CAS Rugby 2012

[Snort]

I agree with everything you said. However, firstly, it was winger Shaun Townsend (not Sion Freed) who scored the double. Secondly, Aloys have recently brought in that 'year of commencement' next to the players, maybe it is to show they are not importing. I think the reason they did it is to spark a reaction, one that you have provided, so that people do think about home-grown talent and importing, but i agree, a tad snarky. But overall, this game will be a shock and a feeling of disappointment to for Trinity, knowing that they let in 29 points to Aloys, but conversely will provide the much needed confidence to the Aloys boys, who come up against a Barker team, who only just downed Cranbrook.

Apologies to Shaun Townsend - I was going on the jersey number given in the home programme. I will correct the error above.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I agree with everything you said. However, firstly, it was winger Shaun Townsend (not Sion Freed) who scored the double. Secondly, Aloys have recently brought in that 'year of commencement' next to the players, maybe it is to show they are not importing. I think the reason they did it is to spark a reaction, one that you have provided, so that people do think about home-grown talent and importing, but i agree, a tad snarky. But overall, this game will be a shock and a feeling of disappointment to for Trinity, knowing that they let in 29 points to Aloys, but conversely will provide the much needed confidence to the Aloys boys, who come up against a Barker team, who only just downed Cranbrook.

I like this year of commencement idea....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[sulidor]

cranbrook 19 barker 20;
won with a penalty from 40 metres that was the last act of the game; after cranbrook had put on 2 quick tries to seemingly steal the game.....the jubilation of the cranbrook old boys after the second of those tries contrasted starkly with the despair of the cranbrook team when that killer kick went over.....cranbrook left winger spectacular....pace and a great fend....

 

[Piglet]

Trinity 47 St Aloysius 29

Apart from Clunies-Ross, Trinity was missing Kotobalavu and Morsello. Pack moved to outside-centre, Roberts was full-back and Coffill filled in at hooker. St Aloysius had in the ball in the first couple of minutes and only an excellent covering tackle from Clark saved a try in the".

Good review. Thanks for that. Much appreciated.

 

[onthewatch]

how did cranbrooks backs perform against barker?

 

[Man on the hill]

I like this year of commencement idea....

SHAME - it will never catch on....

 

[Casnovian]

Enjoy Snorts match reports -however have been thinking about his comments with a "orr (the captain) arguing with the referee (April 22) and speaking with players from yesterday's game (Trinity vs. Alos game) - the referees standard reply - to both sides - was " I am happy with that" - when clearly in the minds of the players they felt (and probably knew) they had a greater command and appreciation of the complexities and nuances of the game. (Can happen).

Generally referees at all levels will be challenged in the future as the Generation Y take over.

They are achievement-oriented: Generation Y is confident, ambitious and achievement-oriented nurtured and pampered by parents who did not want to make the mistakes of previous generations.
They have high expectations of their elders and those in offices of authority – they will seek out new challenges and are not afraid to question that authority.
Generation Y want meaning in what they do.
At our encouragement Generation Y have participated in team sports, play groups and other group activities from a very early age and instrumental to that is that they expect fairness and diligence to be a given (full stop).
They value teamwork, not only seek the input and affirmation of others but expect others to pull their weight. (Part of the no-person left-behind generation).
Generation Y is loyal, committed and wants to be included and involved.
So to “I’m happy with that” – reality check champ! Man up and welcome to the 21st Century
Horwell and all of the captains in Super XV plead their cases week in week out - role models.

 

[Done that]

Enjoy Snorts match reports -however have been thinking about his comments with a "orr (the captain) arguing with the referee (April 22) and speaking with players from yesterday's game (Trinity vs. Alos game) - the referees standard reply - to both sides - was " I am happy with that" - when clearly in the minds of the players they felt (and probably knew) they had a greater command and appreciation of the complexities and nuances of the game. (Can happen).

Generally referees at all levels will be challenged in the future as the Generation Y take over.

