Expansion Making State of Origin work

[genghiskhan]

People dont think WA or SA can beat Victoria? That was what made SOO so great.

17 game season, with SOO after the Finals?

During the Super league war, no one thought Queensland could beat NSW, but they won three nil. These upsets do indeed make for interesting contests.

After the finals would be best. I think the NRL suffers having SOO mid season because it is hard to go from watching an elite spectacle back to watching ordinary home and away matches. It you played after finals, you could treat origin a bit like an international match.

 

[genghiskhan]

Sorry?

You tournament would be a series of boring exhibition games unless they lead to a final where there is a champion.

 

[Fire]

You tournament would be a series of boring exhibition games unless they lead to a final where there is a champion.

The very first sentence was:

"Has to be the one week promotion/relegation thing."

 

[Pirate_4]

6 teams i believe is best. If you can't organise statehood no team for you. ACT/NSW is a natural fit. NT can join SA, wearing the croweater jumper of course.

 

[RUNVS]

6 teams i believe is best. If you can't organise statehood no team for you. ACT/NSW is a natural fit. NT can join SA, wearing the croweater jumper of course.

Agreed. If you dont have 25 fit players who are currently in the AFL then you cant expect to have your own State of Origin team. I would combine NSW and ACT for the simple fact that i would support NSW and i would want Craig Bolton in the backline

 

[Fire]

6 teams i believe is best. If you can't organise statehood no team for you. ACT/NSW is a natural fit. NT can join SA, wearing the croweater jumper of course.

The problem with this is that it cheapens the state teams.

For example, I would have absolutely 0 interest in a combined VIC/NT side. I would expect the same from any croweater. And I cant imagine a NSWelshman being thrilled by not having his state represented, and instead being asked to support some Frankenstein "natural fit" merger with the ACT.

 

[Bone71]

6 teams i believe is best. If you can't organise statehood no team for you. ACT/NSW is a natural fit. NT can join SA, wearing the croweater jumper of course.

Don't think too many South Aussies would be too happy with a SA/NT team, besides SA managed to stand up alright by itself under State of Origin back in the 80's and 90's. Qld/Nt makes more sense.

 

[Pirate_4]

Don't think too many South Aussies would be too happy with a SA/NT team, besides SA managed to stand up alright by itself under State of Origin back in the 80's and 90's. Qld/Nt makes more sense.

I suggested that because most NT players are likely to have played in SA (I'm guessing). As a combined side yes south aussies would care but surely they wouldn't mind having a few lads from up north bolstering the SA side.

 

[emuboy]

State of Origin will never work again. The AFL tried many different formats to revive interest in the concept in the 1990s - none were even remotely successful.

It is time to consign State Of Origin to the past and move on.

 

[walhawk]

Pass on SOO.
Once every year or two would be great but these complicated series are just never going to happen.

AFL is all about the clubs. That is what make it great and why the passion is greater that NRL, A-League, S14.

 

[Fire]

State of Origin will never work again. The AFL tried many different formats to revive interest in the concept in the 1990s - none were even remotely successful.

It is time to consign State Of Origin to the past and move on.

I disagree.

 

[Bone71]

I suggested that because most NT players are likely to have played in SA (I'm guessing). As a combined side yes south aussies would care but surely they wouldn't mind having a few lads from up north bolstering the SA side.

Would love to see players such as McLeod play for SA but it just wouldn't be right. Vic, WA & SA must compete in any origin game as it's own identity, thats what makes this Dream Team game so ridiculous - Victoria maintains it's identity whilst all other states don't.

In fact as I think of it I don't believe any state should have to merge with another. State of Origin is about playing for the STATE you grew up in not some meaningless grouping of area's, I know that means most teams would not be good enough to compete with Vic but at least when they win a game it is their state, represented by their players winning a game not a team that has no heart or soul.

