News "State of Origin is back" - Eddie McGuire, March 2025

[Cmarsh]

You definitely need at least 1 year off in every 3 in my opinion for each state team. The players will start to get flaky if they know it's an annual thing.

AFL seem to be heading that way as per the Age article today. Looking at interspersing Origin with an Indigenous all stars game.

 

[GC2015]

QLD need the opportunity for state footy because in 5 years time they'll likely be number 2 ranked team (the side posted leaves out Rogers Lombard and Graham - 3 first round mids), but you wanna have it on show as it's the best promotion for AFL being mainstream in QLD that you could possibly ask for.

You need to look at the significant flow on effects from state of origin, not just the individual games.

This is a really good point. The northern states need to play and build camaraderie if there's ever a hope of them challenging other traditional states one day. Also, in terms of depth, the reason Zeke Uwland was named in the hypothetical 2026 QLD state team isn't because of a lack of depth, it's because most footy followers up here already consider him to be a better player than QLD's 23rd best player (not surprising considering he just went #2 in the draft). As you pointed out, there's other first round draft pick Queenslanders that weren't named in the hypothetical state team that have been in the AFL system for years like Will Graham, Jake Rogers and Leo Lombard and they would easily slot into the QLD state team if there is actually a concern about naming a player that hasn't debuted in the AFL yet. The depth is already there to avoid playing a 0 gamer and it's only going to grow over the coming years as we see more academy graduates come through.

In 3-5 years when the likes of Will Ashcroft, Jaspa Fletcher, Ethan Read, Jed Walter, Jake Rogers, Will Graham, Leo Lombard, Levi Ashcroft & Ty Gallop will be in their prime mid-20s years with approximately 100-150 AFL games under their belt (including many finals matches) and younger QLDers like Zeke Uwland, Daniel Annable & Dylan Patterson will be starting to enter their prime with 75-100 AFL games to their name, Queensland will be absolutely ready to contend with the best states in Australia and would likely beat both SA & WA as well as give Victoria a run for their money. In the meantime, I think you just need to schedule a few state games against the likes of NSW and TAS on the same weekend that we see a blockbuster VIC v WA/SA game to get the Origin ball rolling in the northern states so everything is cherry ripe for a very interesting Origin landscape in the 2030s with 4-5 genuinely strong states teams that can all challenge each other. A great sign that the game has truly gone national and broken out of its geograpical restrictions of the past.

 

[revo333]

A-League all over again, 'needs more teams' 'needs divisions'

Just keep it simple and have one game a season or play it every 2 years.

And nothing at the MCG, games played in WA or SA.

 

[Philhawk]

A-League all over again, 'needs more teams' 'needs divisions'

Just keep it simple and have one game a season or play it every 2 years.

And nothing at the MCG, games played in WA or SA.

Precisely. The AFL will kill this by trying to constantly “innovate”.

 

[Tandy]

The more I think about it the more I’m all for each state having their team. Like many have said the Allies doesn’t work and back in the day never really got the support you’d expect.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

A-League all over again, 'needs more teams' 'needs divisions'

Just keep it simple and have one game a season or play it every 2 years.

And nothing at the MCG, games played in WA or SA.

Yes, strongly agree with this. If the top players have the opportunity to play every year, they'll just find reasons not to. And while Victoria could still field a great squad, even with 15-20 unavailable, the other states pretty quickly drop to 'mediocre AFL side' (or worse) in terms of talent, if you remove a handful of their first choice players.

It needs to be able to survive without Victoria's participation every year and I think it needs to NOT be every year for every team to avoid saturation and players starting to bring a note from their mum.

I always thought the first year would go quite well, it's no surprise. The trick will be seeing how we're going by year 3 or 4 if it's just Victoria v WA or SA at the latter's home ground. I think interest (from the players especially) will drop off rapidly.

 

[Saints43]

You would only have the Allies if you planned for them to play Vic, WA or SA, for the sake of competitiveness and for making SOO a neat 4 team concept.

Having NSW, Qld and Tas sides would be perfectly feasible if they played each other. Well, maybe not Tassie just yet, but certainly once the Devils have been up and running for a while. Let's say NSW playing Qld at this stage, with Tassie coming in at a later stage.

Why don't we have Vic Metro and Vic Country. I reckon that would get a few more Victorians interested and sort out the competitiveness issue.

 

[Pacman82]

Proposed State of Origin for this time next year:

WEEK 1:
Victoria V South AUS - MCG
West AUS V Northern States (NSW/QLD combined) - OPTUS

WEEK 2:
Winner V Winner - MCG or OPTUS

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The more I think about it the more I’m all for each state having their team. Like many have said the Allies doesn’t work and back in the day never really got the support you’d expect.

Having all six states run out in three games across a weekend would be brilliant and the perfect showpiece for the national game.

You can still keep the scarcity by only playing it every 3-4 years, that's the key.

 

[Underarm]

Why don't we have Vic Metro and Vic Country. I reckon that would get a few more Victorians interested and sort out the competitiveness issue.

