ISA Rugby 2014
- Thread starter pigprop
- Start date
- Status
Cyclops
Stan Wickham (3)
I heard some feedback from the opens trials up at Oxford Falls. There were 4 sets of jerseys; red, green, light blue, dark blue. Red played green, then light blue played dark blue. After lunch, 4 new teams were named and placed into the jerseys. There were more players than jerseys, so some players were swapped at half-time.
In the second round, the same jerseys played each other. This round, there seemed to be more strength in the blues jerseys. Some observers felt that this was the probables and possibles in the light and dark blue. I don't know about that; and there was some talent in the red and green second round.
The teams will be announced to the schools tomorrow.
Sidestepper
Frank Row (1)
Business as usual down at Oxford Falls.
Several annointed ones in Brooky blazers were seen backslapping with selectors on the sidelines while lesser mortals slogged it out on the field on a perfect autumn day.
38 players are to be named tomorrow and from what I saw the ISA coaches should have a good mix of size, speed and skill to work with.
I just hope that the selectors show some vision and choose a combination devoid of vested interest that will not fail us again come the business end of the trials when ISA 1 plays CAS 1.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
A folorn hope I suspect SS.
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
There have been reports of injuries in the Augies camp. Perhaps the "Backslapping Brooky Blazers" are currently in Team Rehab, or are being rested to ensure prime fitness for the big showdown against Riverview this coming weekend.
The "usual suspects" that have been selected in ISA U16 2012 and 2013, and returning ISA I's and II's from 2013 would be heavily favoured to make the cut in the ISA 38 this year, unless they unearth some smokies from the trials.
Any smokies that caught your eye at the Trials yesterday @Sidestepper?
The "usual suspects" that have been selected in ISA U16 2012 and 2013, and returning ISA I's and II's from 2013 would be heavily favoured to make the cut in the ISA 38 this year, unless they unearth some smokies from the trials.
Any smokies that caught your eye at the Trials yesterday @Sidestepper?
Sidestepper
Frank Row (1)
I won't be smoked out on smokies until I see the list and even then it wouldn't be fair to them!
I didn't say the selectors wouldn't do their best and on the vested interest question I rest my case. I was at the trials and behind the resting blazer boys I could see players changing their jerseys. Many were heavily strapped and carried injuries yet had turned up to prove themselves against the best the ISA could throw at them without knowing that the best had something better to do that weekend .
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
Pfft.
Strapping does not equate to injuries.
It's a fashion statement for most.
A security blanket for some.
If you were to do a survey,most players that use strapping,have it from the first trial to the last game.
Strapping does not equate to injuries.
It's a fashion statement for most.
A security blanket for some.
If you were to do a survey,most players that use strapping,have it from the first trial to the last game.
Wood Rat
Alfred Walker (16)
What was the strapping for, usually not more than stability and protection. Innuendo is soft and pointless. you do not know the circumstances or issues with those you were looking at whether booted or not. As suggested previously selection is likely to be a body of work in conjunction with this trial.No mystery and not unreasonable.
and now I am sitting in a room where I can see the screen I can clean up the mess I put here earlier
and now I am sitting in a room where I can see the screen I can clean up the mess I put here earlier
BillyBlack
Allen Oxlade (6)
And Pfft to "I like to watch".
Strapping - just remember that prevention is far, far better than cure!!
Who are parents and spectators to say who should and shouldn't have strapping. Especially when they're not your kids, and generally you have NFI what injuries they are or aren't carrying.
If they feel better, if they play better, if it keeps them out of doctors offices and off physio tables - than I say all the more strapping.
Strapping - just remember that prevention is far, far better than cure!!
Who are parents and spectators to say who should and shouldn't have strapping. Especially when they're not your kids, and generally you have NFI what injuries they are or aren't carrying.
If they feel better, if they play better, if it keeps them out of doctors offices and off physio tables - than I say all the more strapping.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
The strapping quote was in regard to it being evidence of a player carrying an injury.
The context was,that these boys were playing whilst already hurt,whilst the special ones were not required to risk their injuries.
Sounds like you don't think heavy strapping is evidence of someone playing with an injury either.
The context was,that these boys were playing whilst already hurt,whilst the special ones were not required to risk their injuries.
Sounds like you don't think heavy strapping is evidence of someone playing with an injury either.
10to12
Jimmy Flynn (14)
Agree with you Wood Rat. Every year we hear whingeing about certain players getting an easy ride through the selection process. Surely the fact that these players went on and played at higher levels and succeeded at these levels in previous years add to their body of work that the selectors take into account. The boys know who they are and are happy that they get to play with these boys. All those whingers out there ,do they honestly think the best way to pick a team is watching a trial game for one hour and selecting only those boys you noticed?
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
Selectors have their favourites. Always have done, always will.
A selector that hasn't done their homework on the cattle perhaps shouldn't be selecting.
Many of these boys have been in front of selectors on many occasions for both club and school, and most of their strengths and weaknesses are already well known to the ISA selectors. Most of the selectors are well aware of the selfish plays that the boys will attempt to make themselves look more "selectable" for the selectors, and they have generally been around enough to see through those and identify which boy is doing the unspectacular but essential technical work deep in the bowels of the breakdowns and tackle contests, and which boy has a propensity to seagull and not execute their basic job description.