They are achievement-oriented: Generation Y is confident, ambitious and achievement-oriented nurtured and pampered by parents who did not want to make the mistakes of previous generations.
They have high expectations of their elders and those in offices of authority – they will seek out new challenges and are not afraid to question that authority.
Generation Y want meaning in what they do.
At our encouragement Generation Y have participated in team sports, play groups and other group activities from a very early age and instrumental to that is that they expect fairness and diligence to be a given (full stop).
They value teamwork, not only seek the input and affirmation of others but expect others to pull their weight. (Part of the no-person left-behind generation).
Generation Y is loyal, committed and wants to be included and involved.
So to “I’m happy with that” – reality check champ! Man up and welcome to the 21st Century
Horwell and all of the captains in Super XV plead their cases week in week out - role models.

Uhhhh !!???

 

[smokinjoe]

Trinity 47 St Aloysius 29


I notice for the first time that the St Aloysius home programme included the year in which each of its players entered the school. The reason's obvious - look, no imports here, folks! But why do it? Is it an excuse made before the game starts ("look, we're going to lose, but only because we have no imports") or a declaration of righteousness ("we're morally superior to you because we have no imports")? Who knows? Whatever the reason, it strikes an unpleasantly snarky note.]

Great match report Snort but please keep excuses for Trinity import policy to the school sporting scholarship thread.

 

[Snort]

Smokingjoe, nothing in my post was intended to defend any policy of Trinity - I wouldn't have the first clue what the policy is, if there is one. But I do think there is a distinction to be drawn between imports and scholarships, which others no doubt discuss in the scholarships thread to their heart's content. I would have played more 1st XV at school but for a group of players who turned up in Year 11. None were on scholarships - their parents thought they would get a better HSC at a private school. I'm not saying it's so simple now, of course.

 

[northman91]

Before everyone starts paying the s*** out of knox lets just get a couple of things straight.

1. half time was 27-19 to waverly and that could of been different if knox didnt bomb a 100% certain try...after that bombed try knox let them score with like 1minute to go before half time. so the half time score could of been 26-20 to knox. COULD OF BEEN!!
2. It was only 15minutes of the worst defensive game of rugby in the 2nd half which led to the massive score line... the rest of the game was good and knox was actually playing well and if they continued to concentrate they could of won. (could of won)
3. Waverly played very well but knox was taken pretty much single handily by the 15. Paterson? during that 15minutes of the worst defensive effort i have ever seen
4. The knox backline is poor and is very injury ravaged with players like spain and creeley out and with players replacing them are players who didnt play rugby last year, 3rds rugby last year.
   
   But that score like of 69-31 could of been so much different if knox learned how to tackle and didnt fall asleep in that 15minute period...but knox would be a good side and would be competitive this year if they learn how to tackle and can concentrate for 70minutes.
   
   TO ALL KNOX PLAYERS START PLAYING WITH SOME HEART
   END SCORE 69-31
   
   p.s. when watching the game from the crowd you could hear waverly players being arrogant and the most un respective people and just generally giving there school the worst name in all of sydney...and should be kicked out of CAS competition in all sports or get rid of the pieces of trash out of the school.

You cannot say that knox could have won this game with a score line like that. Allowing a team to put 27 points on you in the first half shows that you already suffer from a poor defensive effort. And a 15 minute lapse can not account for a loss either with that many points on the board. Also don't blame injuries, it happens to every school every year. That's why each school needs to develop back up players for every position. Im sure Waverley would have had injured players as well. 69-31 is a pathetic effort, thats 9 or 10 times they would have been standing underneath the posts watching a conversion. Seems as though knox will be on the bottom half of the ladder this year. But well done to knox for not giving up and managing a few consolation tries at the end.

 

[Man on the hill]

...the referees standard reply - to both sides - was " I am happy with that" - when clearly in the minds of the players they felt (and probably knew) they had a greater command and appreciation of the complexities and nuances of the game. (Can happen).

Generally referees at all levels will be challenged in the future as the Generation Y take over.

