CAS Rugby 2014

[RugbyFan14]

Aloys have two...but still can compete for some unknown reason


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually looking at the draw Aloys have 3 teams in u13's; 4 in the u14s & u15's; 3 in the u16's & only 4 in the opens

 

[kazoom]

Speaking of CAS rep sides, what talent do we have coming up in the 16's this year? Any predictions for a 16s team?

Waverley's fullback from last Sat's 1sts Tyzac Bailey qualifies as an under 16s player and also one of the replacement wingers Jaya Yoannidis.

 

[CASoldboy]

CAS selections this year are shaping up to be more unpredictable then in previous years. The back-row will be a strength, but almost the entirety of the back line is up for grabs, especially with Renton's (C) strong form in the opening rounds challenging Smerdon. The centres are a big question mark, there is undeniably some class players throughout the competition in Vevers (A) and Watson (K), but both are more at home then 13 then at 12. It will be interesting to see what approach the selectors take this year. It seems to me that with the lack of stand out individuals for each position, the selectors have been presented with an opportunity to pick a CAS side based on the strongest combinations, something that would be great for the side's cohesion.

With this in mind, I think that the Cranbrook, Barker and Aloysius inside centres all have a chance this year. From what i have seen so far this year, the strongest five-eighth - centres pairing has actually been fielded by the winless Aloysius, who despite a weak forward pack and an unstable platform have been the shining light in a dismal start to 2014.
With that being said, trinity's centres have been powerful and penetrative, so if there is doubt over the inside backs, i wouldn't be surprised if CAS fielded a 'battering ram' style 12, probably the 'safest' option.

Just some thoughts, will be very interested to see the make up of the front row, with the Knox hooker the only real stand out in form thus far.

 

[rtd32]

Each school (and their resources and parental demands) is obviously different. So when you say there is no longer the prevalence of teacher/coaches at the schools I wonder what schools you are talking about, as there is certainly still a very large contingent of them at Waverley (along with recent old boys to fill gaps). I for one like the idea that at parent/teacher night you can talk about maths and cricket, or rugby and history or athletics and geography to the same teacher because many often do both. Give me a MIC over a Program Director any day.

They also serve as great role models for the boys, because they get to understand that sport and study do mix. You can explain algebra and demonstrate good tackling technique, or explain Greek democratic principles and how to execute a cover drive. Not as well as a professional coach, but as a role model for young boys, the mix is great. I for one am extremely glad that 'professionalism and corporatism' hasn't yet infiltrated all schools. There's plenty of time to become corporatised - school is about learning and developing societal attitudes and doing things for others for reasons other than financial remuneration.

Barker only has 2 coaches that are hired predominantly for their contribution to their rugby program. 1 is the head coach, the other is a man named Todd Cole. The head coach is more like a rugby mentor across all age groups from year 7 up. He also has other commitments including gym supervisor and helps with the strength and conditioning program that runs in the summer. Todd Cole's job description is far more diverse - he works with PE, especially in the junior school. He's also a mentor for students (almost playing councillor role in some circumstances). He's heavily involved in the athletics program as well as water polo. Every other coach at the school is a teacher, plain and simple. The 2nds coach's teach commerce/economics and PE, the 3rds coach (also the 16A's cricket coach) teaches commerce/economics, the 4ths coach teaches maths all the way up to 4 unit and has a few interesting stories for you if you have the time of day. To be honest I sympathise with Waverley's lack of resources but you shouldn't sit there and complain that schools like Knox, Cranbrook, and Barker are spending money that they have on coaching and resources in order to enrich and improve the quality of their co-curricular activities and education. They're big schools (especially Barker) and such expenditure is necessary in order to ensure a quality experience across all grades... That's the main reason why parents pay so much to send their kids there - because they expect their child's interest to be catered for to the best of the schools ability. It's not necessarily fair, but what would you rather the schools do? Keep the money?