 

[RUNVS]

In fact as I think of it I don't believe any state should have to merge with another. State of Origin is about playing for the STATE you grew up in not some meaningless grouping of area's

For the most part i agree though the only exception is NSW/ACT as the ACT is completely surrounded by NSW and before federation it was actually appart of NSW. I dont think anyone would have any real problems with combining the 2 on the sporting field.

 

[Bone71]

For the most part i agree though the only exception is NSW/ACT as the ACT is completely surrounded by NSW and before federation it was actually appart of NSW. I dont think anyone would have any real problems with combining the 2 on the sporting field.

Agreed. But would like them to have the choice. Not just forced to because the AFL thinks they should.

 

[genghiskhan]

For the most part i agree though the only exception is NSW/ACT as the ACT is completely surrounded by NSW and before federation it was actually appart of NSW. I dont think anyone would have any real problems with combining the 2 on the sporting field.

No problem at all. Canberra virtually is NSW. It has a population of 300,000 people and about another 200,000 in small surrounding NSW towns that see Canberra as the regional big smoke. These strong links between small towns and the city means integration into NSW is more practical. You see a bit of it in wine marketing. The city has a lot of focus on "Canberra region wines." With an exception of one, all of the Canberra region wines are in NSW.

Northern territory used to be part of SA I think. You could call the team central Australia for old times sake. It does seem more practical to combine it with Queensland though.

I agree with the idea that only states deserve to be involved.

 

[cos789]

People , it's very , very simple .
SOO for the states that can supply a team and



wait for it ..........


state football for teams that can't .
That's what they're currently doing .
You just don't hear about it .

 

[greenhat]

AFL is a professional, polished, commercial, modern and inoffensive competition these days. Players are drafted from anywhere to clubs they don't choose, there are few unshared 'home' grounds, any hint of violence has been drummed out to please the soccer mums.
Its too late to try and re-introduce something based on raw parochial tribalism. Thats not how the players, the clubs and even most fans relate to the sport anymore.

In Rugby League State of Origin its different. Club loyalties, where you live now, and even friendships are all put away - nothing but the State you are from matters when Origin is on. Sometimes, that passion causes this to happen.

That is what makes state of origin work for Rugby League.

The AFL is not like that anymore and AFL Origin hasn't and wouldn't generate the kind of passion that makes RL's State of Origin its showpiece.

http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=LG14CjPJgFg

 

[Azzballz Deluxe]

AFL is a professional, polished, commercial, modern and inoffensive competition these days. Players are drafted from anywhere to clubs they don't choose, there are few unshared 'home' grounds, any hint of violence has been drummed out to please the soccer mums.
Its too late to try and re-introduce something based on raw parochial tribalism. Thats not how the players, the clubs and even most fans relate to the sport anymore.

In Rugby League State of Origin its different. Club loyalties, where you live now, and even friendships are all put away - nothing but the State you are from matters when Origin is on. Sometimes, that passion causes this to happen.

That is what makes state of origin work for Rugby League.

The AFL is not like that anymore and AFL Origin hasn't and wouldn't generate the kind of passion that makes RL's State of Origin its showpiece.

http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=LG14CjPJgFg

The AFL would rake it in though, i know that much.

(not that i'm agreeing with you btw )

The reason why RL SoO is so successful is because there are only two states. That is all. Makes it as simple as simple can be.

 

[MickyCrow]

Has to be the one week promotion/relegation thing.

Also, there has to be the following teams:

Victoria (NO SPLIT BETWEEN RURAL AND METRO, absolutely essential.)
South Australia
Western Australia
Queensland
Northern Territory
Tasmania
New South Wales
ACT.

8 teams, 4 matches.

Sides liek the ACT, and in some years Tasmania and NT will not be able to fill a team with AFL players. This is irrelevant, as state-level players can fill the gaps, much like how SOO used to be.

We still see the best, its a real SOO competition, its manageable, and every team means something. None of this Allies/ NSWACT, QLDNT/ Vic Metro/ All stars concept. Every team is meaningful. Every Australian is represented.