People would care about the same amount as the Allies.

 

[iameviljez]

Proposed State of Origin for this time next year:

WEEK 1:
Victoria V South AUS - MCG

I reckon this will kill it pretty fast. Better to get a full house at Adelaide Oval than risk 50k at the G.

 

[RUNVS]

Proposed State of Origin for this time next year:

WEEK 1:
Victoria V South AUS - MCG
West AUS V Northern States (NSW/QLD combined) - OPTUS

WEEK 2:
Winner V Winner - MCG or OPTUS

People have no idea about the rivalry between NSW and QLD. They would never play in a combined team like that.

 

[Pacman82]

People have no idea about the rivalry between NSW and QLD. They would never play in a combined team like that.

Just throw them in some old Marcellin College gerseys, jumper sorted..

It'd make for a somewhat competitive team too, both states not having the talent pools alone the other 3 do. I saw the mock QLD side, looked rubbish.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

I think the solution to the 'Allies' problem is just to have a bi-annual NSW vs QLD game that acts as a television curtain raiser for one of the annual VIC vs WA/SA games.

It can be sold to networks as a cheap piggy backing opportunity off the NRL rivalry. The goal shouldn't be to make it into some massive success, which it obviously wouldn't be, but just to maintain some pre-season exposure in the north every two years.

Tasmania should be kept well away from origin because they are the only state with a team already in the main competition and they would be uncompetitive anyway (at least initially).

As others have pointed out, origin became pointless the first time when many Crows and Eagles fans started to see them as effectively their state teams already.

Having non-Tassie born Tasmanian players play against Tassie born non-Tassie players would be stupid and actually harm the regular team's identity.

 

[Underarm]

I think the solution to the 'Allies' problem is just to have a bi-annual NSW vs QLD game that acts as a television curtain raiser for one of the annual VIC vs WA/SA games.

It can be sold to networks as a cheap piggy backing opportunity off the NRL rivalry. The goal shouldn't be to make it into some massive success, which it obviously wouldn't be, but just to maintain some pre-season exposure in the north every two years.

Tasmania should be kept well away from origin because they are the only state with a team already in the main competition and they would be uncompetitive anyway (at least initially).

As others have pointed out, origin became pointless the first time when many Crows and Eagles fans started to see them as effectively their state teams already.

Having non-Tassie born Tasmanian players play against Tassie born non-Tassie players would be stupid and actually harm the regular team's identity.

But even then NSW v QLD would be barely better standard than Sydney v Brisbane, and who wants to risk their players health in a game like that?

WA/VIC/SA Are the only Viable options.

 

[420]

A-League all over again, 'needs more teams' 'needs divisions'

Just keep it simple and have one game a season or play it every 2 years.

And nothing at the MCG, games played in WA or SA.

100%, we are lucky the bigfooty hivemind isn't in charge of the league or we'd have 40+ afl teams and 20+ additional matches per year "so nobody misses out!!1"

 

[GoldbergsGold]

It's the highest standard match possible for Aussie Rules. To suggest SA and WA people are not interested in the highest standard match that is possible to be played is insulting. Do you not like football or something? It was played in 2008 and it was played with no less intensity than Saturday nights game. I was at the 2008 match so I'd know. It also rated through the roof in SA and WA. Through the roof. It was a ratings hit.

Do you want to see Aussie Rules with two equally matched sides played at its highest level or not?

And the fact that Victoria is in the match makes it work. Everyone hates the Vics and wants to beat them. SA fans didn't turn up the last time they played WA in 1998 (the crowd was a pathetic 18,000), but S.O.O isn't about South Australia. It's about playing agaisnt and beating Victoria and always has been. Victoria as an opponent is the golden goose.

The 1998 match between SA and WA was a low-attended joke. No South Australians gave a shit about it. They only care when Victoria is the opponent. That might be an inconvenient truth, but it's a stone cold fact. The crowd figures prove it and the TV ratings from the 2008 Vic vs Rest of Australia match prove it. The TV figures don't lie.

Whilst you're entitled to your opinion, your opinion does not match what the TV ratings were in 2008.

This is ironic, because the 1999 state of origin with Victoria v SA at the MCG was also a low-attended joke, a mere 26,063, Victorian fans didn't turn up for that, yet, you don't apply that same logic. The TV figures were also very high this year for WA v Victoria, so why are you moving the goal posts constantly? You seem to just cherry pick things and ignore the clear success of this year.

 

[Big Blood]

If we’re going to have origin footy do it properly. Make it a real competition and not just a high-scoring exhibition match in the middle of summer.

You can do with three teams, six teams or seven. You can do it as lightning carnival or have a three-year comp, you can do it FA Cup-style knockout or win-loss and percentage, it’s not hard if there is the will.