 

[BRUMBIEJACK]

Barker only has 2 coaches that are hired predominantly for their contribution to their rugby program. 1 is the head coach, the other is a man named Todd Cole. The head coach is more like a rugby mentor across all age groups from year 7 up. He also has other commitments including gym supervisor and helps with the strength and conditioning program that runs in the summer. Todd Cole's job description is far more diverse - he works with PE, especially in the junior school. He's also a mentor for students (almost playing councillor role in some circumstances). He's heavily involved in the athletics program as well as water polo. Every other coach at the school is a teacher, plain and simple. The 2nds coach's teach commerce/economics and PE, the 3rds coach (also the 16A's cricket coach) teaches commerce/economics, the 4ths coach teaches maths all the way up to 4 unit and has a few interesting stories for you if you have the time of day. To be honest I sympathise with Waverley's lack of resources but you shouldn't sit there and complain that schools like Knox, Cranbrook, and Barker are spending money that they have on coaching and resources in order to enrich and improve the quality of their co-curricular activities and education. They're big schools (especially Barker) and such expenditure is necessary in order to ensure a quality experience across all grades. That's the main reason why parents pay so much to send their kids there - because they expect their child's interest to be catered for to the best of the schools ability. It's not necessarily fair, but what would you rather the schools do? Keep the money?

Very glad to hear that the teachers at Barker are heavily involved in coaching as well. Don't get me wrong about the relative lack of resources. I am sending my kids to Waverley knowing full well what the resourcing is and I wouldn't have it any other way. I send them to Waverley for philosophical reasons, and while we may lack financial resources, we are putting 7 teams in the 13s on the paddock every saturday this year which says a lot about the human capital we have - and about how much the school is serious about rugby participation at all levels of ability.
Obviously people fork out much bigger bucks to send their kids to the more expensive schools and I fully agree that that money should be spent on education - by all means get the best science block, IT backup, business school.
I suppose that I don't see rugby as 'education' per se. At a school it should be about the boys and the teachers seeing what kind of team they can put out on the weekend. Having two coaches predominantly for rugby at a secondary school to me is a strange way of educating kids.
Still, we will beg to differ I'm sure. I am not complaining about the lack of resources at Waverley at all. Indeed the place has a perverse pride in the fact. I am complaining about people making predictions about school's chances based on some assumption that all are equally resourced and therefore presumably have an equal chance. We all know that's not the case.
Outside of the weekend results thread, I think the next most important thread is to look at how schools approach their rugby - how is participation, what are the competing sports, how much emphasis is placed on it. If it doesn't prosper in the private schools, rugby in this country struggles.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Rep Programme dates seem to be out:

June 4
CHS/CAS Dinner @Cranbrook School (Evening)

June 5 @ Cranbrook NSWSRU U18s Trials
CHS I v CAS I, CAS II v CHS II

June 20 @ Knox Grammar (Friday)
NSWSRU U18s Trials
CHS I v GPS I, CAS I v ISA I, GPS II v CHS II, CAS II v ISA II, GPS III v CCC, Country v AICES
Note: apparently no AICES U18 this year, so I reckon there will be no GPS 3's and CCC will play Country.

June 21/22 @ Knox Grammar Saturday/Sunday
NSWSRU U16 CHAMPIONSHIPS
No date published for CAS vs GPS but going on past schedules, that will be at Knox on 17 June.

Anyone know where and when are the Nth Harbour v South Harbour selection trials for CAS reps?

 

[Blackdog]

As a Knox parent I like rd32's thoughts. I haven't met Matt Williams at Knox but it appears his brief revolves around 1st 15 success - with his efforts appearing to focus on the top team and a few of the standouts from the 16A's. Surely in the long term both for rugby and the school, attention paid to lower age group teams will deliver more for the schools (and so parents $).
With 6 training sessions a week the year 12 students will feel the demands on them as the season progresses - and lets face it, more will depend on their HSC mark than rugby skills in a year or so. The previous regime headed up by Chuck Ardron appeared to be very aware of commitments away from rugby. Chuck was also good at giving those players in their last year at school but who were the next best in their position some game time towards the end of matches whilst the Williams team appears to more focused on next years stars. It appears at Knox to represent both the 1st Cricket and 1st rugby in your final year is not going to be achievable under the Williams program.
To counter this, by all accounts the Knox team this year are enjoying the Williams style - but they are as good a group as Knox has had for a few years and that always helps.