What do you want him to say? Or do you want time out and a big "jaw jaw" on the issue before them every time some boy qnants to query the referee. & BTW when they get sent for a little 10 minute holiday becasue of dissent - what then? The day when a school boy player understands the laws of the game better than someone refereeing at schools 1st XV standard are not with us quite yet.

 

[Snort]

Enjoy Snorts match reports -however have been thinking about his comments with a "orr (the captain) arguing with the referee (April 22) and speaking with players from yesterday's game (Trinity vs. Alos game) - the referees standard reply - to both sides - was " I am happy with that" - when clearly in the minds of the players they felt (and probably knew) they had a greater command and appreciation of the complexities and nuances of the game. (Can happen).

Generally referees at all levels will be challenged in the future as the Generation Y take over.

A captain always has a right to discuss interpretations with the referee. I don't have an issue with that, unless it leads to a three minute discussion after every decision (George Gregan was the master of this). I don't mind Orr doing that. But when an opposition player knocks on, and the referee misses the knock on, and the other side scores, that's not discussing an interpretation of the laws. It's telling the referee that he's made a mistake. Now, on that occasion (I'm talking about the St Pats game), Orr was right - the ref had missed a knock-on. But it was disappointing to see him argue the point, for three reasons. First, it's dumb, because I have never, ever seen a ref reverse his decision because a player complained about it. Secondly, it's dumb, because there's time left on the clock, and refs are human, and why give them reason to dislike you when they can still make decisions that influence the outcome of the game? And finally, I might be old fashioned, but one of the things I hate about soccer is the way the players run to the referee and whinge every time a decision goes against them. I was always a little proud that Rugby players weren't like that. There's something to be said for taking the ref's mistakes on the chin and trying to win the game anyway.

Anyhow - the Rugby. The results on the weekend went as expected, with only one upset seriously threatened. I hope this doesn't sound consdescending, but it's good to see Cranbrook looking very competitive again. The second round put their win over St Aloysius into context: Cranbrook kept St Aloysius scoreless, while Trinity allowed them 29 points, and it's Trinity who are meant to be in contention for the title. The Waverley-Cranbrook match should be a cracker this weekend. Waverley lost to a less competitive Cranbrook side last year, there's a local derby feeling to it, and it's a game Cranbrook will very much want to win. Logically, Waverley should take out the game, but don't be surprised if it's very close. Significant statistic: Waverley has allowed 58 points in two games, while Cranbrook has conceded 23. Which means that Waverley may find Cranbrook's defence tough to breach, and may need to patch up a few holes in their own defence.

St Aloysius will feel that their performance against Trinity shows that they have a chance of upsetting Barker. I hope the injury to Vevers on the weekend wasn't serious, because the backline seemed to look to him to spark the attack and he was one of the better players in blue and gold. Without him, it's hard to see St Aloysius knocking Barker off.

It feels strange to write about a Trinity/Knox game as if it's a foregone conclusion, but really it's very hard to see Knox upsetting Trinity at Summer Hill. You can find reasons why it could be a close game: Knox scored more points against Waverley than Trinity did the week before; Trinity has allowed 51 points in two games, which shows that its defence is vulnerable; Knox may have players back from injury and will be eager to salvage some pride form the season... and so on. But rationally, Trinity will run away with it. Not, I suspect, by a huge margin, but comfortably enough.

Does anyone know what has happened at Knox? It's not just that they used to be a powerhouse; it's that, even when they weren't hugely strong, they always turned up with fit, disciplined, well-trained teams that were hard to beat. They beat Waverley in the Seconds, so there depth doesn't seem to be much worse than anyone else's (prediction: they will take Trinity apart in the Seconds). So why is their 1st XV so weak? Any thoughts (the clown who keeps posting nonsense about individuals from Knox need not reply)?