Its also a great way to develop the game in markets like Tasmania and the ACT without actually giving them an unviable AFL team. Plus, it adds a completely new dimension to footy in NSW and QLD, as well as appeasing the traditional heartlands of VIC, SA and WA.

There is absolutely no reason why this cant work. No issue is close to being insurmountable. The addition it will bring to our game is invaluable. So it is no surprise that the AFL aren’t even contemplating it.

DAMN STRAIGHT

 

[genghiskhan]

The AFL would rake it in though, i know that much.

(not that i'm agreeing with you btw )

The reason why RL SoO is so successful is because there are only two states. That is all. Makes it as simple as simple can be.

So why is the six nations rugby union tournament so successful in Europe?

Having a lot of states is only a problem if you try to have exhibition games, which is why the last attempt failed.

 

[jpdixon]

No problem at all. Canberra virtually is NSW. It has a population of 300,000 people and about another 200,000 in small surrounding NSW towns that see Canberra as the regional big smoke. These strong links between small towns and the city means integration into NSW is more practical. You see a bit of it in wine marketing. The city has a lot of focus on "Canberra region wines." With an exception of one, all of the Canberra region wines are in NSW.

You definitely won't find too many NSW people objecting to including Canberra. Apart from the history and geography, it already works in cricket and I would expect ACT players are elegible for NSW rugby league state or origin, too.

 

[Speck]

Vic, SA, WA would work. Play 1 team home, 1 team away.

Vic v SA
WA v Vic
SA v WA

Simple as that. Top 2 teams play off in a Grand Final.

The only problem is with the days its played on. You need 4 games in the space of 2 weeks. Also the rest won't get to play.

 

[Azzballz Deluxe]

So why is the six nations rugby union tournament so successful in Europe?

Having a lot of states is only a problem if you try to have exhibition games, which is why the last attempt failed.

Aye, you're preaching to the choir mate!

I'm absolutely obsessed about reintroducing SoO aussie rules. I think it would at least be as big as the RL version.

 

[Azzballz Deluxe]

Vic, SA, WA would work. Play 1 team home, 1 team away.

Vic v SA
WA v Vic
SA v WA

Simple as that. Top 2 teams play off in a Grand Final.

The only problem is with the days its played on. You need 4 games in the space of 2 weeks. Also the rest won't get to play.

Leaving out nsw and qld woud be a HUUUGE mistake. By the time any future SoO competition is put in place, there will be many more players from both these states and will able to really challenge the "Big 3".

 

[Azzballz Deluxe]

3 weeks, to be played before the AFL season.

States ranked 1>6. (You know how)

First season like this:
1. Victoria
2. WA
3. SA
4. QLD
5. NSW
6. TAS

week 1
TOP 4 SEMI 1 - VIC v.s WA - vic win (vic go straight to final, wa go to preliminary)
TOP 4 SEMI 2 - SA v.s QLD - sa win (sa go to preliminary, qld Top 4 qualifier 2)

TOP 4 QUALIFIER - NSW v.s TAS - nsw win (nsw go to Top 4 qualifier 2, tas eiminated)


week 2
PRELIMINARY - WA v.s SA - sa win (go to final, loser eliminated)

TOP 4 QUALIFIER 2 - QLD v.s NSW - nsw win (move to top 4 next year, qld drops out of top 4 next year)

week 3
FINAL - VIC v.s SA



I have used the Top 4 system that the AFL used to use years ago.

eg. 1v2, 3v4. Winner of the former goes to GF, loser plays winner of the latter the next week. Winner of that match goes to GF.

Winner 5v6 would play loser of 3v4 for a chance to make the Top 4 the next year. (only top 4 states can win the FINAL each year)
I'm sure you could work out the rankings for the next season following my example?

Top 4 States play at least 2 matches, only the worst state plays one. I cant see a problem with personally.

Anyone? (Dont be afraid to ask questions if you are confused!)