If you were a 2024 State of Origin selector...

[GC2015]

It's that time of the year when the NRL's State of Origin has rolled around again (this Wednesday night) so enivtably we are going to have discussions about our own hypothetical State of Origin competition.

So, if you were a 2024 AFL State of Origin selector for any state of your choosing, who is making your team? Injuries / suspensions can be ignored and the last version of State of Origin criteria is applied - most amount of time spent in a state between the ages of 13-18 (with the exception of boarders).

I'm sure people will be shocked at the strength of some states. Particularly New South Wales.

 

[RUNVS]

B: Cunningham, Murray, H.Himmelberg
HB: Williams, Buckley, Blakey
C: Gulden, Steele, Heeney
HF: Wicks, Walker, Kennedy
F: Schultz, Hawkins, Finlayson
Foll: Witts, Green, Hopper
Int: Perryman, Campbell, Marshall, Rampe

Taking injuries into account and not including Mills this is the team I can think of.

I am not happy with Hawkins being in the team as he is no where near what he used to be, but I can't think of anyone else to replace him.

 

[OniAu]

If we cant have SOO , can we at least have players named officially in teams for it. Just for funsies

 

[Cmarsh]

B: Cunningham, Murray, H.Himmelberg
HB: Williams, Buckley, Blakey
C: Gulden, Steele, Heeney
HF: Wicks, Walker, Kennedy
F: Schultz, Hawkins, Finlayson
Foll: Witts, Green, Hopper
Int: Perryman, Campbell, Marshall, Rampe

Taking injuries into account and not including Mills this is the team I can think of.

I am not happy with Hawkins being in the team as he is no where near what he used to be, but I can't think of anyone else to replace him.

Your comment about Hawkins epitomizes why SoO doesn't work. Just not enough depth in certain states to make it viable.

 

[RUNVS]

Your comment about Hawkins epitomizes why SoO doesn't work. Just not enough depth in certain states to make it viable.

That is a good team though. It would be better than majority of AFL teams.

 

[Cmarsh]

That is a good team though. It would be better than majority of AFL teams.

It is a good team but if a few are unavailable due to injury in a real match against a southern state side it gets exposed in a pretty bad way. Hence my comment about depth.

 

[RUNVS]

It is a good team but if a few are unavailable due to injury in a real match against a southern state side it gets exposed in a pretty bad way. Hence my comment about depth.

Not sure to be honest. I think that team can beat Queensland and South Australia.

 

[GC2015]

B: Cunningham, Murray, H.Himmelberg
HB: Williams, Buckley, Blakey
C: Gulden, Steele, Heeney
HF: Wicks, Walker, Kennedy
F: Schultz, Hawkins, Finlayson
Foll: Witts, Green, Hopper
Int: Perryman, Campbell, Marshall, Rampe

Taking injuries into account and not including Mills this is the team I can think of.

I am not happy with Hawkins being in the team as he is no where near what he used to be, but I can't think of anyone else to replace him.

Couldn't Marshall just go straight into the starting forward line and replace him with a versatile player on the bench? Walker and Marshall together isn't a bad combination.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Your comment about Hawkins epitomizes why SoO doesn't work. Just not enough depth in certain states to make it viable.

Its difficult to structure, but if players clubs, league and broadcasters wanted it it could be made to work.
Two, or maybe three divisions.
Vic, WA, SA top division and maybe NSW. Qld, Tas, NT then are division 2. Sure, Tas and NT would be playing players from outside the AFL system, but that's fine.
Or just Vic, WA, SA top division; NSW v Qld as div 2, Tas v NT as div 3.
Either way with promotion playoffs on the week of the div1 final.

It wouldn't be every year, maybe players would only play a handful of game across a career. But it seems younger fans don't want it, clubs and the league don't want it, players when surveyed say they do but would they actually turn out for the state.
Plus the Tas club calling itself "Tasmania" and wrongfully taking a very slightly tweaked the rep jumper shows there is no inclination to cater for even the possibility of SoO.

 

[Cmarsh]

Its difficult to structure, but if players clubs, league and broadcasters wanted it it could be made to work.
Two, or maybe three divisions.
Vic, WA, SA top division and maybe NSW. Qld, Tas, NT then are division 2. Sure, Tas and NT would be playing players from outside the AFL system, but that's fine.
Or just Vic, WA, SA top division; NSW v Qld as div 2, Tas v NT as div 3.
Either way with promotion playoffs on the week of the div1 final.

It wouldn't be every year, maybe players would only play a handful of game across a career. But it seems younger fans don't want it, clubs and the league don't want it, players when surveyed say they do but would they actually turn out for the state.
Plus the Tas club calling itself "Tasmania" and wrongfully taking a very slightly tweaked the rep jumper shows there is no inclination to cater for even the possibility of SoO.

Would an SA team be considered a 'div 1' team currently though or is it just because they are a traditional footy state?

There are suggestions that a current NSW side may beat a current SA side.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Would an SA team be considered a 'div 1' team currently though or is it just because they are a traditional footy state?

There are suggestions that a current NSW side may beat a current SA side.

I think given the history they would have to start division one. Who would actually win currently between SA and NSW, not sure.
With a four team div1, which would allow Vic to play every round, we would find out.
With a 3 team div1, NSW could win their way to the top division the following time around by winning div2 and a promotion playoff (at this point, probably against SA).

 

[RUNVS]

I think given the history they would have to start division one. Who would actually win currently between SA and NSW, not sure.
With a four team div1, which would allow Vic to play every round, we would find out.
With a 3 team div1, NSW could win their way to the top division the following time around by winning div2 and a promotion playoff (at this point, probably against SA).

If I was making State of Origin I would go

Division 1
Vic Metro
Vic Country
Western Australia

Division 2
South Australia
New South Wales/ACT
Queensland/NT

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

If I was making State of Origin I would go

Division 1
Vic Metro
Vic Country
Western Australia

Division 2
South Australia
New South Wales/ACT
Queensland/NT

Then you only have two states taking part, WA and SA. Which defeats the point, imo. Splitting Vic metro and country is fine at junior level, as are the allies, because its about recruitment and not representation.

For ACT and Internationals (and offshore territories) add an extra rule that they qualify for the first qualifying region they lived in after the usual age check.
So Tom Green (ACT, not likely to get a shot at this point) would qualify for NSW because he was recruited into NSW, not because the quite distinct ACT is lumped with NSW.

 

[GC2015]

Then you only have two states taking part, WA and SA. Which defeats the point, imo. Splitting Vic metro and country is fine at junior level, as are the allies, because its about recruitment and not representation.

For ACT and Internationals (and offshore territories) add an extra rule that they qualify for the first qualifying region they lived in after the usual age check.
So Tom Green (ACT, not likely to get a shot at this point) would qualify for NSW because he was recruited into NSW, not because the quite distinct ACT is lumped with NSW.

Why? Under your rule, ACT's Dougal Howard would only be eligible to play for South Australia because Port Adelaide drafted him first. Seems to go against the whole idea of State of Origin. Why not just combine NSW and ACT into one team like they do in rugby league? No one seems to complain about it in the NRL and I doubt many people would complain in the AFL either. The ACT is inside the Giants' academy zone, it makes sense for all their prospects to play for the same SoO state.

The internationals is a challenging one, though. I don't think we really have enough high quality internationals in our game for it to be an issue, but if we ever did then you'd think they would be campaigning for an opportunity to play in a representative game. Maybe there could be a model similar to the Barbarians in rugby union where they choose the best of the internationals in a certain league to play against an actual national team. Still seems unnecessary at this stage.