 

[Scythe]

CAS selections this year are shaping up to be more unpredictable then in previous years. The back-row will be a strength, but almost the entirety of the back line is up for grabs, especially with Renton's (C) strong form in the opening rounds challenging Smerdon. The centres are a big question mark, there is undeniably some class players throughout the competition in Vevers (A) and Watson (K), but both are more at home then 13 then at 12. It will be interesting to see what approach the selectors take this year. It seems to me that with the lack of stand out individuals for each position, the selectors have been presented with an opportunity to pick a CAS side based on the strongest combinations, something that would be great for the side's cohesion.

With this in mind, I think that the Cranbrook, Barker and Aloysius inside centres all have a chance this year. From what i have seen so far this year, the strongest five-eighth - centres pairing has actually been fielded by the winless Aloysius, who despite a weak forward pack and an unstable platform have been the shining light in a dismal start to 2014.
With that being said, trinity's centres have been powerful and penetrative, so if there is doubt over the inside backs, i wouldn't be surprised if CAS fielded a 'battering ram' style 12, probably the 'safest' option.

Just some thoughts, will be very interested to see the make up of the front row, with the Knox hooker the only real stand out in form thus far.

Good summary


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[formerflanker]

Each school (and their resources and parental demands) is obviously different. So when you say there is no longer the prevalence of teacher/coaches at the schools I wonder what schools you are talking about, as there is certainly still a very large contingent of them at Waverley (along with recent old boys to fill gaps). I for one like the idea that at parent/teacher night you can talk about maths and cricket, or rugby and history or athletics and geography to the same teacher because many often do both. Give me a MIC over a Program Director any day.

They also serve as great role models for the boys, because they get to understand that sport and study do mix. You can explain algebra and demonstrate good tackling technique, or explain Greek democratic principles and how to execute a cover drive. Not as well as a professional coach, but as a role model for young boys, the mix is great. I for one am extremely glad that 'professionalism and corporatism' hasn't yet infiltrated all schools. There's plenty of time to become corporatised - school is about learning and developing societal attitudes and doing things for others for reasons other than financial remuneration.

Good argument BJ.
From a teacher's perspective, you get to see a more rounded picture of the student when coaching. Classroom performance can be looked at in the context of sporting capability, giving the teacher a better picture of the student. The more insights a teacher/coach has to a student, the better the classroom interaction with increased benefits for the student.
A worthwhile line of enquiry BJ. It may become central to the "haves" (professional, highly resourced schools) vs "have nots" argument if a possible CAS/GPS merger is ever mooted.

 

[rtd32]

Very glad to hear that the teachers at Barker are heavily involved in coaching as well. Don't get me wrong about the relative lack of resources. I am sending my kids to Waverley knowing full well what the resourcing is and I wouldn't have it any other way. I send them to Waverley for philosophical reasons, and while we may lack financial resources, we are putting 7 teams in the 13s on the paddock every saturday this year which says a lot about the human capital we have - and about how much the school is serious about rugby participation at all levels of ability.
Obviously people fork out much bigger bucks to send their kids to the more expensive schools and I fully agree that that money should be spent on education - by all means get the best science block, IT backup, business school.
I suppose that I don't see rugby as 'education' per se. At a school it should be about the boys and the teachers seeing what kind of team they can put out on the weekend. Having two coaches predominantly for rugby at a secondary school to me is a strange way of educating kids.
Still, we will beg to differ I'm sure. I am not complaining about the lack of resources at Waverley at all. Indeed the place has a perverse pride in the fact. I am complaining about people making predictions about school's chances based on some assumption that all are equally resourced and therefore presumably have an equal chance. We all know that's not the case.
Outside of the weekend results thread, I think the next most important thread is to look at how schools approach their rugby - how is participation, what are the competing sports, how much emphasis is placed on it. If it doesn't prosper in the private schools, rugby in this country struggles.