 

[It is what it is]

Does anyone know what has happened at Knox? It's not just that they used to be a powerhouse; it's that, even when they weren't hugely strong, they always turned up with fit, disciplined, well-trained teams that were hard to beat. They beat Waverley in the Seconds, so there depth doesn't seem to be much worse than anyone else's (prediction: they will take Trinity apart in the Seconds). So why is their 1st XV so weak? Any thoughts (the clown who keeps posting nonsense about individuals from Knox need not reply)?

[/QUOTE]

'Snort', here are some observations on your questions above

Knox lack mongrel, leadership, talk and urgency.
Don't be fooled by their score of 29 points....it was 62-19 until 5 minutes from time, meaning they hadn't scored for over 35 mins of play, before they scored 2 quick tries.
Their halfback didn't make a single run in the game so Waverley's defence could simply focus on the 5/8 all game. Knox received some good scrum ball and he should have made a few darts to put doubt into the defence.
The fullback was unfortunately way out of his depth and provided little in the way of last line defence.
Their 2 centres both run across field making the sideline the opposition's best defensive weapon.
The Knox kick/chase defensive line didn't exist, thus allowing Waverley too many easy counter attacking opportunities
They couldn't match Waverley's aggression in the contest and lacked patience and composure when under pressure.

I agree that Knox usually turn out hard, fit and well drilled teams each year. There is no joy in seeing them cop such a hiding so hopefully they can regroup and become competitive again.

 

[Fairpoint]

If I recall correctly, the so called confrontation with the referee over the missed knock-on lasted under 10 seconds. I viewed this game from the opposite sideline and believe Orr had all right to ask the referee about the try. Watch a super rugby game, colts game, grade game and you will see its a common occurrence when a captain questions the grounds of why a try was given,it isn't disrespectful or rude or dumb, following the try the st pats crowd caused a breakage in play and the referee called time off, so there goes your wasting time comment.

Back to the proper use of the forum now, does anyone care to share their early predictions for CAS selections?

 

[Snort]

If I recall correctly, the so called confrontation with the referee over the missed knock-on lasted under 10 seconds. I viewed this game from the opposite sideline and believe Orr had all right to ask the referee about the try. Watch a super rugby game, colts game, grade game and you will see its a common occurrence when a captain questions the grounds of why a try was given,it isn't disrespectful or rude or dumb, following the try the st pats crowd caused a breakage in play and the referee called time off, so there goes your wasting time comment.

Back to the proper use of the forum now, does anyone care to share their early predictions for CAS selections?

I guess some time in the last few years it became OK for schoolboys to show dissent at referees' decisions.

And who decided that the purpose of the forum was to speculate about representative selections after two games?

 

[Casnovian]

What do you want him to say? Or do you want time out and a big "jaw jaw" on the issue before them every time some boy qnants to query the referee. & BTW when they get sent for a little 10 minute holiday becasue of dissent - what then? The day when a school boy player understands the laws of the game better than someone refereeing at schools 1st XV standard are not with us quite yet.

Thanks MOTH, I differ - there were a number of young men who have averaged about 70 to 80 games of rugby over the last two years and the majority of them know the laws more than well (courtesy of the off season skill training - JGS / NGS etc ). Consequently we should give them credit. They learn very fast and are hungry for knowledge - whether the instruction is good or not so good -it is therefore logical to maximise the number of good opportunities.

Consider their questions as continuous improvement for Rugby in general ( from the bottom up) - they are encouraged from year dot to question and clarify. And power to them.

I agree not every occassion requires a discussion or "jaw jaw" as you put it.

However when it comes to the referree saying I am happy to a clear contravention of the laws (that had a direct effect on the safety of the players) - he should of said why he was happy with that - he didn't and exhibited disinterest and from my point of view was lazy (if it was in a court of law I would most certainly raise negligence - ((should an injury had occurred)) I need not go into the technicalities.

The referee did himself a big disservice with his much repeated phrase on the day - eroded his credibility with both sides

If asked do the players expect more - well the answer is yes and like water on stones - change will happen! I don't see respectful questioning going away any time soon.

I think the majority referrees are above liking and disliking players - but can be different when their son is playing - can go over board and be punitive in their take on perception of bias by others.

