yes.

Yes, some are.
But they will pick the big 3 nations, regardless of what a player may feel, or what he may think his heritage makes him, or whether he feels Fijian, Tongan, Samoan, Papuan, Scottish, Irish, or Welsh, he is going to choose to play for NZ or England for the opportunity to play in the top tier internationals and Australian for the chance to play in the top tier internationals and SoO

Its more than $0

Akuila Uate was Fijian when he lived in Fiji, his dad was Fijian when he played for Fiji, Akuila Uate was Fijian in 2008 when he played for Fiji. When SoO came calling, he for some reason became a born and bread, died in the wool, sheep shearing, tinny drinking, reincarnation of crocodile dundee apparently.

because mostly they are half d mid-season Anzac tests with a kiwi b team playing because of a lot of convenient injuries. In actual, competitive tests the Kiwis are.......competitive. If they are competitive with the best 17 players Australia can put out, they are likely better than a team with only half of the best players Australia can put out.

I am not going through it all.
Uate came to Australia as a 16 year old youngster and moved to the NSW Central coast and represented Australian Schoolboys in 2005 as any School kid can regardless of Nationality.
He represented Fiji at the last World Cup so did Jarryd Hayne and Ashton Sims Born in Australia and around 60 other Australian born players for other World Cup teams to bolster that Tournaments smaller teams and make them competitive to a point, they knew by doing that it would not affect their chances of being selected for Australia, or NZ or England in the future.

So the Kiwis have played 20 recent Test matches against Oz and could not give a toss about 17 of them or even pick a strong squad? they had a master plan to win the games that count and plan to lose some games on the way to the finals to pounce in the big games?

I wonder why Australia bothers playing Test matches at all if that is the way the Kiwis approach Test games based on your Kiwi theory and England are a walk in the park most games.
Makes a mockery of the game at Test level if you are correct.

England have selected Kiwis, Islanders and Scottish and Welsh players in the past under exactly the same circumstances or worse, England has taken players built and developed elsewhere unlike Australia.

Two Australian born players were in the Kiwis World Cup winning Team including their Captain.

Im not so quick to decide, on behalf of Uate, that he only decided to represent the country of his birth and where he spend his childhood purely ‘to make them competitive’ in the world cup. Im not so quick to decide on behalf of Akuila Uate that his being a born and bread Fijian is secondary to his economic migration to Australia. You are.

For some reason you cant see that given a straight choice some of those who have chosen to play for Australia via birth or residency ahead of their nations of birth or heritage, that all things being equal, some of them may have chosen to stick with their nations of heritage or birth.

I don’t know whether Akuila Uate would have stuck with Fiji if it meant he could play SoO and in top tier internationals. But I think that is what we should be finding out.



Maybe the Kiwis would like to pick a strong squad, but there seems to be an awful lot of convenient injuries to Kiwi players in mid-season tests. A lot of minor surgery seems to be arranged for that time of year.
THey probably wont in the near future. The Anzac test will probably be gone pretty soon.
And i have no problem with any of them choosing to do so. Whether they choose to play for England, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand is fine with me. It is however wrong that a player would lose so much by choosing to play for Fiji over Australia.

Ok done Smokey.
I would have no issues if one day a player that learnt his craft in England turned around an said my parents are Australians I want to play for them. That is never going to happen though.

The NRL builds players from all nations many times through Government Grants and School Scholarships and if they play for Australia its theft of a player, if like Benji Marshall ex Oz Schoolboy its developing other Nations players I guess.

Im not saying anything like that at all, however much you seem to be wishing I was.

Im simply saying that if a player wants to play SoO and top tier internationals he shouldn’t be forced to choose Australia/England/NZ.

If Akuila Uate wants to play for Australia fine, good luck to him. But he should do that because he wants to play for Australia not because if he chooses Fiji he misses out on Origin and top tier internationals.

[url=http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/kiwis-hit-out-at-origin-coaches-as-kasiano-nears-maroons-switch-20120617-20ida.html?$50,000 for your loyalty.[/url

Shocking and it will only get worse until something is done to stop it. I love Origin but not at the expense of Test Footy!!

The quote from Taumolo says it all. When interviewed after SOO one he said, in his Kiwi bro accent, "It was great, everything I expected it to be. Getting an Australian jersey was just an added bonus." Shows how cheap representing the green and gold has become. Dally Messenger will be turning in his grave!

Is there anyone in the Australian media or current/former players, coaches talking about the the lack of desire to represent the green and gold and test football in general?

Sam Burgess! He was on the NRL on Fox the other week and stated that he wouldn't turn his back on his country for anything or any amount of money.

Sadly SOO rules, its the parochial nature of the states and territories in Australia. Generally the ex players talk about representing their country as the highlight of their career. I do think the demise of proper tours and an Ashes series has contributed to the SOO prominence.

