CAS Rugby 2013

[C.A.S rugby observer]

Barker hasn't secured the Henry plume shield as recent comments have said before... If they lose to Knox next week and waverley beat trinity then it's a split premiership which personally think has great odds as of happening seeming as Knox have been looking good these last 5 games ad I think they should do the same as last year and beat barker in the last round for the battle of Hornsby and for waverley I think here mobile forward pack will prove to much for trinity... With that said if It does happen, of waverley had kicked the ball out instead of throwing it out in the first waverley barker fixture the. Waverley would have there hands on the Henry plume shield

 

[Fred87]

Barker 40 (7 tries, 1 penalty, 1 conversion) Trinity 13 (1 try, 1 conversion, 2 penalties)

For Trinity McLean (T1) was very damaging.
For Barker Stoltz (12) very strong defence as usual. Lloyd (B7) had an outstanding game. This is the half back for the 2nds but came into the 1sts as a flanker & had an incredible game

Nice flowing game played in a good spirit
Extremely dominant wins to Barker in 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc.....marred by two nasty leg injuries to two Trinity boys in the 2nds match - a serious looking knee injury and a broken leg that required a stretcher....

 

[rtd32]

Barker hasn't secured the Henry plume shield as recent comments have said before. If they lose to Knox next week and waverley beat trinity then it's a split premiership which personally think has great odds as of happening seeming as Knox have been looking good these last 5 games ad I think they should do the same as last year and beat barker in the last round for the battle of Hornsby and for waverley I think here mobile forward pack will prove to much for trinity. With that said if It does happen, of waverley had kicked the ball out instead of throwing it out in the first waverley barker fixture the. Waverley would have there hands on the Henry plume shield

I'm going to hold my tongue here given what happened last year but one key difference here is that barker are playing at home

 

[Artbeet]

Waverley 1st XV 35 def St Aloys 1st XV 29

A very good game by St Aloys who really put it to Waverley today.

Several Waverley players did not have their best games today and may have taken St Aloys a bit lightly after their win against Barker last week. a big mistake as the first foray into Waverley half was almost a push over try by a rolling maul at high speed.

Waverley kicking and line outs were unusually both off today (at least in the first half). At half time there was only four points in it with Waves in front.

Aloys scored and took the lead by one. Waverley converted a penalty to lead by two. Aloys scored again and were leading by a point or two (?sorry but game was too interesting to take notes). In the last minutes of the game Waverley spent a bout four minutes trying to cross Aloys line and did so only in the dying seconds after strong Aloys defence. Try converted and ref blew the game for a very close Waverley win.

Sounds like a very close encounter with the Alos team rising to the challenge at home. I undertand Waves have been hit hard by injuries with O'Donnell and Kava joining Ghan and the young 13 on the sidelines for this game.
Should be a good battle for the wooden spoon next week end against Cranbrook, home ground advantage to Alos will probably play a major factor

 

[Man on the hill]

Thats why he was given a red card. deliberately killing the ball is foul play yet you wouldn't be asking for the player to be suspended

Why not? Last I looked, red is red. 2 yellows = red. The referee will submit a written report, they have scope to define the severity & intent of the "crime" to arrive at a scale of seriousness - all neatly outlined on the NSWRU referee page. & for info on the barker red v Waverley, the critical report will be the report required to be submitted by the AR. Also, a referee friend tells me that it is not unheard of for aforementioned report to SOMETIMES include the term send off sufficient - code speak for obligatory red that wasn't otherwise a red offence.

 

[rtd32]

Sounds like a very close encounter with the Alos team rising to the challenge at home. I undertand Waves have been hit hard by injuries with O'Donnell and Kava joining Ghan and the young 13 on the sidelines for this game.
Should be a good battle for the wooden spoon next week end against Cranbrook, home ground advantage to Alos will probably play a major factor

There's a battle for every team this week as tied 1st, 3rd, and 5th are up for grabs in this weekends fixtures which is possibly the most exciting final round the 2 fixture CAS competition has ever seen! - to make things better it's also 'rival round' people, so get down to the respective fields this weekend to support your team!! (if you can't make your mind up head up to Hornsby for a cracker).

