And Fabian curved it up today in grade.
A
An excellent half back. I think the point if the question was to nominate a half back who didn't get an opportunity to be seen by the relevant selectors.
Forgive me if I am wrong, but a handful of minutes off the bench in each of the national competition games would suggest he does fit in that category.A
An excellent half back. I think the point if the question was to nominate a half back who didn't get an opportunity to be seen by the relevant selectors.
I don't think it's game time or a better selection process that is needed. We have the skills and drive to match it with England and SA. Where they do better is the physical and mental development of players from 16 years on. The English players are taken into professional club framework from 16 and given the type of physical development that now sees them bigger and stronger than Oz players at the same age. Yesterday's game reminded me if the game a couple of years ago where an English U18/19 side came here and did a job on our schoolboys and an Oz u19 side . The improvement from then to now by our boys is very promising but until we look at physical development and bringing them into some sort of professional framework from under 16 I don't think we will compete at this level.
The same for SA. It was said during the NZ v SA game that 19 of the squad of 30 came from the Bulls Academy. I bet those players have been there for more than 2 or 3 years
Forgive me if I am wrong, but a handful of minutes off the bench in each of the national competition games would suggest he does fit in that category.
Who are these awesome players that have been overlooked?
Name a better halfback than Angus Pulver.
Suggestions that he is there because of Servo being the CEO is as insulting to the Coach and Selectors as it would be claiming that Cameron Clark is in the Sevens squad because his father is the head commentator for Fox.
By all accounts, the selection and trial process this year has been very thorough.
Plenty of kids without Aust Schoolboy Rockstar CV's have made it into the squad on their talent and application rather than reputation.
Well said and agree 100%From NSW, FABIAN NATOLI at Manly for one . Played 1XV and 2XV for last two seasons consistently well yet dropped for Pulver who plays 2XV colts !
Re Clark, he has developed well but like most of these shoe ins it is about the visibility and Opportunities they get that other boys do not. Many boys are still being picked from schools based on connections rather than boys playing good footy at colts and grade levels. It is still going on believe me.
Bottom line is the results.and AUs looking at 7th place playoffs like last few years. Hats off to England, they chnaged their 'old farts' selection process in 1995 and their setup including their junior setup is flourishing. They have the inclination ($)and population, we have neither !
Wicks 2s have put a lot of teams to the sword this year though. And I think Pulver has reached 3rds in grade.Only the Wicks @Dave Beat. Not as if it was a decent mob.
That's Fabian playing 1st grade (not colts) in a competitive team, not colts or 3rd grade.From NSW, FABIAN NATOLI at Manly for one . Played 1XV and 2XV for last two seasons consistently well yet dropped for Pulver who plays 2XV colts !
From NSW, FABIAN NATOLI at Manly for one . Played 1XV and 2XV for last two seasons consistently well yet dropped for Pulver who plays 2XV colts !
Re Clark, he has developed well but like most of these shoe ins it is about the visibility and Opportunities they get that other boys do not. Many boys are still being picked from schools based on connections rather than boys playing good footy at colts and grade levels. It is still going on believe me.
Not sure how anyone could disagree with your breakdown.You're completely right. Pulver's continued selection over Natoli is a farce and is entirely the product of Angus getting opportunities that Fabian has not had access to, despite being a clearly superior player.
This was evident in 2012 Schoolboys when after initial trials, Pulver was the Combined States halfback whereas Natoli was only given the lesser opportunity of being picked in the starting team for NSW 1sts. It is widely known that CS is a far superior platform for halves to be selected from, due to the dominance of their forwards, and as such Pulver was always a shoe in for the Australian Schoolboys and his selection there can only be seen as a result of being handed opportunities Fabian never had.
What a travesty, but lo and behold the injustice didn't stop there. Whilst both Natoli and Pulver were in the NSW u20s squad and shared the starting jersey during trials, somehow the NSW coaches decided that Angus would be a better option and rewarded him with the starting jersey for the national competition. Apparently it was for "better form" or some drivel like that, but I secretly think it's just because he's the CEO's son.
From there I personally thought Fabian would mesmerise the National selectors with his incredible form off the bench, but it turns out that even they thought Angus was the better option. The pricks must be blind or retarded.
It's obvious that Natoli's been robbed of the Australian u20s 9 jersey. If anyone can name one opportunity that Pulver's had that Natoli's also shared then I'll eat my hat. Until then, everyone join me taking up torches and pitchforks because I won't rest until this abomination of selection process is corrected.
.
Or maybe, just MAYBE, these three sets of independent selectors saw something in Pulver you lot didn't? Can anyone honestly say that they would have Natoli over Jake Gordon or Jock Merrimen as the starting halfback for Manly if those two were also at the club?
Pulver is a fine player, but he was the victim of the points system in Colts and now he's the victim of the embarrassment of riches that Sydney Uni has in regard to halfback options in its Grade setup.
Whilst I agree that the selection process for Aus u20s isn't perfect, this years been a marked improvement on previous years, and methinks that Pulver is simply an easy target for us to vent our frustrations through.
Sure we lost to England when a lot of us would have preferred for the boys in NZ to win, but they were a very strong team and theres no shame in losing to a better side. I hardly think that its fair that members of this forum place the responsibility for that result on individuals such as Placid or Pulver.
Not so much the point I was trying to make, yesterday I read Kellaway should get a contract, and I'd like him to prove he could at least hold his own in first grade.Additionally, I'd like to add that despite the U20s being a great experience and platform for exposure, when both men are 25 it will only be one of many reasons they are where they stand in the rugby world.
Not sure how anyone could disagree with your breakdown.
I saw Pulver play 3rds against Manly.
I saw Fabian play against Randwick yesterday.
The difference was enormous BUT rugby is a team sport and it is always hard to isolate and compare players in different games. Fabian carved them up yesterday, and pulled off some awesome tackles.
I was being sarcastic, hopefully that came through haha. I personally think Pulver is the more complete player. Both he and Fabian are very physical halfbacks, but I think Fabian needs to work on certain aspects of his game, such as his pass. It's a shame that both couldn't be in the squad, but Powell deserved his selection, and sometimes a few players who probably deserve to be there as well miss out. If we took every u20 that has performed well in his respective sides over the last two years, we'd have about 100 players on tour. Such is life.
I don't think it's game time or a better selection process that is needed. We have the skills and drive to match it with England and SA. Where they do better is the physical and mental development of players from 16 years on. The English players are taken into professional club framework from 16 and given the type of physical development that now sees them bigger and stronger than Oz players at the same age. Yesterday's game reminded me if the game a couple of years ,ago where an English U18/19 side came here and did a job on our schoolboys and an Oz u19 side . The improvement from then to now by our boys is very promising but until we look at physical development and bringing them into some sort of professional framework from under 16 I don't think we will compete at this level.
The same for SA. It was said during the NZ v SA game that 19 of the squad of 30 came from the Bulls Academy. I bet those players have been there for more than 2 or 3 years