The nzrl will have to match the current soo match payments when their series begins.

Neither did Morley. THe media made up so much crap about him wanting to play Origin and giving up the chance to play Origin.

Utter bolloçks, he was asked if he'd like to play Origin and he said yes, that was it. They made the rest of the crap up as he'd got residency status aswell. more to do with moving back here when he retires than playing for NSW.

The other funny was Dally Cherry Evans being asked to play for England as he mum's English. Guess what. His mum ain't English.

with a name like that there must be some southern toff in him!

[url=http://www.nrl.com/grant-admits-origin-eligibility-an-issue/tabid/10874/newsid/68149/default.aspx?"If the rules are wrong then change the rules."[/url

The 'Make yourself eligible for Aus' rule is a recent one I presume? Didn't Craig Smith (NZ) and Adrian Lam (PNG) both play Origin but stayed loyal to their country?

It's bizarre that it's done at all. State of Origin has nothing to do with national team availability, you qualify through senior rugby league. It doesn't even cover all of Australia ffs. It isn't even like Australia needs the carrot at international level anyway. I genuinely don't understand how where you start a career dictates your national allegience.

Surely Australia wants more competitive internationals and higher profile representative games? Surely diluting Australia and relaxing Origin rules would help with both? Or is it more important to win than improve the game

I think it's more down to the fact that GB haven't been competitive with Australia during pretty much everybody's lifetime. I'm sure if we rattled off a couple of test series in a row (agree about preferring that to Tri-Nations) the international game would peak a bit more.

That said, Saints v Wigan generates more passion at a neighbours level than England v Australia because there's a closer identity with self in those games i.e. it feels like "ours" whereas every Tom, Dick and Harry can ride the coattails of success for internationals (as is often seen with football fans too). I'm sure that sense of identity and beating a local rival, some of whose supporters you may even work with, carries greater sway for the average RL fan than the challenge of an opponent from the other side of the world who you rarely come into contact with.

I disagree, i'd love nothing more than to stick one over the aussies. I'd have wire playing in the Chp if we could give the aussies a few good pastings and see their smug faces wiped clean

www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/ ... 6399211464 According to the poll at the end of this article, 80% do not want players to be allowed to play origin unless they sign up to play for Austrailia. Although the question in the poll is biased. Its the exact opposite to the British RL flatcapper who doesnt want Chase, Widdop, Widdop, Read, Brough etc to sign up to play for England.

www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/ ... 6399211464 According to the poll at the end of this article, 80% do not want players to be allowed to play origin unless they sign up to play for Austrailia. Although the question in the poll is biased. Its the exact opposite to the British RL flatcapper who doesnt want Chase, Widdop, Widdop, Read, Brough etc to sign up to play for England.

State of Origin gives us a fantastic blueprint for taking the international game forward and making it more valuable.

If internationals were played under "Origin rules", if the refereeing of facials, high tackles, biff and the like was as lax in international games as it is Origin there would be much more interest, especially from fair-weather fans and non-fans who might not otherwise be interested in League.

Is it coincidence that in the last 10 years especially Origin has been taken to new heights? I don't reckon so. Origin is getting more popular because the stuff that's been removed from League, the sanatisation of the game, hasn't been applied to Origin.

Bring back the tri-nations and referee it under Origin rules. It'll take maybe 5 years but you'd soon fill stadiums and significantly increase tv viewership if you give people the unregulated biff, niggle and hatred.

On the other hand, think of the children!

rancid makes a bloody good point. Everyone seemingly raves about Origin, but turns a blind eye to the plain fact that it isn't the same game that we watch week in week out. As people the world over do seem to love that version of league, how come it exists without demur, rather with glowing approval, yet anyone wanting to play the same game in our normal comps would be shot down in flames?

You and me too but I reckon most people's priorities are with their local team.



Perhaps that's more a question of culture and civilisation than it is of RL identity. You only have to go back a year or two to read about the horrendous culture that's bred around the NRL and its players to get some idea of that.

What horrendous culture? The culture in the NRL is the same as in every professional sport

Did you used to go to the proper Int's back in the 90's when we could raw 60k to Wembley for test matches? You can;t tell me there wasn;t passion and feeling in the fans for those games.

I'm not paparazzi follower but the stories emanating from Australia over the past decade of things like gang rape, Greg Bird, Matty Johns don't appear to be as prevalent amongst UK players. I'm not saying they're angels over here because they're not but it is the national sport in Australia and thus there will be a connection to society because that's how these things work.



I never said there wasn't any feeling or passion in them because there still is now but you know, as well as I do, that the feeling and passion is stronger when you're watching your team versus your closest rivals. More people travel to France to watch their own team than do to watch England when they play there.