State of Origin Concept
- Thread starter Scrubber2050
- Start date
- Status
Highlander35
Andrew Slack (58)
Strewthcobber
Mark Ella (57)
What's a non-wallaby Queensland team look like?
Without QC (Quade Cooper) among others, it's pretty much going to be worse than the Reds isn't it?
Without QC (Quade Cooper) among others, it's pretty much going to be worse than the Reds isn't it?
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
Without the top guys it would be about s exciting as a NRC match and probably attract the same number of supporters. I wouldn't turn up even if it was for free.
amirite
Chilla Wilson (44)
If this game took place last year during the inbound tests, so no Wallabies or U20s players, this is close to what the teams would've looked like:
NSW
1. Ryan/Alexander
2. Fainga'a/Mann-Rea
3. Talakai/Weekes
4. Neville/Staniforth
5. Hanigan/Cummins
6. Dennis/Demsey
7. Fainga'a/Reid
8. Holloway/Wells
9. Stirzaker/Meehan
10. Debreczeni/Hegarty
11. English/Dargaville
12. Horowitz/Asquith
13. Inman/Carraro/Smith
14. Robinson
15. Kellaway
QLD
1. Daley/Paraka
2. Ready
3. Fa'agase/Anae
4. Endeavor
5. Jefferies
6. Jones/Korczyk
7. Gill/Butler
8. Browning/Fox
9. Lucas/Prior
10. Lance/McIntyre
11. Taliauli
12. Paia'aua
13. Ah Wong/Taefu
14. Shipperly/Feauai-Sautia/Kuridrani
15. Harris/Placcid/Toua
Thoughts -
People that ship this concept say it'll look like State of Origin but really it'll look more like City V Country.
Expect to see older guys nursing bumps to take their manager's advice and pull out of this fixture and only the most die-hard of fans to attend (like CvC).
No point doing it unless it has value as a development tool. In a crowded calendar, does it?
NSW
1. Ryan/Alexander
2. Fainga'a/Mann-Rea
3. Talakai/Weekes
4. Neville/Staniforth
5. Hanigan/Cummins
6. Dennis/Demsey
7. Fainga'a/Reid
8. Holloway/Wells
9. Stirzaker/Meehan
10. Debreczeni/Hegarty
11. English/Dargaville
12. Horowitz/Asquith
13. Inman/Carraro/Smith
14. Robinson
15. Kellaway
QLD
1. Daley/Paraka
2. Ready
3. Fa'agase/Anae
4. Endeavor
5. Jefferies
6. Jones/Korczyk
7. Gill/Butler
8. Browning/Fox
9. Lucas/Prior
10. Lance/McIntyre
11. Taliauli
12. Paia'aua
13. Ah Wong/Taefu
14. Shipperly/Feauai-Sautia/Kuridrani
15. Harris/Placcid/Toua
Thoughts -
- Two decent sides, but still sub-Super standard when they miss the 3-10 Wallabies that're in most Super teams.
- So, this would be a game of somewhere between Super and NRC standard but add in low-prep time. Hm.
- A game like this might be a valuable jersey, but it cheapens the idea of the 2 states going at it in Super rugby. Are these just franchise now? Notice the base of both these teams are the Reds and the Tahs anyway.
People that ship this concept say it'll look like State of Origin but really it'll look more like City V Country.
Expect to see older guys nursing bumps to take their manager's advice and pull out of this fixture and only the most die-hard of fans to attend (like CvC).
No point doing it unless it has value as a development tool. In a crowded calendar, does it?
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
Is Paraka still in the squad ?
amirite
Chilla Wilson (44)
I don't know, but I worked off the 2016 squads for the sake of simplicity.
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
I'll ask Reg on the Reds thread
p.Tah
John Thornett (49)
I mentioned previously State of Origin is League greatest strength but also its weakness because it reinforces it's essentially a NSW and QLD sport.
That's one of the reasons I don't want it in Rugby.
