not born in Queensland or New South Wales, then you don't play Origin.
Some say this harsh. "What about Petero Civoniceva? He was born in Fiji and his family moved to Australia when he was 1. We can't lose players of his quality from the Rep football scene."
Fair point, but one which I can counter.
Petero is Fijian. He plays for Fiji. Fiji has a National team, he can play for them, thus he won't be lost to the representative football scene, furthermore, he'd be a great help for Fijian Rugby League. The Australia game appears to be doing fine in comparison.
Now my opinion has been met with much discussion and some criticism. Most don't like my "No grey area's" stance.
But when the word 'origin' is used as the main term in the phrase "State of Origin" then it may as well be enforced.
Otherwise, we can just call it "State of Wherever."
If I had to implement just one 'grey-area' rule, it would be that if you were not born in Australia and want to play Origin, then you become an Australian citizen and represent Australia only. This decision can not be reversed. If you are a Kiwi and want to play Origin, then you can never represent New Zealand in any way ever again.
One last thing, the Blues fans have been harping on for years about Queensland having Origin players from outside of Queensland.
Well after some digging around, I found there have been 33 players all up, representing both states, who were not born in the state they represented, or even in Australia. 19 played for Queensland, 14 for New South Wales.
And so I present to you, the State of Wherever champion teams
New South Wherever
1 - Ken Nagas
2 - Hazem El Masri
3 - Chris Johns
4 - John Hopoate
5 - Akuila Uate
6 - Peter Wallace
7 - Peter Sterling
8 - Justin Poore
9 - Ben Elias
10 - Willie Mason
11 - Ian Roberts
12 - Mario Fenech
13 - Timana Tahu
14 - James McManus
Queensallovertheland
1 - Karmichael Hunt
2 - Israel Folau
3 - Greg Inglis
4 - Paul Bowman
5 - Lote Tuqiri
6 - Mat Rogers
7 - Adrian Lam
8 - Petero Civoniceva
9 - Neville Costigan
10 - Antonio Kaufusi
11 - Sam Thaiday
12 - Brad Thorn
13 - Michael Crocker
14 - Chris Flannery
15 - Robbie O'Davis
16 - Julian O'Neill
17 - Scott Sattler
18 - Willie Tonga
19 - Tonie Carroll
Showing posts with label eligibility criteria. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eligibility criteria. Show all posts
Wednesday, 4 July 2012
Thursday, 14 June 2012
Complicating the Uncomplicatable (2012)
Ever since the introduction of the Rugby League International Federation (the
successor of the International Rugby League Board in 1998), the International
game has been in a steady decline.
It’s inability to have set rules for the code in every country the game is played in has been a minor issue for many years, but the most burgeoning problem they have has been surrounding the one thing of which there was never an issue before.
The one thing which it would appear would be so crystal clear without any grey area whatsoever, the most certain of all certainties.
International eligibility.
The International body began its existence in 1927, initially known as the Imperial Rugby League Board. It contained representatives from Britain, New Zealand and Australia. The big ideas of post-war French officials lead to the creation of the International Rugby League Board in 1948. Paul Barriere was the chief of French Rugby League at the time and he put forward plans for a World Cup. The French provided the trophy and the venues for the first competition in 1954.
The International game blossomed and soon games were played in USA, South Africa and Italy among other nations. By the late 1970’s, Papua New Guinea had a test team. The game continued growing right up until the Superleague war in Australia put International Rugby League in disarray.
In 1998, the games governing body was again reformed, this time as the Rugby League International Federation. In its time it has increased the number of member countries to twelve, however with half of these nations all located in the Oceania region, it has seen a lot of players leave the smaller islands to play in the ‘big time’ in either New Zealand or Australia.
The RLIF believed it needed to clearly define set rules for player eligibility, which had previously followed the very practical and inflexible rule – You play for the country you were born in.
Four core rules were created to define eligibility, providing greater flexibility, but also creating great controversy and confusion. While the core rules seem solid enough, all they have done is taken a simple, obvious, clear-cut rule and muddied the waters in what can only be believed to be a misguided attempt to improve the game
Internationally, by allowing prominent players born in either New Zealand, England or Australia, to play for a weaker International side.
Sounds good in theory, but the RLIF insistence on flexibility has all but muddied the waters and made the whole process a joke. It’s turned the International game into a mess.