If Knox wish to preserve some of their 'rugby prestige', or maintain the reputation they've got for themselves over the years, they will be looking to secure a 3rd place spot (I can't remember the last time Knox finished outside the top 3) and who better to do it against than their rivals from down the road? They'd love to walk away with the last laugh two years in a row. Waverley of course will be hungry for the win against trinity so they can get one hand on the henry plume shield, but Trinity aren't going to take it lying down. It will be an interesting clash in Summer Hill no doubt - how are trinity for injuries by the way? and Cranbrook vs Aloys is always a show, sure, they're usually at 5th and 6th but these boys love their rugby and they love not coming last. Aloys' extremely zealous and passionate crowd will undoubtedly be in full voice, cheering for their boys to get a victory at home and avoid that wooden spoon. We've got a lot to look forward to this weekend, I'll see most of you in hornsby

 

[rtd32]

Why not? Last I looked, red is red. 2 yellows = red. The referee will submit a written report, they have scope to define the severity & intent of the "crime" to arrive at a scale of seriousness - all neatly outlined on the NSWRU referee page. & for info on the barker red v Waverley, the critical report will be the report required to be submitted by the AR. Also, a referee friend tells me that it is not unheard of for aforementioned report to SOMETIMES include the term send off sufficient - code speak for obligatory red that wasn't otherwise a red offence.

the point is the suspension is a punishment to dissuade players from callous or unsportsmanlike conduct. I already conceded that the player threw a closed fist punch - sure unnecessarily violent - but to the players leg? not at all callous. Was it unsportsmanlike? well perhaps, but this is where judiciary discretion takes place - factors including remorse, the players actions after the incident, the actual severity of the incident itself etc are all taken into account. The referee report suggested that the player not be suspended for 2 reasons - 1. he'd practically already missed a full game
2. the criteria I have stated above.
You can throw all the NSWRU and NSWJRU and CAS referee guidelines and codes of conduct at me all you want but thats exactly what they are, guidelines. They are there to set a standard, not to dictate

 

[Man on the hill]

the point is the suspension is a punishment to dissuade players from callous or unsportsmanlike conduct. I already conceded that the player threw a closed fist punch - sure unnecessarily violent - but to the players leg? not at all callous. Was it unsportsmanlike? well perhaps, but this is where judiciary discretion takes place - factors including remorse, the players actions after the incident, the actual severity of the incident itself etc are all taken into account. The referee report suggested that the player not be suspended for 2 reasons - 1. he'd practically already missed a full game
2. the criteria I have stated above.
You can throw all the NSWRU and NSWJRU and CAS referee guidelines and codes of conduct at me all you want but thats exactly what they are, guidelines. They are there to set a standard, not to dictate

So you've read the AR's report? You must be extraordinarily well placed - team coach, sports master, head master, ref dept from NSWRU or the convener of the CAS.

Which is it because I would have thought that any of that list would be more discrete than you have been.

 

[rtd32]

So you've read the AR's report? You must be extraordinarily well placed - team coach, sports master, head master, ref dept from NSWRU or the convener of the CAS.

Which is it because I would have thought that any of that list would be more discrete than you have been.

no but I doubt its dissimilar to the Referee's report who has commented on this page. Just let it go, it's not even a big deal

 

[Man on the hill]

no but I doubt its dissimilar to the Referee's report who has commented on this page. Just let it go, it's not even a big deal

I'll let it go when you stop inventing your facts

 

[Fred87]

A few pages back i said Barker policy on red cards was automatic one match suspension etc. Talking to a few people (including a teacher) on Saturday I should have said it was the "default position" not "automatic". Meaning that to avoid the suspension there must be a strong case. Word on the sideline was that the view from the referee was strongly supportive of suspension not needed (i emphasize this was the word amongst the parents, none of us have seen a report or even know if it was written or verbal). Also the video evidence supported strong provocation (punched in the head, which is still not an excuse for retaliation). The player B4 was knocked dizzy at the following ruck. The provocation was in the previous ruck where the punch to the leg was thrown.