Look that's a fair point and I respect every aspect of what you're saying. The only thing I see point in saying to what you've just said is to reiterate the point that a school like barker looks to accommodate for EVERYONES interest to the best of their means. I doubt that you would have given much consideration to barker for your boy(s) to attend given the commute from the east (I'm assuming that's where you live) but it doesn't take a very comprehensive look into their educational approach/ethos to know that they strive to create an environment that caters for a well rounded student on all fronts. Rugby is a big focus of the school, no doubt, and I'm sure if you raised the 'how is it education argument?' with them they'd argue that's it's character building (working in a team), and promotes a healthy lifestyle. However, rugby doesn't stand alone when talking about serious injections of cash flow - there are people employed specifically for their cadet unit, their outdoor ed program, swimming, soccer, drama and music etc you get the picture. My point is merely that I send a kid there for such a high price with the expectation that the money is 100% utilised for them to get the most out of school - academically (you'll notice they're not too shabby on that front either), socially, in co-curricular activities, and in character building. That's what you pay for, whether or not it's worth the money or achieved to a satisfactory level is totally subjective to opinion and individual circumstances.

That's not to put down any other school or say that you need money to succeed. Who's won the most CAS titles in the history of the competition? Waverley. Who consistently has the best academics in CAS and has won the most debating titles? Aloys - 2 of the less wealthy schools. I certainly agree that it's a matter of mentality, not money.

 

[kazoom]

Regarding U16s Reps, I believe Trinity has 4 x U16s playing in their 1st XV team. How many other U16s are playing in 1sts teams in the comp?

 

[BRUMBIEJACK]

Look that's a fair point and I respect every aspect of what you're saying. The only thing I see point in saying to what you've just said is to reiterate the point that a school like barker looks to accommodate for EVERYONES interest to the best of their means. I doubt that you would have given much consideration to barker for your boy(s) to attend given the commute from the east (I'm assuming that's where you live) but it doesn't take a very comprehensive look into their educational approach/ethos to know that they strive to create an environment that caters for a well rounded student on all fronts. Rugby is a big focus of the school, no doubt, and I'm sure if you raised the 'how is it education argument?' with them they'd argue that's it's character building (working in a team), and promotes a healthy lifestyle. However, rugby doesn't stand alone when talking about serious injections of cash flow - there are people employed specifically for their cadet unit, their outdoor ed program, swimming, soccer, drama and music etc you get the picture. My point is merely that I send a kid there for such a high price with the expectation that the money is 100% utilised for them to get the most out of school - academically (you'll notice they're not too shabby on that front either), socially, in co-curricular activities, and in character building. That's what you pay for, whether or not it's worth the money or achieved to a satisfactory level is totally subjective to opinion and individual circumstances.

That's not to put down any other school or say that you need money to succeed. Who's won the most CAS titles in the history of the competition? Waverley. Who consistently has the best academics in CAS and has won the most debating titles? Aloys - 2 of the less wealthy schools. I certainly agree that it's a matter of mentality, not money.

Actually from the west so I didn't look at Barker I'm afraid. Not because of wrong location but wrong brand. On your last point though, it simply highlights the issue I was highlighting. Aloys is top academically because it's academically selective (therefore not a level playing field in scholastic terms) and Waverley has won most of its titles when the playing field was more or less even in terms of coaching professionalism and school sizes. Those days with regards to sport appear to be in the past. It would be a shame if it is.

 

[Antony]

Aloys is top academically

What I'm about to say is totally unrelated to rugby, but I think that's a reasonably recent development. Back when I finished they were down around the 60s in the rankings. Good on Aloys - quality school.