A player is eligible to play an International game for:
1. A country he was born in
2. A country in which either his parents or grand-parents were born
3. A country he has lived in for at least 3 years prior to selection
4. A country he has gained senior international honours in any sport
Players who qualify for dual International representation are seen as taking the ‘easy way’ to International level football by playing with their second nation so to speak, because they may not have been good enough to break into the team representing the country they were born in.
If a player born in Australia, but with Tongan heritage decides to play for Tonga, he is not allowed to represent any other nation….
….until after the next World Cup has finished, or two years have passed since his last international game for Tonga.
Herein lies the biggest issue with the entire guidelines. They are set this way to allow a player to play International football, but to also play for his country of birth down the track if he so wishes.
This concept entirely removes pride for representing ones country, the once highest accolade a player could ever achieve. It has cheapened the International game, essentially whoring it out in a pathetic attempt to improve the quality of the game internationally.
And that has failed.
These rules are farcical and borderline insane. There are many great ways this Federation can improve the game Internationally, but this cheap pathetic ploy is getting out of control and turning the game into a parody. There would be close to half of all senior Rugby League players eligible to play for different nations to that of the one they were born in.
These rules need to be scrapped and we need to go back to common sense, for the sake of the game!
It’s inability to have set rules for the code in every country the game is played in has been a minor issue for many years, but the most burgeoning problem they have has been surrounding the one thing of which there was never an issue before.
The one thing which it would appear would be so crystal clear without any grey area whatsoever, the most certain of all certainties.
International eligibility.
The International body began its existence in 1927, initially known as the Imperial Rugby League Board. It contained representatives from Britain, New Zealand and Australia. The big ideas of post-war French officials lead to the creation of the International Rugby League Board in 1948. Paul Barriere was the chief of French Rugby League at the time and he put forward plans for a World Cup. The French provided the trophy and the venues for the first competition in 1954.
The International game blossomed and soon games were played in USA, South Africa and Italy among other nations. By the late 1970’s, Papua New Guinea had a test team. The game continued growing right up until the Superleague war in Australia put International Rugby League in disarray.
In 1998, the games governing body was again reformed, this time as the Rugby League International Federation. In its time it has increased the number of member countries to twelve, however with half of these nations all located in the Oceania region, it has seen a lot of players leave the smaller islands to play in the ‘big time’ in either New Zealand or Australia.
The RLIF believed it needed to clearly define set rules for player eligibility, which had previously followed the very practical and inflexible rule – You play for the country you were born in.
Four core rules were created to define eligibility, providing greater flexibility, but also creating great controversy and confusion. While the core rules seem solid enough, all they have done is taken a simple, obvious, clear-cut rule and muddied the waters in what can only be believed to be a misguided attempt to improve the game
Internationally, by allowing prominent players born in either New Zealand, England or Australia, to play for a weaker International side.
Sounds good in theory, but the RLIF insistence on flexibility has all but muddied the waters and made the whole process a joke. It’s turned the International game into a mess.
A player is eligible to play an International game for:
1. A country he was born in
2. A country in which either his parents or grand-parents were born
3. A country he has lived in for at least 3 years prior to selection
4. A country he has gained senior international honours in any sport
Players who qualify for dual International representation are seen as taking the ‘easy way’ to International level football by playing with their second nation so to speak, because they may not have been good enough to break into the team representing the country they were born in.
If a player born in Australia, but with Tongan heritage decides to play for Tonga, he is not allowed to represent any other nation….
….until after the next World Cup has finished, or two years have passed since his last international game for Tonga.
Herein lies the biggest issue with the entire guidelines. They are set this way to allow a player to play International football, but to also play for his country of birth down the track if he so wishes.
This concept entirely removes pride for representing ones country, the once highest accolade a player could ever achieve. It has cheapened the International game, essentially whoring it out in a pathetic attempt to improve the quality of the game internationally.
And that has failed.
These rules are farcical and borderline insane. There are many great ways this Federation can improve the game Internationally, but this cheap pathetic ploy is getting out of control and turning the game into a parody. There would be close to half of all senior Rugby League players eligible to play for different nations to that of the one they were born in.
These rules need to be scrapped and we need to go back to common sense, for the sake of the game!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)