All selectors have had various degrees of bias and self interest. Remember they are the ones putting their reputation on the line if the selected squad doesn't perform on the field. Just look at the ridicule that Papa was subjected to following what some refer to as the "Papahatzis Experiment" about 4 years ago when the NSW I team was outperformed by NSW II at Nationals.
For those not around at the time, that "discussion" got so heated and personal that the Mods had to issue a directive that the subject was not to be mentioned any further.
Also consider the rants and tirades that get directed towards SJRU Zone Selectors, SJRU and NSW JRU selectors about their incompetence, transparent cronyism, team/club/district bias and even borderline slanderous allegations of outright dishonesty.
I for one am on the record here as having a go at the PROCESS used to select teams from time to times, not the selections themselves: - Exhibit A - the (previously) Annual Clusterduck that was the selection process for the various NSW U16 teams. Exhibit B - The circus that was used last year for the SJRU U17's.
Anyhoo. IMHO the incumbents deserve a degree of special treatment, and it is up to the challenger to knock them off the perch. The incumbent knows the structures, plays and game plan (they don't change all that much from year to year) that will be used and has either demonstrated their abilities to perform in that environment, or if they haven't, they will be going into the trials with a note to that effect against their name. One bad performance in a head to head artificially contrived trial environment, and conversely one good performance in that same environment, may not necessarily provide that evidence to drop an incumbent or reward a challenger.
Rant over and in summary, I can't see any Association Selector (ISA incl) making wholesale changes from previous years representatives who return. There will always be one or two surprises, but even then there is usually some objective performance based evidence that can be found to justify that selection.
On the other hand, Coaches reserve the right to absolutely bollocks it up and play a flanker at halfback (italy), an outside back at flyhalf (Dingo), a specialised tighthead prop at loosehead and vice versa (too many to mention) but that is another story.
Anyone have the squads yet?
A selector that hasn't done their homework on the cattle perhaps shouldn't be selecting.
Many of these boys have been in front of selectors on many occasions for both club and school, and most of their strengths and weaknesses are already well known to the ISA selectors. Most of the selectors are well aware of the selfish plays that the boys will attempt to make themselves look more "selectable" for the selectors, and they have generally been around enough to see through those and identify which boy is doing the unspectacular but essential technical work deep in the bowels of the breakdowns and tackle contests, and which boy has a propensity to seagull and not execute their basic job description.
All selectors have had various degrees of bias and self interest. Remember they are the ones putting their reputation on the line if the selected squad doesn't perform on the field. Just look at the ridicule that Papa was subjected to following what some refer to as the "Papahatzis Experiment" about 4 years ago when the NSW I team was outperformed by NSW II at Nationals.
For those not around at the time, that "discussion" got so heated and personal that the Mods had to issue a directive that the subject was not to be mentioned any further.
Also consider the rants and tirades that get directed towards SJRU Zone Selectors, SJRU and NSW JRU selectors about their incompetence, transparent cronyism, team/club/district bias and even borderline slanderous allegations of outright dishonesty.
I for one am on the record here as having a go at the PROCESS used to select teams from time to times, not the selections themselves: - Exhibit A - the (previously) Annual Clusterduck that was the selection process for the various NSW U16 teams. Exhibit B - The circus that was used last year for the SJRU U17's.
Anyhoo. IMHO the incumbents deserve a degree of special treatment, and it is up to the challenger to knock them off the perch. The incumbent knows the structures, plays and game plan (they don't change all that much from year to year) that will be used and has either demonstrated their abilities to perform in that environment, or if they haven't, they will be going into the trials with a note to that effect against their name. One bad performance in a head to head artificially contrived trial environment, and conversely one good performance in that same environment, may not necessarily provide that evidence to drop an incumbent or reward a challenger.
Rant over and in summary, I can't see any Association Selector (ISA incl) making wholesale changes from previous years representatives who return. There will always be one or two surprises, but even then there is usually some objective performance based evidence that can be found to justify that selection.
On the other hand, Coaches reserve the right to absolutely bollocks it up and play a flanker at halfback (italy), an outside back at flyhalf (Dingo), a specialised tighthead prop at loosehead and vice versa (too many to mention) but that is another story.
Anyone have the squads yet?
@10to12. I agree that watching a trial for 1 hour is not the best way to pick a rep team. I also believe selecting half of the 38 boys to represent ISA from one school as they have done in the past is questionable at the very least. In 2012 ISA 16's lost by about 7 points to Presidents XV and last years 16's holding Presidents XV to a 5 all draw. Most of these players deserve to get selected. It will be interesting to see how many from one school get picked in ISA 1's when both of these teams had a fair mix of players from DIV 1 and DIV 2 schools.
10to12
Jimmy Flynn (14)
Agree with you pilot. 2012, 2013 u16 should make up the majority of the squad. Their success should put them in as front runners. we will find out soon enough.
blastblastbronco
Frank Nicholson (4)
Is anyone aware of how many teams Pats are fielding in opens this year?
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
At least 3
RugbyTears
Chris McKivat (8)
Auggies vs Riverview, Oakhill vs Joeys, Kinross is playing TAS (The Armidale School), I think Pats got Sydney Grammar. Not sure whats on for Stannies & Gregs
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Pius v High
- Status