National Academy 2012

[tigerland12]

Thanks for that Lee, good read

 

[Lee Grant]

Will Skelton is listed as being in the playing squad. Did he play?

Yes, he played in the 2nd half. Had a couple of good runs and stopped a few large folks. Willie appears to be lazy but I am certain it is not the case: IMO he does not have the intuition of where and when to participate and sometimes the game passes him by. This is a pity as I remember one game he had for CHS at Knox and he had a storming game.

His rugby mentors have to work on this with him - and against his innate shyness.

 

[qwerty51]

He's not a viable lineout option, he shouldn't be playing lock.

 

[DownsSupporter]

Yes, he played in the 2nd half. Had a couple of good runs and stopped a few large folks. Willie appears to be lazy but I am certain it is not the case: IMO he does not have the intuition of where and when to participate and sometimes the game passes him by. This is a pity as I remember one game he had for CHS at Knox and he had a storming game.

His rugby mentors have to work on this with him - and against his innate shyness.

Lee,

Thank you for your report on the game - perceptive and informative as always.

Your comments on Willie could apply to a lot of young men progressing through Colts to grade and highlight the importance of the coaches and mentors who make the difference to young men who may have size and skill but just need to be taught how, and when, to apply theses attributes to given situations.

A couple of absences from the program for the QLD side that I thought noticeable given their prospective importance to U20 considerations this year - Michael Birmingham and Sam Reiser.

Any news on these two?

 

[Cat_A]

Sam Reiser is coming back from knee problems (?related to another growth spurt?). He' should be ok for the start of the season, and also available for U20s selection. But given he only turned 18 in Nov last year, not sure I he's still a development prospect for this year?

 

[Orange Peeler]

I'm sorry guys but I was expecting more out of yesterday's game.

I thought this National Academy game was of a very poor standard.

I don't believe in the excuse that "it was there first time playing together" I ask you to remember that this is Australia's best emerging Rugby talent, instructed by ARU coaches. I'm sure if you review the team lists most of these players have been together for many years in various ARU programs.

Just some quick observations,

a) Brisbane based players

• should have won by alot more but poor ball handling stopped there momentum.
• lazy one on one tackles on their own try line and poor decision making in defense let in some very soft tries against a basic one out attack
• it looked like boys against men, the majority of the Brisbane team looked physically imposing enough to make the transition into Super Rugby, well done to there S&C coaches.

b) Sydney based players

• Its disappointing to see the player performances at yesterdays game, I'm not sure how most of these players where selected, no standout performances at all.
• For an elite squad that spends so much time training together the basic core skills where dismal, in particular the catch & pass
• NSW is the biggest player producing Rugby State in Australia, so is this really the best we have to offer at this level.
• the majority of these players would struggle to cut it in the Shute Shield.
• Sydney based National Academy officials should go back and review their "mission statement" and just start all over again with new selections.

 

[Bruce Ross]

A very interesting and seemingly perceptive commentary on this weekend's game from a new member, Orange Peeler. Well done. You voice many of the concerns that some of us hold about this latest and earlier manifestations of the academy system. You suggest that "most of these players have been together for many years in various ARU programs". To the extent that this is true it indicates a closed shop approach to the development of talent.

We need to have resources channelled into development programs at the level of the clubs. The "Sydney based National Academy officials" you speak of should be redeployed in this way.

 

[Red Heavy]

Thanks for the reviews guys. You can also add a * to Malouf as well Lee he will be turning 19 this year. Played 7 his whole life untill last year when he was moved to 12 in colts to add to his game. Don't think he was in the academy before this weekend on a full time basis. Just training with them from time to time.

 

[Bowside]

Interesting reviews thanks to those that wrote them.

I think this academy system has potential but like other posters have already alluded to, the net from which they are picking players if far to small due to a lack of grass roots development.

I hope the plan is to open academies in Canberra, Perth and Melbourne as the talent pool grows in those states.

However as I wrote a few pages back I am still of the opinion that putting these blokes into teams and having them play kiwi academy teams in regular high standard competition is the way forward. Far to much 'development' in Australian rugby and not enough actual competitive rugby played.

 

[eastman]

Starting backline for the NSW Academy was:
Trent Lake
Damon Anderson
Bill meakes
Apo
Elijah Kok
Ben Volavola
Apart from Lake and Elijah most of these guys have been pretty solid players in the Shute Shield, so you have to wonder that maybe these guys are the best young playes in the NSW system

 

[Jets]

• 6. Ah Wong – excellent prospect – hard, skilful player with athletic build. Watch this space.

I'm expecting big things from Nigel this year. If I was the Rebels I'd sign him as soon as possible as he would make a great addition to their squad in 2013

 

[Lee Grant]

I thought the NSW Academy was the better team in the first half - albeit with the wind behind them but in the second half the Qld group was clearly superior (many reserves started in the second half and by the 4th quarter all were on the park). The Qld team after oranges did look bigger and stronger and more rugby wise.