That's all. As you were.

 

[Elfster]

Look, I'd be happy if you turn out to be right. Unfortunately, each point you make has a counterpoint. For instance, it's true that Trinity hit 40 points against Waverley for only the second time (the 2011 premiers scored 46), but it's pretty rare for Knox to score fifty against Waverley, too. And, yes, Cranbrook allowed St Aloysius to score 17 points, but its margin of victory (20) was still higher than Trinity's (17). So the stats tell you a certain amount, but really what matters is how you assess the strengths and weaknesses of each side.

Knox, it seems to me, has two weaknesses - its lineout is a bit suspect and the backline defence is sometimes vulnerable. So that means that Trinity needs to give the ball to Barkley-Brown in space, and let him do his thing, and back up Saofia when he goes on one of those big charges. Saofia will breach the line, but doesn't have a whole lot of speed, so the quicker players need to support him when he makes a bust. And with Rasch and Filipo doing well at the lineout, maybe Trinity could plan some attack around its (surprising, after the last few years, but welcome) lineout strength. And - discipline. No silly penalties, no yellow cards.

Against that, Knox has probably the best forward pack in the competition (Widders-Leece, Pierce and Van Zyl are terrific) and the most penetrative back in Watson, assuming he plays. Plus they're fit and their support play is good. All of that makes them a tough proposition.

Mind you, there's one area where Trinity may have an edge. We don't talk about it so much these days, but Trinity's goal-kicking has been better than Knox's. It's making a difference at Cranbrook, too, where Renton seems to be landing them from everywhere. In a tight contest, this could be important.

I agree that the Knox line out is a little inconsistent, so Trinity should be able to put some pressure on there. At this stage the biggest weakness for Knox is their inconsistency and ability to give away penalties. If a side can put on continual pressure and get possession and territory Knox are emminently beatable as they tend to leak penalties more than other sides.

One of Knox's strength is that they are a well balanced side who have good structure. The greatest concern for Trinity would be keeping the starting 1st XV on the field. Waverley 2nds put some 20 points on the Trinity seconds. Knox seconds beat their Waverley counterparts by 60 points - there doesn't look like there is a lot of depth out at Trinity.

 

[SonnyDillWilliams]

What I'm about to say is totally unrelated to rugby, but I think that's a reasonably recent development. Back when I finished they were down around the 60s in the rankings. Good on Aloys - quality school.

That's all. As you were.

Some waverley old timers complain about waverley's glory days having gone ... As the story goes once upon a time waves was good at rugby and had good academics ... Judges, politicians, rhode scholars, blah blah

Not being a waverley old boy, Not sure if this is a figment of their imagination

Oh well the Governor General is a waverley old boy, the block got won by a waverley old boy, tom English is supposedly a future wallaby out of rebels, and Stephen holies is back miraculously in the tahs ..... Maybe world domination might happen, despite the shoe string budget ... And no bloody toilet paper at queens park 1

Maybe , just maybe if the weather closes in, and the gods comply, waves might surprise one of this years heavyweights ( knox or brook) . But only at Death Valley ... And only if toilet paper is removed, as per normal

 

[Antony]

Hearing news of the Knox V Waverly honestly was no surprise.

Post deleted and poster banned permanently.

See you later mate.

 

[Lemons]

As a Knox parent I like rd32's thoughts. I haven't met Matt Williams at Knox but it appears his brief revolves around 1st 15 success - with his efforts appearing to focus on the top team and a few of the standouts from the 16A's. Surely in the long term both for rugby and the school, attention paid to lower age group teams will deliver more for the schools (and so parents $).
With 6 training sessions a week the year 12 students will feel the demands on them as the season progresses - and lets face it, more will depend on their HSC mark than rugby skills in a year or so. The previous regime headed up by Chuck Ardron appeared to be very aware of commitments away from rugby. Chuck was also good at giving those players in their last year at school but who were the next best in their position some game time towards the end of matches whilst the Williams team appears to more focused on next years stars. It appears at Knox to represent both the 1st Cricket and 1st rugby in your final year is not going to be achievable under the Williams program.
To counter this, by all accounts the Knox team this year are enjoying the Williams style - but they are as good a group as Knox has had for a few years and that always helps.