In summary - evidence from the referee and video strongly supported the player and the outcome. Since i suspect no one in this forum has seen or heard a report from the ref or seen the official video (which the schools pay for) we are all just speculating. Barker in the past have not hesitated to suspend bigger stars than this boy so all the snide comments seem misplaced.

 

[rtd32]

I'll let it go when you stop inventing your facts

What did I invent?

 

[rtd32]

I'll let it go when you stop inventing your facts

refer to comment from Fred87... Then let it go

 

[Keen observer]

A few pages back i said Barker policy on red cards was automatic one match suspension etc. Talking to a few people (including a teacher) on Saturday I should have said it was the "default position" not "automatic". Meaning that to avoid the suspension there must be a strong case. Word on the sideline was that the view from the referee was strongly supportive of suspension not needed (i emphasize this was the word amongst the parents, none of us have seen a report or even know if it was written or verbal). Also the video evidence supported strong provocation (punched in the head, which is still not an excuse for retaliation). The player B4 was knocked dizzy at the following ruck. The provocation was in the previous ruck where the punch to the leg was thrown.

In summary - evidence from the referee and video strongly supported the player and the outcome. Since i suspect no one in this forum has seen or heard a report from the ref or seen the official video (which the schools pay for) we are all just speculating. Barker in the past have not hesitated to suspend bigger stars than this boy so all the snide comments seem misplaced.

maybe not snide - just disappointed that there is such a subjective application by some schools of the default position to suit themselves.

 

[Benched '84]

Imagine the commentary if Waverley had have LOST the match!!

 

[rtd32]

maybe not snide - just disappointed that there is such a subjective application by some schools of the default position to suit themselves.

Clearly you're having difficulty dropping the issue. Is there some point you'd like to make that hasn't been made already over the past 3 pages?

 

[Fred87]

Must compliment Trinity on the behaviour of their supporters on Saturday. It was very noticeable how well behaved the crowd was and in the 3 games i watched no barracking of the referee from either side; and silence for goal kickers from both teams

 

[alpha]

Does anyone have any thoughts on why Barker and Waverley seem so closely matched when they play each other but when they play other teams Barker are so much more dominant. This weekend was a good example - Barker beat Trinity 7 tries to 1; but Waverley very close against Aloys. I know Waverley had a lot of injuries but it is not just this weekend.

According to the CAS website (which i note has the Barker scoring from Saturday all wrong, apart from the total which is correct) Barker have a points differential of +219 & Waverley +122. Anyway, interested if anyone has any thoughts.

 

[Snort]

Does anyone have any thoughts on why Barker and Waverley seem so closely matched when they play each other but when they play other teams Barker are so much more dominant. This weekend was a good example - Barker beat Trinity 7 tries to 1; but Waverley very close against Aloys. I know Waverley had a lot of injuries but it is not just this weekend.

According to the CAS website (which i note has the Barker scoring from Saturday all wrong, apart from the total which is correct) Barker have a points differential of +219 & Waverley +122. Anyway, interested if anyone has any thoughts.

It's because of Barker's backline. Waverley doesn't have the strike power out wide that allows Barker to score rapidly when it wins enough ball. But they do have a stronger forward pack. Hence when the two schools meet, Waverley can tie Barker up in the forwards.

 

[Fred87]

It's because of Barker's backline. Waverley doesn't have the strike power out wide that allows Barker to score rapidly when it wins enough ball. But they do have a stronger forward pack. Hence when the two schools meet, Waverley can tie Barker up in the forwards.

It might also be the defensive prowess of the Waverley backline. Agree in the first encounter Waverley forwards dominated and Barker backs were starved. But in the second match i thought the forwards battle was more even. Barker backs saw a lot of ball, especially at the back end of the match where they often score heavily. The Waverley backs worked well as a team in terms of defensive formation and individually tackled well. Barker with loads of ball in the 2nd half did not threaten the Waverley line; then pushed a pass that was intercepted......