Cheika has suggested a Probables vs Possibles for Wallaby selection instead. Now that's something I'd love to see and support. ARU do this not a NSW vs QLD thing.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...s-to-be-a-unique-product-20170209-gu92j6.html
That's one of the reasons I don't want it in Rugby.
Cheika has suggested a Probables vs Possibles for Wallaby selection instead. Now that's something I'd love to see and support. ARU do this not a NSW vs QLD thing.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...s-to-be-a-unique-product-20170209-gu92j6.html
WorkingClassRugger
David Codey (61)
Much prefer the Possibles vs Probables set up. Would have a lot more meaning in my mind.
Highlander35
Andrew Slack (58)
Go old school. First forwards and second backs against second forwards and first backs.
waiopehu oldboy
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
Fuck me !
Probables V Possibles
Maybes V Wannaes
Of course I understand why Chek prefers a Not SOO. He is being
inclusive and doesn't want to piss off people outside of QLD and BSW.
The whole concept behind the success of State of Origin is state pride and the intense historic rivalry between the 2 major states of the Commonwealth.
Probables V Possibles
Maybes V Wannaes
Of course I understand why Chek prefers a Not SOO. He is being
inclusive and doesn't want to piss off people outside of QLD and BSW.
The whole concept behind the success of State of Origin is state pride and the intense historic rivalry between the 2 major states of the Commonwealth.
WorkingClassRugger
David Codey (61)
amirite
Chilla Wilson (44)
I think the issue with a Probables V Possibles, SoO, Best Backs/Reverse Forwards V Reserve Backs/Best Forwards is I don't think people will really care. It's a crowded rugby calendar as is.
Presuming people don't care and it ends up looking something like City V Country rugby league, then why would you hold it? Ask yourself, is it a better trial than the hours of game-simulation drills that professional players do?
Test coaches don't lack for data-points when it comes to selecting players or combinations, the usual hurdle is a lack of trust of the newbie and plenty of trust in the incumbent.
Presuming people don't care and it ends up looking something like City V Country rugby league, then why would you hold it? Ask yourself, is it a better trial than the hours of game-simulation drills that professional players do?
Test coaches don't lack for data-points when it comes to selecting players or combinations, the usual hurdle is a lack of trust of the newbie and plenty of trust in the incumbent.
T
TOCC
Guest
I honestly couldn't care less about a possibles vs probables match.. and it certainly won't appeal to the wider market..
Patriotism and a sense of belonging is what drives support, putting two teams out on a pitch with no history, no sense of pride and no means for a fan to draw a sentimental value from isn't going to drive support.
If the SOO concept or similar isn't feasible then they may as well have nothing at all.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Patriotism and a sense of belonging is what drives support, putting two teams out on a pitch with no history, no sense of pride and no means for a fan to draw a sentimental value from isn't going to drive support.
If the SOO concept or similar isn't feasible then they may as well have nothing at all.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
p.Tah
John Thornett (49)
Australia vs Australia A in One Dayers were brilliant. No history, no rivalry but great to watch. In my mind, and perhaps I'm in the minority, probs vs Poss would be similar.
Rugby SOO just makes us look like more like RL's poor cousin.
QLD may love SOO but it's lost its lustre down here. It rates well but the passion of the Blues fans has waned.
Rugby SOO just makes us look like more like RL's poor cousin.
QLD may love SOO but it's lost its lustre down here. It rates well but the passion of the Blues fans has waned.
Scrubber2050
Mark Ella (57)
^^^^
Only lost some interest down there because, over the last several years you have been flogged.
It's very positive up here.
I would think that if Queenslanders had been on the receiving end (as you blokes have) the "passion" to win (and beat NSW) would only be greater.
The "hatred" would grow (which ultimately leads to greater rivalry, support, bums on seats and greater viewers - more money).
Rugby has tried to engage all by having teams such as the Brums, Force and Rebels and the inclusion of many "foreign" players.
