Official NRL 2012 Thread | Boncos win worst jersey design

[Candy Arse]

He'll look good in maroon, monstering soft cocks like Paul Gallen.

[Madmya]

that's excellently set up for next year, given he's picked.

[mxlegend99]

Yeah, agreed. So by your rules you're fine with Papalii playing for QLD. I'm fine with it too.

How so? While he's closer than James Tamou, he has still only lived about 60% of his life in Queensland and wasn't born there.

He's 20 years old now, and spent the first 6 years of his life in New Zealand, and has spent atleast the last 2 years of his life in Canberra. He has more right to play for QLD then some of the current and former players IMO, but he doesn't hit the criteria in what State of Origin should be.

At the end of the day these guys are choosing to turn their backs on New Zealand because the money for playing Origin is far better, they're worth more when they negotiate contracts and at the moment it's basically the pinnacle of the game. But if we improved the eligibility rules and allowed players who are rightfully eligible for Origin based on birth and/or living 75% of their life to represent the country they truly want to represent without losing Origin, it should also improve International footy as more players will be representing countries other then Australia and some of the guys already doing so will have more big game experience.

The only country that it would weaken is Australia, and even then with the depth we have we wouldn't really be losing quality at our best. Just ridiculous depth.

[Madmya]

He probably only remembers 3 years of his life in NZ. Three years. Compared to practically his entire school life in QLD, where he would have started playing football on all levels, received his first contract etc. I don't believe we have the right to tell him he's not Australian.

There's so many kiwis here there's got to be some reward for having to put up with them.

[mxlegend99]

I'm not saying he can't feel Australian or that he doesn't deserve the right to represent Australia if he feels like he's an Aussie more so then a Kiwi.

But State of Origin should atleast try and live up to its name. It's meant to be a rivalry between two states and from the name should be lining up guys born in one state against guys born in the other. So even allowing for guys who have just spent the majority of their life in that state despite being born elsewhere is a big enough compromise IMO.

I think the eligibility rules should be black and white and more strict then eligibility rules for International footy. We should be living up to what the game was meant to be atleast. Allowing guys who have spent barely half their life in the state to be eligible just doesn't seem right to me. Especially when you disallow guys who have been born and raised and spent their entire lives and careers in the state and are ineligible because they choose to honor their heritage.

It always pissed me off that Frank Pritchard was ineligible for NSW because he chose to play for New Zealand, when his bio reads:

Born: Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia
Junior Clubs: Campbelltown City
Previous Clubs: Penrith Panthers
FG Debut: Panthers v Manly, Penrith Football Stadium, 3/5/03 (Rd
Club Debut: v Wests Tigers, ANZ Stadium, 14/03/2011 (Rd 1)

He has lived his entire life in NSW, played all his footy in NSW and has only ever played for NSW based teams except for when playing International football. Maybe it's unreasonable for me to expect for us to atleast try and live up to the name of the game. But to me it's an absolute joke that a player can have a bio read like that and not be eligible, meanwhile there's any number of players who have bios that suggest they're anything but from that State and yet they're eligible simply because they are happy to play for Australia instead of whatever country they come from.

I also find it hard to believe the players who choose a state they've lived a small portion of their lives in truly have more passion for that state then their country. They're doing it for the money and because Origin is held in higher regard then international footy. That's not to suggest they don't also love or feel allegiance to the state... but ahead of the country where their heritage is from? There wouldn't be many (if any) players who could truly feel that way. Regardless of what they say.

[Madmya]

It means someone like Peter Sterling would be forced to play for QLD despite living fuck all of his life there. That I don't think is right. What if growing up they were hardcore supporters for the other state? Wuh oh.

[mxlegend99]

That's why I was willing to bend on the requirement of being born, and settle for a 75% (minimum) lifetime in that state.

I'm sure there would be a few cases where it sucked that a player had to miss out. But atleast we wouldn't be flooded with loads of cases where players were born in other countries and spent fuck all of their lives in the State they are eligible for because of playing a few games at a certain age.

I also think for every players that's unfairly ineligible, we would have 10+ players (easily) that are eligible if they ditch the stupid criteria that players must choose Australia as their country also. But unfortunately the NRL would rather have the rules so that Australia is the only country to benefit from State of Origin, and anyone who doesn't play for Australia is ineligible for the game despite having more right to play then blokes who are happy to turn their back on their heritage.

[pilonv1]

The only reason I hate this is that it weakens Aus/NZ games. I'd like to see players given more flexibility to the nation they represent to prevent this.

[Madmya]

That's why I was willing to bend on the requirement of being born, and settle for a 75% (minimum) lifetime in that state.

I'm sure there would be a few cases where it sucked that a player had to miss out. But atleast we wouldn't be flooded with loads of cases where players were born in other countries and spent fuck all of their lives in the State they are eligible for because of playing a few games at a certain age.

I also think for every players that's unfairly ineligible, we would have 10+ players (easily) that are eligible if they ditch the stupid criteria that players must choose Australia as their country also. But unfortunately the NRL would rather have the rules so that Australia is the only country to benefit from State of Origin, and anyone who doesn't play for Australia is ineligible for the game despite having more right to play then blokes who are happy to turn their back on their heritage.

So if someone hadn't met the 75% requirement, what would stop them from refusing to pledge allegiance and wait it out until they hit the 75% figure? What happens if Sterlo wanted to play for QLD but he's over the 75% figure for NSW? Can he choose?