Explanation assists learning - that's a fact and will benefit the players and the game.

Perhaps we should have a random referree rating sheet (use the one for trainee refs) and randomly give them to the players every now and then - consumer feedback if you like?

 

[wicks]

'Snort', here are some observations to your questions below

Does anyone know what has happened at Knox? It's not just that they used to be a powerhouse; it's that, even when they weren't hugely strong, they always turned up with fit, disciplined, well-trained teams that were hard to beat. They beat Waverley in the Seconds, so there depth doesn't seem to be much worse than anyone else's (prediction: they will take Trinity apart in the Seconds). So why is their 1st XV so weak? Any thoughts (the clown who keeps posting nonsense about individuals from Knox need not reply)?

Knox lack mongrel, leadership, talk and urgency.
Don't be fooled by their score of 29 points....it was 62-19 until 5 minutes from time, meaning they hadn't scored for over 35 mins of play, before they scored 2 quick tries.
Their halfback didn't make a single run in the game so Waverley's defence could simply focus on the 5/8 all game. Knox received some good scrum ball and he should have made a few darts to put doubt into the defence.
The fullback was unfortunately way out of his depth and provided little in the way of last line defence.
Their 2 centres both run across field making the sideline the opposition's best defensive weapon.
The Knox kick/chase defensive line didn't exist, thus allowing Waverley too many easy counter attacking opportunities
They couldn't match Waverley's aggression in the contest and lacked patience and composure when under pressure.

I agree that Knox usually turn out hard, fit and well drilled teams each year. There is no joy in seeing them cop such a hiding so hopefully they can regroup and become competitive again.[/quote]

Completely agree Snort,the Knox side really dissappointed,whilst not always the side to beat, but always competitive,they are generally always very fit ,disciplined and well coached,particularly in the forwards.The forward pack while significantly more sizeable than Waverley s failed to maintain their early asendency and soon ran out of puff,while as you correctly stated the backs failed to take advantage of good go -forward, more ball,and had the penalties in their favour.Waverley weathered the early storm in the forwards led by Johnson(very solid) until they achieved parity,then the talent backline took over,scoring an unanswered 35points,halfback Whitaker starting to snipe and made good inroads,putting the defence in two minds, while his 5/8 O Donnell used the attacking pace outside of him to his advantage linking and running himself,these two created opportunities for the likes of Paterson at fullback and Wileman on the wing to take good advantage ,with Paterson particularly strong scoring two individual long range tries.The outside backs for Knox who had played and defended well for much of the first half dropped off countless tackles as the Waverley backline ran riot....Quite an amazing game to watch given how competitive much of the 1st half was.

 

[The_Good_Old_Days]

predictions for CAS squad anyone ? any changes or have the familiar faces still earned their right to the spot ?

 

[Snort]

predictions for CAS squad anyone ? any changes or have the familiar faces still earned their right to the spot ?

I have only seen Trinity and St Aloysius.

From St Aloysius, Harrison Williams is a good candidate. He's very good in the air (lineouts and restarts) and gets around the park well.

From Trinity, Clunies-Ross, if fit, must be in the mix at wing or full back. Morsello, if fit, is worth a run at hooker. Satiu has been spectacular this year and needs to be there. Then you get a problem. Orr and McLean are very good ball-running front rowers but Trinity's abundance of riches in this department has pushed McLean into the second row. You wouldn't pick him in the second row in a representative team, I suspect. So the selectors have a tough choice. I guess they pick Orr in the position he plays for his school, but it's not an easy call. Neither Malaki nor Ola would be out of place at the next level. Clark should be the fly half. Trinity has won something like its last thirteen Associated Schools competition games so if they get seven or so players in the CAS 1sts, no-one could complain too much.

From Waverley, Whitaker and Paterson must be in with a good chance.

Cranbrook and Barker will have good candidates I haven't yet seen this year. Barker's winger, Haltmeier, impressed me last year, though no-one else ever says anything about him.