• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

CAS Rugby 2011

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

waves

Guest
thebear said:
what is the waverley team for this week vs Aloys?
Click to expand...

Same team that played knox Talakai as a reserve will only play if needed, There treating this as a 4 point game a win into the winter break is vital.
 
P

Piglet

Herbert Moran (7)
baldingwingforward said:
If a team gets a forward sin binned in U19 laws - i.e. schoolboys, the other team has to match numbers in the scrum so it would have been 7 on 7, so Trinity weren't holding their scrum with 7 against Waverleys 8 - you just weren't paying attention. If you had looked more closely there would have been a spare Waverley forward stood out in the backline.

If there wasn't the referee wasn't doing his job properly!! (which come to think of it is quite likely at schoolboy level!)
Click to expand...

Hello BWF,

If that is the case then I stand corrected.

Just had a quick look at the U19 rules and it seems to suggest that there is no requirement for the opposing team to make a similar reduction in number of players in the scrum. Of course I could be wrong...
 
B

baldingwingforward

Guest
Piglet said:
Hello BWF,

If that is the case then I stand corrected.

Just had a quick look at the U19 rules and it seems to suggest that there is no requirement for the opposing team to make a similar reduction in number of players in the scrum. Of course I could be wrong...
Click to expand...

You're wrong....

Law 20 the scrum - Under 19 variations:

"If a team is without one forward, then both teams must use a 3-4 formation (i.e. no No. 8)."

It is a stupid rule as it actually puts the team who have done nothing wrong at a disadvantage on their own ball. The team with 7 forwards could put in a back if they wanted to have 8 on 8, but why would you as that then leaves them short in the back line.

Quite often the referee will miss it and not enforce the law, but that is what is supposed to happen...
 
thecow

thecow

Ward Prentice (10)
baldingwingforward said:
You're wrong....

Law 20 the scrum - Under 19 variations:

"If a team is without one forward, then both teams must use a 3-4 formation (i.e. no No. 8)."

It is a stupid rule as it actually puts the team who have done nothing wrong at a disadvantage on their own ball. The team with 7 forwards could put in a back if they wanted to have 8 on 8, but why would you as that then leaves them short in the back line.

Quite often the referee will miss it and not enforce the law, but that is what is supposed to happen...
Click to expand...

The reason that this law exists is that most Under 19 matches are not played between possible Australian schoolboy representatives. They are played by players between the ages of 7-19 of all abilities. It is my understanding that the ARU Under 19 law makers do not see the scrum as a tactical weapon until you get to about 15A and above level, and more of a way to restart play.
 
C

crannie5

Guest
meathead said:
Wilson (B) has lost many scrums, and has been beaten to the hook of the ball. I dont know if this is due to barkers lack of push or what, but i think someone else would be better off in the position.
Also the knox scrum/front row was put under lots of pressure by the understrength waverley front row missing talakai, losing 3-4 scrums in their 20-5 loss.
The under rated waverley pack has been dominating in scrum encounters and i would not be suprised to see more selected in the sides.
The Knox outside backs were slow, and were dominated by the waverley backs.
The side will be stacked with trinity, however i hope that the cas selectors will decide on recent performances and form, rather than on names. Which can sometimes be asking too much
Click to expand...
ive heard about waverley scrums, very dominate but very inexperianced, and their lineouts are atrocious due to bad throwing by the hooker
 
C

crannie5

Guest
a very moral booster for waverley as berenger stevens returns to school starting in year 11.
 
H

HiTh

Stan Wickham (3)
Will paterson aka "the bananna" should be considered for a spot in the CAS 1st XV team, outplayed knox and barker no 10s, class act

on a side note, waverley No. 8 is unfit and cant catch, was seen sweating profusely during the game
 
T

the beast

Guest
HiTh said:
Will paterson aka "the bananna" should be considered for a spot in the CAS 1st XV team, outplayed knox and barker no 10s, class act

on a side note, waverley No. 8 is unfit and cant catch, was seen sweating profusely during the game
Click to expand...
The No 8 for Waverley is a great defender and is probably sweating so much because he is doing a lot more work than some of the other forwards and is covering for all the backs missed tackles.
 
B

bellcheese

Guest
Berenger stevens will be unfit and undetermined to play. he dropped out of school so who's to say he can be trusted to put in the work to play 1st XV rugby
 
S

ShippingSteel

Guest
Id have to say that the Waverley pack without their so called "stars," were very impressive against a Knox side which had big wraps on them. After watching the game, the Waverley Hooker and Tight Head prop were 2 of the most mobile players on the field and caused absoloute havoc at ruck time. the hooker in particular was outstanding around the field, with his presence at the ruck causing 4 or 5 turnovers and i wouldnt be suprised if he is picked in one of the CAS teams. Waverley did struggle at lineout time but i beleve this may be due to confusion among the lifters and jumpers who did not appear to be in sync with each other. It was obvious that a couple of times the call was clear however the jumper simply did not jump. However ths may be the case, hopefully they have worked on it this week and as a result Waverley should definatly give Aloysius a run for their money.
 
T

the beast

Guest
ShippingSteel said:
Id have to say that the Waverley pack without their so called "stars," were very impressive against a Knox side which had big wraps on them. After watching the game, the Waverley Hooker and Tight Head prop were 2 of the most mobile players on the field and caused absoloute havoc at ruck time. the hooker in particular was outstanding around the field, with his presence at the ruck causing 4 or 5 turnovers and i wouldnt be suprised if he is picked in one of the CAS teams. Waverley did struggle at lineout time but i beleve this may be due to confusion among the lifters and jumpers who did not appear to be in sync with each other. It was obvious that a couple of times the call was clear however the jumper simply did not jump. However ths may be the case, hopefully they have worked on it this week and as a result Waverley should definatly give Aloysius a run for their money.
Click to expand...
How can you say that a couple of times the call was clear, unless you were on the field. Are you the hooker or the tight head prop?
 
M

meathead

Guest
the beast said:
The No 8 for Waverley is a great defender and is probably sweating so much because he is doing a lot more work than some of the other forwards and is covering for all the backs missed tackles.
Click to expand...

which no.8 are you referring to ? there has been 3 different waverley no.8s in 3 games
 
L

LucyMiller

Guest
tips for this weekend
cranbrook v barker - cranbrook
trinity v knox - trinity
waverley v aloys - waverly
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top