But I agree with the sentiment, I don't like Australia pillaging NZ's ranks just because of Origin either. I just think that cases like Papalii are easy to swallow given the length of time he's been in our country, Tamou - not so much.

All that centrelink money, they have to pay us back somehow.

[mxlegend99]

That's why I was willing to bend on the requirement of being born, and settle for a 75% (minimum) lifetime in that state.

I'm sure there would be a few cases where it sucked that a player had to miss out. But atleast we wouldn't be flooded with loads of cases where players were born in other countries and spent fuck all of their lives in the State they are eligible for because of playing a few games at a certain age.

I also think for every players that's unfairly ineligible, we would have 10+ players (easily) that are eligible if they ditch the stupid criteria that players must choose Australia as their country also. But unfortunately the NRL would rather have the rules so that Australia is the only country to benefit from State of Origin, and anyone who doesn't play for Australia is ineligible for the game despite having more right to play then blokes who are happy to turn their back on their heritage.

So if someone hadn't met the 75% requirement, what would stop them from refusing to pledge allegiance and wait it out until they hit the 75% figure? What happens if Sterlo wanted to play for QLD but he's over the 75% figure for NSW? Can he choose?

But I agree with the sentiment, I don't like Australia pillaging NZ's ranks just because of Origin either. I just think that cases like Papalii are easy to swallow given the length of time he's been in our country, Tamou - not so much.

All that centrelink money, they have to pay us back somehow.

Ofcourse he could choose. He's a special and rare circumstance where he can pledge his allegiance to wherever he truly feels his state of origin is. The place he was born, or the place he spent his entire life.

If a player is willing to wait until they hit the 75% requirement, then good on them and odds on they're the sort of player that you want in State of Origin. But guys like Papali and Tamou would never hit that requirement given they spent a portion of their lives in that state before moving. If they wanted to play for their state that badly they would have to prove it by playing for a club based in that state even if it means playing for less money, or waiting longer for an opportunity etc. to prove themselves.

Honestly I'd much rather it be closer to like 95% of their lives just so that guys like Peter Sterling aren't forced to represent a state based on where he was born and spent nearly none of his life. I think 75% of their lives is still pretty lenient, without bending too far and just opening it up to anyone who wants to increase their worth or status in the game. People willing to turn their back on their country just to play State of Origin are the type of players we shouldn't want IMO. I don't see it as blind and true loyalty to QLD or NSW. I see it as having no loyalty to their country and heritage and instead choosing to play the games that make them worth more money and pay better. Sometimes that might not be the case, but those cases would be the exceptions. At the end of the day it's just the fame and fortune that goes with Origin that makes these guys passionate about their state.

[Candy Arse]

Fox Sports are showing a "Classic" Grand Final - the 1993 decider between Brisbane and St George. I don't know if anyone here actually saw the game, but it's as far from a classic as you can possibly get. Awful, awful game, primarily because the Broncos weren't THAT good that year and the Dragons choked like dogs in a game they should have won. That's the year where, had Ricky Stuart not suffered that injury, we'd have probably had the mythical Raiders/Broncos Grand Final.

They'd have been better off running the 1992 game, even though the Broncos killed the Dragons they at least put on a 2nd half attacking masterclass that is a pleasure to watch, in particular the Steve Renouf length-of-the-field effort.

Top 5 grand finals I've seen in my life (in terms of best games, not my favourite results) -

1997
1989
1999
2003
...probably 2005.

The top 2 in my list are all-time great games. 1999 was a great game highlighted by the dramatic ending and the epic St George choke in the 2nd half. 2003 gets the nod because of The Sattler, and 2005 is interchangeable with 1992, 1994 and 1998 because they were all one-way games of touch football.

If this Sunday is as good as I'm expecting/hoping, I think it'll slot neatly into position 4 or 5. Definitely 3rd if it goes to extra time.

[Madmya]

Broncos smashing sharks in 1997 wasn't that great candy.

[pilonv1]

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/queenslande ... 26klq.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Crying over Johns being an immortal. Get over it.

[Madmya]

Roy Masters.

I don't think Joey should ever get it purely because he played on drugs.

[pilonv1]

I think someone like Provan should get it, there's plenty of years left for Mal & Joey to be picked.

[Candy Arse]

Provan should have had it by now. Johns gets it next based on the criteria of the selections and the short memory of the general public. Plus, he was a better player than Mal Meninga.

[pilonv1]

So we're all agreed this is the order?

Provan
Johns
Meninga
Hindmarsh
Cariage
Mogg
Brad Drew
Lockyer

In other news, Knights are getting Jeremy Smith for 3 years. Guessing Smith was let out of his contract early so the Sharks could sign Heighington.

[Candy Arse]

No that's terrible. You forgot to put Terry Campese ahead of Lockyer.

[pilonv1]

Good point. I was only putting retired players though, but Campese is basically done so he could be added.

[Madmya]

If johns gets it (heaven forbid), lockyer is a certainty next time, if to just stop the burning and rioting in QLD.

[Candy Arse]

Mal should get it before Lockyer.

[pilonv1]

Agreed. No point inducting guys 10 minutes after they retire.

[Madmya]

Why doesn't he just get it before Johns then? At least mal wasn't winning games with the aid of drugs.

[pilonv1]

If anything, the recreational drugs he was taking would have been detrimental to his performance. So he's even better than we give him credit for.

[Madmya]

Maybe if it was weed, but it wasn't so here we are.