The biggest factor holding back state footy has been the impact on broadcasters’ audience and profit, but it’s possible to do it in ways that may even be additive. But we have to get serious about it. We are supposedly a great Australian sport yet we are the only one without any representative-level competition. That’s pathetic but I don’t see any sign the league has plans for anything more ambitious than more one-off kick and giggle games.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

No mate. South Australians couldn't give a shit about playing against WA. I don't care if 1998 was a long time ago. The principle remains. S.O.O ONLY works if Victoria is the opponent. That's why it simply must be a Victoria vs Rest Of Australia match. To suggest that the prospect of watching the best 46 players in the Australia in the same match is not desireable is idiotic.

It didn't work in 1996, 35k went to see Victoria verse the Allies at the MCG, and then in 1999 vs SA at the MCG it was 26k. You can move the goalposts all you want, but it's clear even interest in Victoria declined significantly. There was only interest in 2008 because of the long hiatus and promotion around the 150th anniversary, but even that couldn't compete with the highs of 1989 where it was almost 92k at the MCG Victoria versing SA.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

I vote for thread-bans for anyone proposing the re-introduction of the Allies.

Include All of Australia except Victorians, ie The Dream Team and All-Stars concept, too.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

Scarcity is what makes it special. I think they could almost treat it like a World Cup (like cricket or soccer) and actually have a State of Origin tournament every 4 years. All states involved in a round robin 4 week tournament in a different host city each tournament. Builds anticipation when it comes around each period, all eyes will be on one particular host city (like Gather round). Players will want to make themselves available when they might only get 2 times in their career to play and represent their state.

It should stay an exhibition, it's better than a NAB Cup type of preseason match. But I think you're right about the scarcity being key, because people will take it for granted. Maybe rotate which 2 state of origin teams play each year. It shouldn't be a competition, the premiership season is what matters most.

 

[Dan26]

It didn't work in 1996, 35k went to see Victoria verse the Allies at the MCG, and then in 1999 vs SA at the MCG it was 26k. You can move the goalposts all you want, but it's clear even interest in Victoria declined significantly. There was only interest in 2008 because of the long hiatus and promotion around the 150th anniversary, but even that couldn't compete with the highs of 1989 where it was almost 92k at the MCG Victoria versing SA.

The Allies is not "the Rest if Australia". No one cares about the Allies and it's a stupid example. The Rest of Australia is everyone not from Victoria which is an astonishingly good team, which rated through the roof in 2008. More WA people and SA people watched the 2008 Vic vs Dream Team game than any Eagles or Crows macth that year.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

The ongoing structure to this concept actually feels quite simple to me.

I personally loved the time of year it was held, however I acknowledge the potential issues with the heat and player conditioning. Happy for it to be played 2-3 weeks before the start of the season proper (as long as the opening round concept is finally done away with).

So, here it is.

2027 - SA vs Vic (Adelaide Oval)

2028 - WA vs SA (Optus) Winner plays Victoria the following season.
Vic vs Allies (Marvel) Essentially am exhibition game to see how an Allies team would actually perform.

2029 - Winner of previous year between SA and WA vs Victoria
Loser of previous year vs Allies (Winner of this plays winner of first game the following year)

Then just repeat, repeat, repeat every year. I'm sure WA and SA would exchange victories often enough, and there is the potential for an Allies upset somewhere along the way until they ultimately become just as competitive.

It should always be a night game. I know because of the time zone differences for interstate TV they had to have it at twilight, but you can tell it negatively affected the players playing in 30 degree heat. And I think Victoria v SA or Victoria v WA will always be the main draw, as opposed to WA v SA.

 

[Dan26]

This is ironic, because the 1999 state of origin with Victoria v SA at the MCG was also a low-attended joke, a mere 26,063, Victorian fans didn't turn up for that, yet, you don't apply that same logic. The TV figures were also very high this year for WA v Victoria, so why are you moving the goal posts constantly? You seem to just cherry pick things and ignore the clear success of this year.

The 1999 match was pouring with rain. And when I say pouring I mean POURING. The weather ruined the game. Also, Victorian fans want to see a contest and very rarely do we get one in S.O.O at the MCG. The reason the 1989 clash was so well attended was because S.A had won the last 3 times and the Vic fans were baying for blood. It's rare for Victoria to be beaten three times in a row, because they are normally so dominant, so when it happens, the Vic fans turned out.

The reality is the "Rest of Australia" picking from a pool of 50% of the AFL population is the only team that could rival the Vics in talent head-to-head consistently.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

The Allies is not "the Rest if Australia".

I didn't say they were, but it's the same idea as the Dream Team/All-Star idea to combine players from multiple states together.

No one cares about the Allies and it's a stupid example. The Rest of Australia is everyone not from Victoria which is an astonishingly good team, which rated through the roof in 2008. More WA people and SA people watched the 2008 Vic vs Dream Team game than any Eagles or Crows macth that year.

There's no turf/tribalistic appeal to a Non-Victorians team, as opposed to Victoria who is the only real represented state side. WA viewership was barely more than SA in 2008, when WA is larger than SA in population. It was 1.3 million over all in 2008, whereas on the weekend it was 2.4 million viewership over all platforms and a crowd of 58k.