THE showpiece of rugby league hit our screens on Wednesday night and it left many footy fans wondering, 'why can't we do something like that?'

True, State of Origin has had its place in the AFL world and as long as the concept works for rugby league there will be calls to bring it back to our game.

But we have to get over the envy that another code has something better than us and ask ourselves, 'do we really need it?'

State of Origin is without question the highlight of the rugby league calendar but when the bulk of players come from only two states, it makes sense that they would play off against each other.

If State of Origin were to return to the AFL it would also have to be a yearly game between the same two camps to build any rivalry.

The most traditional state rivalry was always Victoria v South Australia but if we were to settle on these two, we would be neglecting the vast talents from everywhere else in the country.

And it would be ludicrous to think that Tasmanian Jack Riewoldt, his Queensland cousin Nick, West Australian Lance Franklin and Northern Territorian Cyril Rioli to name a few, would not be eligible to play in a game supposedly featuring the best players in the land.

The most recent attempt to revive State of Origin came in the 2008 Hall of Fame tribute match when Victoria took on an All Star team.

Undoubtedly, those wearing the Big V took some pride in that honour, but how motivated would you be to represent the best of the rest? It was a success but only because we all knew it was going to be a one-off.

Rugby league is one of the few sports that has fostered a genuinely competitive and captivating representative contest in the middle of its season. But have a look abroad and you see plenty of examples of the idea not quite working out.

The NBA All-Star game is little more than a series of laid-back party tricks while players run around smiling and back-slapping each other.

The NFL All Star game is really just a junket to Hawaii that this year didn't even feature players from the two best teams as it was one week before the Superbowl. In years past, it was held in the week after the Superbowl, when all players were well and truly in party mode.

As for soccer, how often do we hear of European clubs making life hard for their highly-paid players who want to leave to play international mid-season friendlies?

Let's also not forget why State of Origin wound up as a regular concept back in 1999. The stars were missing out with nagging injuries and clubs were vociferous in their disdain for the idea of their best players having an extra workload.

Twelve years on, with fitness and conditioning staffs monitoring and manipulating every minor detail of player workloads, it would be impossible to convince clubs to allow their stars to play an extra game with no control over their preparation, time on the ground or the position they play. The idea would not work.

Some players have expressed a desire to bring back the concept, but so far it has been little more than a passing thought that has fluttered away into the twittersphere. The difficulty is convincing everyone in 'club land' that it is a good idea.

Rivalries and blockbusters are a weekly occurrence in AFL world, not a best of three mid-season exhibition.

Wednesday night's clash between the Maroons and the Blues drew a 'blockbuster' crowd of 52,144. Four days earlier, more than 82,000 people came through the turnstiles to watch a home and away game between Richmond and Essendon.

Maybe State of Origin works for rugby league because it genuinely means something to the players.

That said, it was only two years ago that Karmichael Hunt and Israel Folau were teammates in Queensland's 2-1 series win over New South Wales.

An honour, but apparently one they could live without.

The views in this story are those of the author and not necessarily those of the clubs or the AFL.