Queensland Rugby League CEO Bruce Hatcher has suggested that State of Origin rules regarding the eligibility of Pacific Island players should not change.

It has been widely reported that the NRL would consider tinkering with the current eligibility rules should Tonga and Samoa be given Tier 1 status.

Tonga made the semi-finals at the 2017 Rugby League World Cup and quarter-finals of the most recently completed tournament, losing to Samoa, who made the final of the tournament in England, and have made the quarter-finals of the previous two editions.

Both Pacific Island nations had numerous State of Origin players in their ranks, with the Australian Rugby League Commission's current map for eligibility stating that players may play for New South Wales or Queensland while representing a Tier 2 nation.

No players who choose to represent another Tier 1 nation - New Zealand or England - may play for either state in the Origin series however, a move which has ended Victor Radley's chances of playing for New South Wales in the future after he played for England during the World Cup.

Hatcher told News Corp though that he would fight any changes to the rules, even if Tonga and Samoa become Tier 1 nations.

“I am a great believer in leaving Origin as it stands," Hatcher told News Corp.

“The rules have worked very well. I would be very reluctant to tinker with them. There is a lot of pride in playing for Queensland. It's different. It's unique.

“It has worked well as it is. I have got no problem with people being concerned about expanding the interests of international football but I wouldn't want to make people play for Queensland whose major objective is playing for the country of their birth (other than Australia)."

There have been some suggestions that other Tier 1 players could also play State of Origin, although it's unclear where the ARLC sits on that issue.

The IRL have so far made no suggestion that Tonga or Samoa would become Tier 1 nations, with multiple factors outside of on-field performance also set to go into any decision.

It's understood that following the recent tournament in England, where Matt Parish's side lost the final to the Kangaroos, multiple Samoan players gave their long-term commitment to the island nation.

All of Brian To'o, Stephen Crichton, Jarome Luai, Josh Papalii and Junior Paulo played State of Origin, before going on to represent Samoa this year, while a trio of players in the Kangaroos' squad - Tino Fa'asuamaleaui, Murray Taulagi and Jeremiah Nanai - could have done the same but opted against it.

Jaydn Su'A and Hamiso Tabuai-Fidow have also played Origin previously but represented Samoa.

Tonga also named a handful of players who either played Origin this year, or have done previously, with David Fifita, Moeaki Fotuaika, William Hopoate, Felise Kaufusi, Siosifa Talakai and Daniel Tupou running out for Mate Ma'a.

Valentine Holmes was the only other multi-eligible player in the Kangaroos squad, with the gun Cowboys and Queensland centre able to represent the Cook Islands if he so chose.

Should the Origin eligibility rules change, or Samoa and Tonga become Tier 1 nations, the ability for all of those players to represent both State and Pacific Island nation of heritage, would disappear.

2 COMMENTS

  1. State of Origin eligability rules should not be determined by what country Polynesian players decide to play for. There is plenty of talent in the NRL to fill those origin spots.

  2. Toowoomba Knight: The SOO Eligibility Rules start with the words: “To qualify for State Of Origin you must be eligible and elect to play for Australia and have not represented another Tier 1 nation at senior level”.

    Once a player elects to play for Samoa / Tonga / Cook Islands / PNG he has elected to play for some other country. ie he does not “elect to play for Australia”. On that basis, he should not be eligible for SOO.

    However, the statement seems to be interpreted as “you can keep changing your mind about whether you want to play for a Pacific Island or for Australia, and we will continue to let you play SOO”.

    Is that good for the game?

    I have no objection to a player who is qualified to play for Australia, but who can’t make the national team, going to play for a tier 2 nation. It makes that team more competitive (though whether it boosts the quality/ attraction of league in those tier 2 countries is another issue).

    What I would like to see is that unless and until a tier 2 player says: “I renounce playing for my tier 2 country, and elect to play for Australia (if selected)”, he should not be eligible to play SOO.

    That – I think – is what was intended by that first statement in the SOO Eligibility rules.

    ie if a guy wants to play for Australia, (and is eligible to play for Australia), he is eligible for SOO selection. If he doesn’t want to play for the Australian national team, then he is not eligible.

Comments are closed.