- Moderator
- #1
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
From the AFLs 1998 Annual Report
View attachment 1511936
View attachment 1511937
View attachment 1511939
A very accurate picture of Origin in the AFL then.
My view is that the 'best of the best' concept is attractive now & the AFL must eye the financial bonanza Origin is for its closest rival the NRL.
i Agree. Origin or some sort of Allstar game is inevitable if they want to add value to rights
The big plus for Origin is the commitment of the players - the comparison with the all star model is arguably lazy & misleading.
The problem is the number of players that have to be released for a meaningful origin series. Allstar means the minimum and most likely to be supported by the clubs.
Agreed, people need to have a vested interest, whilst many would interested in watching traditional SOO the players and the clubs just aren’t interested, firstly it would have to be played on a bye round (lots of players nip overseas that week) or at the end of the season during players off time (good luck with that), the appetite for football among the public would also be very low at that time of year.Cant see people being interested in an Allstar game.
Sadly, because the sport itself is now run by the league, they basically see the league itself as the sport. Hence the confusion with some people calling the sport itself "AFL"...It still gives an incentive for players in terms of representation, allows us to concentrate the national talent pool into one instead of several different games, and could be a good curtain raiser for a season in late Feb/early March.
Nil - a game of footy without passion cannot be compared to Origin.A lot of the points in the report probably still hold true: what would be the appetite for an annual, one-game, national "city v. country" all-star game? Bush v. the Big Smoke?
It still gives an incentive for players in terms of representation, allows us to concentrate the national talent pool into one instead of several different games, and could be a good curtain raiser for a season in late Feb/early March.
Better than nothing I guessI accept that SOO for our game is probably dead, but why can't we at least select a team for each of the States?
Bit of harmless, cheap fun, creates discussion and would provide the AFL with more media coverage which it craves.
Put it on Fox Footy and / or free to air, a 2 hour show during GF week or during the pre finals bye. Half hour per team, an interview with the captain, the coach with a few highlights of the some of the selected players.
I accept that SOO for our game is probably dead, but why can't we at least select a team for each of the States?
Bit of harmless, cheap fun, creates discussion and would provide the AFL with more media coverage which it craves.
Put it on Fox Footy and / or free to air, a 2 hour show during GF week or during the pre finals bye. Half hour per team, an interview with the captain, the coach with a few highlights of the some of the selected players.
That might be interesting if it drove enough discussion and hype to get people to want to bring back SoO. But if it was just a media thing, I feel it'd just be a whole bunch of inferior rep team opinions and just more media junk. Even the AA team which is effectively a similar concept but superior teams cops enough heat and criticism every year. But I do like it if it drove enough talk for people to give playing it a shot again.I accept that SOO for our game is probably dead, but why can't we at least select a team for each of the States?
Bit of harmless, cheap fun, creates discussion and would provide the AFL with more media coverage which it craves.
Put it on Fox Footy and / or free to air, a 2 hour show during GF week or during the pre finals bye. Half hour per team, an interview with the captain, the coach with a few highlights of the some of the selected players.
That might be interesting if it drove enough discussion and hype to get people to want to bring back SoO. But if it was just a media thing, I feel it'd just be a whole bunch of inferior rep team opinions and just more media junk. Even the AA team which is effectively a similar concept but superior teams cops enough heat and criticism every year. But I do like it if it drove enough talk for people to give playing it a shot again.
Origin is huge in the NRL, how does this differ from the AFL?A very accurate picture of Origin in the AFL then.
My view is that the 'best of the best' concept is attractive now & the AFL must eye the financial bonanza Origin is for its closest rival the NRL.
Origin is huge in the NRL, how does this differ from the AFL?
1. Established rivalry and tradition
2. The number of states, only being NSW v Queensland means it’s always heavyweight v heavyweight
3. Origin has meaning to the players, they are playing for their state but also for their spot in the Kangaroos
I really like this idea. The reason I've never understood the tribalism around State of Origin (in any code) is because to me the real divide in Australia isn't between states, it's between city and country. People living in Adelaide probably have more in common with Melburnians than they would with people living in Bordertown.A lot of the points in the report probably still hold true: what would be the appetite for an annual, one-game, national "city v. country" all-star game? Bush v. the Big Smoke?
It still gives an incentive for players in terms of representation, allows us to concentrate the national talent pool into one instead of several different games, and could be a good curtain raiser for a season in late Feb/early March.
Origin is huge in the NRL, how does this differ from the AFL?
1. Established rivalry and tradition
2. The number of states, only being NSW v Queensland means it’s always heavyweight v heavyweight
3. Origin has meaning to the players, they are playing for their state but also for their spot in the Kangaroos
Yeah they use to be rep teams from each league then became state of origin. Aussie rules never had two evenly matched rivals like the NRL hasOrigin the AFL had all of the rivalry of the NRL, but the national comp put paid to that. Many here do no know that there were interstate games played in Origin era that were not played under Origin rules.
Its interesting to see the challenge the Pacifika players are making to Origin NRL style.
Vic Country v Vic Metro would be a flop. It’s not under 18s1. Do you honestly think that if given the chance there wouldn't be a rivalry between w.a and Vic, s.a and w.a, Vic country and metro and nsw and qld?
2. The number of states being higher makes it better, a true representation of the actual national code. The strength of Victoria gets spilt by putting then into metro and country, which adds more competitive games across the big 4 and more pride in the Vic jumper, especially for country.
3. Origin would have meaning as you are good enough to be selected for your state, you are seen as the best in the business playing in the best games in front of big crowds and getting paid more than those that don't get selected. Also it's a different experience, imagine a guy like coniglio getting to play for w.a against Vic metro at a full Optus stadium. It's a different experience for players which gives them something to look forward to, particularly if they are in a bottom team that season, with not much to play for.
4. It's a great promotion for the game in the expansion states. Nsw and qld have been told by their local media that nobody plays footy there, switch on the tv 'bloody hell I didn't know we had over 50 players in the AFL (nsw) and tex walker and Hawkins are actually from here'. It helps with brand recognition and player recognition, it's the only way anybody in the southern states knows any nrl players that don't follow the sport closely.