Blackdog I can understand your point, however Chapman the flanker in year 11 at Knox was a key member of the knox 1st xi winning CAS champs for cricket and is a huge part of the Knox rugby team as well. Williams allowed him to train for cricket whilst doing only minimal training.

 

[rtd32]

I

Actually from the west so I didn't look at Barker I'm afraid. Not because of wrong location but wrong brand. On your last point though, it simply highlights the issue I was highlighting. Aloys is top academically because it's academically selective (therefore not a level playing field in scholastic terms) and Waverley has won most of its titles when the playing field was more or less even in terms of coaching professionalism and school sizes. Those days with regards to sport appear to be in the past. It would be a shame if it is.

I disagree there, Waverley won in 2007 and 2009 and have placed 2nd for 4 years running since 2009. In the last 2 seasons they drew with the winners in one year and beat them the next (some would argue Waverley should have won the first encounter as well, which i agree with).

As for Aloys, without going on too much of a tangent, they are academically selective but they allow spots for siblings, sons of old boys, and the junior school entry requirements is a lower standard. Their mentality is focused around academics and that is what they achieve, plain and simple - I doubt their results would be significantly affected if they changed their admissions policy

 

[Snort]

I'm not sure how helpful it is to talk in general terms about the approach each school takes to Rugby and its place in school life generally. When I was at school (back in the dim mists of time), the expectation was that the ideal was to produce a well-rounded student, who was proficient in the classroom and at more than one sport, and who had other skills as well (artistic, or musical, or whatever). Of course, only a very few lived up to that ideal, but the aim was balance. Rugby was one thing that you did as part of that package. But times have changed. I spoke to one Associated Schools headmaster not long ago, and he said that now that boys could win six-figure contracts to play Rugby within a year or two of leaving school, the school needed to see that as a legitimate career path, and provide the boys who had a chance of doing that with an opportunity to achieve that aim - in the same way that the school helps other boys aim to get into Law or Medicine.

So, I suspect, in each school, you have a mix of boys. Some are preparing to try to make a career in professional sport, others love the game and will go on to enjoy it in Grade or Colts, and others are having a good time and probably playing the game for the last time. The game needs them all, because the ones in the third category will end up paying to watch the ones in the first.

That applies to St Aloysius, too, by the way. It may be academically selective, up to a point, but it has also produced a fair number of Super Rugby players in recent times - think Foley, McCabe, Kingston - as well as one or two who have gone into League. What handicaps St Aloysius, I suspect, is that it is the smallest of the Associated Schools, so depth is an issue, and it doesn't actively seek to attract Rugby players, as some other schools do.

 

[Pete King]

Some waverley old timers complain about waverley's glory days having gone . As the story goes once upon a time waves was good at rugby and had good academics . Judges, politicians, rhode scholars, blah blah

Not being a waverley old boy, Not sure if this is a figment of their imagination

Oh well the Governor General is a waverley old boy, the block got won by a waverley old boy, tom English is supposedly a future wallaby out of rebels, and Stephen holies is back miraculously in the tahs ... Maybe world domination might happen, despite the shoe string budget . And no bloody toilet paper at queens park 1

Maybe , just maybe if the weather closes in, and the gods comply, waves might surprise one of this years heavyweights ( knox or brook) . But only at Death Valley . And only if toilet paper is removed, as per normal

I think you will find that each of the schools have a rich tradition. Waverley being no exception, There have been many old boy wallabies and people of good standing in the community to have been schooled there.
Whatever schooling you received unfortunately you missed the boat in acquiring the ability to show some respect. Wake up to yourself each and every team, be it a NRL, super rugby franchise or schoolboy team has peaks and troughs.