There is nothing wrong with trying to ignite that tense state rivalry that already exists in a seething way between the 2 big rugby States. It may be a great success but the secret is the KISS formula.
Only lost some interest down there because, over the last several years you have been flogged.
It's very positive up here.
I would think that if Queenslanders had been on the receiving end (as you blokes have) the "passion" to win (and beat NSW) would only be greater.
The "hatred" would grow (which ultimately leads to greater rivalry, support, bums on seats and greater viewers - more money).
Rugby has tried to engage all by having teams such as the Brums, Force and Rebels and the inclusion of many "foreign" players.
There is nothing wrong with trying to ignite that tense state rivalry that already exists in a seething way between the 2 big rugby States. It may be a great success but the secret is the KISS formula.
p.Tah
John Thornett (49)
^^^ I just think SOO sends the wrong message for rugby. Im supportive of rugby having a national foot print so every time someone wants to watch the game, play the game or officiate it can do so. Focusing on QLD and NSW origins just shrinks the game back.
When we should be celebrating the development of a the Wallabies raised in the ACT and the new crop beginning to come through WA and Victoria and even Coleman from Tasmania we are taking a step back by just focusing on the traditional states.
When the Swans we're doing well I jumped on the bandwagon and really enjoyed their success. Then during one Grandfinal the Melbourne media kept referring to South Melboune Swans and celebrating that the clubs roots were Victorian. I was unaware of the relocation story before then. I was new to the sport and a bit felt cheated. Although many Swans players have been raised in NSW for some reason the Way the Melboune media carried on with the South Melbourne reference and glossing over Sydney really grated on me. It reinforced that this was a Melbourne sport.
I see parallels with the SOO for rugby. We've made tentative inroads into growing the game outside the Private school network of Sydney and Brisbane.
In my view a Rugby SOO where Brumby, Rebels and Force players jump ship and play in NSW and QLD colours just reinforces a stereotype we need to brake.
It's a step back on two fronts:
1. A poor man's RL rip off
2. A retraction in the growth we're trying to bring to the game
My gut feeling is that at the moment, QLD is in a rut and the SOO concept is an attempt to make the QLD supporters feel good by bringing the boys home so it can beat its chest over the development of players.
When we should be celebrating the development of a the Wallabies raised in the ACT and the new crop beginning to come through WA and Victoria and even Coleman from Tasmania we are taking a step back by just focusing on the traditional states.
When the Swans we're doing well I jumped on the bandwagon and really enjoyed their success. Then during one Grandfinal the Melbourne media kept referring to South Melboune Swans and celebrating that the clubs roots were Victorian. I was unaware of the relocation story before then. I was new to the sport and a bit felt cheated. Although many Swans players have been raised in NSW for some reason the Way the Melboune media carried on with the South Melbourne reference and glossing over Sydney really grated on me. It reinforced that this was a Melbourne sport.
I see parallels with the SOO for rugby. We've made tentative inroads into growing the game outside the Private school network of Sydney and Brisbane.
In my view a Rugby SOO where Brumby, Rebels and Force players jump ship and play in NSW and QLD colours just reinforces a stereotype we need to brake.
It's a step back on two fronts:
1. A poor man's RL rip off
2. A retraction in the growth we're trying to bring to the game
My gut feeling is that at the moment, QLD is in a rut and the SOO concept is an attempt to make the QLD supporters feel good by bringing the boys home so it can beat its chest over the development of players.
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Right on p.Tah........
The idea is a regressive, gimmicky
I will have to defend the South Melbourne thing though as the team is still strongly aligned to the SMFC and the larger 'Bloods' supporter base down there.........
However, during last year's finals build up the Swans were definitely Sydney, as Melbourne got around the Doggies.
The idea is a regressive, gimmicky
I will have to defend the South Melbourne thing though as the team is still strongly aligned to the SMFC and the larger 'Bloods' supporter base down there.........
However, during last year's finals build up the Swans were definitely Sydney, as Melbourne got around the Doggies.
- Status