ACTJRU U18 & ACT Schools XV 2014

[No.8]

Wow - no 2nd/3rd grade players to play????? No u16's?????

 

[Keiran]

Wow - no 2nd/3rd grade players to play????? No u16's?????

Yeah pretty hard to understand with SEC 2nd and 3rd XV's playing. Royals also had 3 players rested with the schoolboys without the luxury of even a 2nd XV.

There are serious issues with player depth in the ACTJRU at the 16's and 18's age groups. 1st division 18's only had 7 teams and 16's 1st division 5 teams.

 

[No.8]

Yeah pretty hard to understand with SEC 2nd and 3rd XV's playing. Royals also had 3 players rested with the schoolboys without the luxury of even a 2nd XV.

There are serious issues with player depth in the ACTJRU at the 16's and 18's age groups. 1st division 18's only had 7 teams and 16's 1st division 5 teams.

Maybe a loss would be harder to take than a forfeit?? - I heard all the front rowers were out with the A.C.T and they had 5 starting players out with injuries - but still - you would think they could play there whole 2nd XV and still beat Royals 1st XV (No disrepect) or has Eddies really go that backwards with their Rugby - I remember back in the day Eddies 1st Div u16 team prob could of beaten alot of 1st XV sides - I remember them even having u15 players playing/benching for 1st XV.

 

[Keiran]

Maybe a loss would be harder to take than a forfeit?? - I heard all the front rowers were out with the A.C.T and they had 5 starting players out with injuries - but still - you would think they could play there whole 2nd XV and still beat Royals 1st XV (No disrepect) or has Eddies really go that backwards with their Rugby - I remember back in the day Eddies 1st Div u16 team prob could of beaten alot of 1st XV sides - I remember them even having u15 players playing/benching for 1st XV.

I would seriously doubt if Eddies 2nd XV would come anywhere near Royals. It should also be remembered Eddies only had 1 more player rested for Schoolboys. If a club side with a squad of 23 with 3 players rested and several injuries of their own are willing to play you would imagine Eddies could have played. I agree Eddies would take a forfeit before a loss, but all this has really done is all but guarantee Royals a top 4 spot in the finals at the expense of Darra I'd imagine.

 

[exISA]

I would seriously doubt if Eddies 2nd XV would come anywhere near Royals. It should also be remembered Eddies only had 1 more player rested for Schoolboys. If a club side with a squad of 23 with 3 players rested and several injuries of their own are willing to play you would imagine Eddies could have played. I agree Eddies would take a forfeit before a loss, but all this has really done is all but guarantee Royals a top 4 spot in the finals at the expense of Darra I'd imagine.

Dunno if I agree with this - and if its true its weak sauce.

Forfeit = still a loss.

Play the game if you are only down 3 players. There must be a good reason not to play the game beacuse if its seroiusly only 3 players there is something not right with taking a forfeit because you are scared of losing the game. A forfeit is still a loss!

 

[angrydog]

The whole Eddies forfeit situation seems very bizarre, can anybody actually explain the reason? A quick scan of the St Edmunds rugby website tells me they have 19 teams across the school which is promoting it's 60th anniversary this year.

Considering these numbers, it seems very odd that they could not fill the gaps adequately to mount a challenge against Royals. There is very little character shown in a forfeit, even less when you have 19 sides to draw a 1st XV from. A loss on the other hand, no matter how big or small will almost always show a sides character as well as go a long way to developing it further. Poor form from Eddies me thinks.

 

[No.8]

They did have 8 players out - but still! Are the ACT u16's/15's on at the sametime as the 18's?

When I was playing schoolboys - it was not strange to see u15's/16's sitting on the 1st XV bench or even in some games starting.

 

[Keiran]

15's cannot play 18's under the ARU's 2 year window policy. 16's can with a clearance, and play at 1.00pm, 1st XV play at 3.00pm. What I can't understand is forfeiting in the first division. Why not forfeit 3rd's and fill upwards. Across their 3 18's teams you would be looking at a player base of 60 players or so. Couldn't see them forfeiting a finals game in 18's first division because of player unavailability.

 

[Keiran]

We forfeited a few years back against SEC and Marist and got well spanked. Clubs find it hard to field teams in older age groups, but the schools have a captive market. That said I believe Marist have more students playing other winter sports than rugby.

 

[No.8]

15's cannot play 18's under the ARU's 2 year window policy. 16's can with a clearance, and play at 1.00pm, 1st XV play at 3.00pm. What I can't understand is forfeiting in the first division. Why not forfeit 3rd's and fill upwards. Across their 3 18's teams you would be looking at a player base of 60 players or so. Couldn't see them forfeiting a finals game in 18's first division because of player unavailability.

Wow when did that law come in? not a good way of being able to develop players...

 

[Keiran]

Wow when did that law come in? not a good way of being able to develop players.

It's been around for many years and is in line with the IRB. I remember David Pocock causing some concern about the policy when he played a trial for the Force as a 17 year old. It is sometimes a strange rule as we have had 17 year olds playing grade rugby who are ineligible to play colts, but can play 1st grade.

 

[No.8]

It's been around for many years and is in line with the IRB. I remember David Pocock causing some concern about the policy when he played a trial for the Force as a 17 year old. It is sometimes a strange rule as we have had 17 year olds playing grade rugby who are ineligible to play colts, but can play 1st grade.

I remember when I was 15/16 - there were guys playing 1st XV at age 15/16 - this was about 10 years ago now - things must of changed since then...

 

[Rhino147]

any predictions for this weekend?

I think:
Royals to beat Daramalan by 2 tries
Grammar to beat Wests by 30+
St Edmunds to edge Marist in a close one

 

[the beaver]

Nothing to say about this weekend ??? Marist Vs Eddies All grades?

 

[angrydog]

Does anybody know the final score in the Marist v Eddies game today?

 

[Michael Walker]

Does anybody know the final score in the Marist v Eddies game today?

50-14

 

[angrydog]

To Eddies I presume....ouch!

 

[Keiran]

That's a thumping from Eddies, and from what I've seen Marist have been very impressive this season. Top 4 now is settled after Royals beat Dara.

 

[Keiran]

They may find it hard to bounce back against a Grammar side that is steadily improving, but at home I'd see Marist getting the win by a few points.

SEC to put at least 30 on Darra.

Royals to beat Wests by a comfortable margin.

 

[Fishy]

Any other results?

Also lets be honest, there is only one game per week until finals that is in contention...