Bowside - I would have hated to have seen the result if these guys played against a Kiwi Academy team as they would have been blown off the park as the Oz U/20 trialists were embarrassed by a Kiwi provincial Academy (Hawkes Bay??) last year at Narrabeen. Just as well it wasn't a national academy - mind you, some of them were over 20.

I think the Oz Academy has to bed down better, to get smarter, and the players have to get more S & C even before they report in to the Academy for the first time - before they play an equivalent Kiwi team.

We saw another example last year of poor Aussie S&C of young Oz players. The Oz U/19 team looked like boys against men against an England team, but the Poms were all U/18 qualified. The difference was that even though all the young Poms were still at school a month or so before they arrived in Oz, they had all been reporting to a professional club during the school year. They were more rugby smart that the Aussie boys also; so one supposed they were doing more than S&C stuff with their clubs. This is what the Rugby League system does in Australia.

Knowing that context I did not criticise the Oz Academy lads for their lack of S & C in my post. I agree with Orange Peeler except that I thought the Qld players were also wanting physically and would struggle against a Kiwi or England team with the same age profiles of all the players I saw yesterday.

Its easy to criticise but harder to know what to do. I've mentioned before than many of the the private rugby schools have good gyms and it just needs some liaison by an S&C guy from the state union to give someone at the school individual programmes for the targeted lads, and to track their compliance and progress.

Clubs should do this for boys in their district who don't have access to a school gym; they will want them in their Colts team when they leave school anyway. Again, there should be state oversight of targeted players. Such activities cost money but we need a bit of that stuff coming down the chain.

 

[spectator]

Thanks for the report LG.

Good to see Ah Wong go well. He has been impressive at Brisbane Prems level and it should only be a matter of time before he gets a chance at the next level.

From a Qld and Easts Tigers point of view, good to see Enever impressing and Faulkner back on the park.

 

[Orange Peeler]

Why does the Sydney based National Academy persist with selecting past Australian School Boy players / NTS members (formerly know as)

Now I certainly don't blame the players but the system does need a complete overhaul.

I can only speak from a NSW perspective in the hope of moving forward, so why not use the Sydney v NSW Country game to select a Sydney Based National Academy side.

1. For the actual game itself all players should be selected on an origin basis, if you where born in the Country then your eligable for NSW Country selection.

2. The best inform (Sydney & NSW Country) Grade players are chosen from the Shute Shield with (NSW Country) also having the provision to select players from the Country competitions.

3. After the Sydney v NSW Country game is over a Sydney Based Academy squad is chosen (including shawdow reserves) by the ARU selectors in conjuction with the NSW, ACT and VIC, Franchises

4. The selected inform Grade players would surely be physically and mentally closer to Super Rugby representation, then a player who has just finished high school.

5. You could also do the same for the Colts Competition in order to find the best inform players for the Australain U/20's

6. This would defintley help revive the nearly extinct Rugby player pathway.

 

[SuperGrover]

Some fine points Orange Peeler, however, it all comes down to what the ARU is actually using the National Academy for.

If it is meant to provide immediate depth for the Super Rugby franchises then I suppose more emphasis should be placed on finding those closer 'physically and mentally closer to Super Rugby representation' as you put it.

However, if it is (as I suspect) more to do with providing a contract to retain those players identified (the most contentious issue it seems) as having the potential to physically and mentally mature into Super Rugby and Test players then the emphasis on selection will obviously be different.

The system is probably designed with both these objectives in mind, hence the conflict.

 

[twenty seven]

Reading the comments above and comparisons made if we were to play against the NZ academy; From the amount of players and the fact they they were trying to give all lads two 25min halves, it sounds to me like a hit out and an opportunity to see were the boys are at. If they were to play against a 'team', like the NZ academy, would they not then select a 'team' and train them as such. I feel that the process would be a lot different as would the training from a team perspective. Also remember that it is still heavy training time, particularly with weights sessions as the season hasn't kicked of yet. Not here in Qld anyway. Trial matches for clubs have not yet got underway.
Looking at the names posted on the ARU web site for the academy game, there are a few more names eligable for the U20's. Also there are a few missing who were injured and didn't play.

 

[Lee Grant]

Why does the Sydney based National Academy persist with selecting past Australian School Boy players / NTS members (formerly know as)

Rugby clubs were able to nominate players for the national academy and they wouldn't have cared two hoots if the players they suggested played for Oz Schools or were in the Gold Squad, or not. That was one of the things about the National Academy that I liked, though who knows what weight was given to club nominations?

If correct weight was given, at least the club nominations took into account progress some boys made since leaving school. We all know that some boys develop physically after school more than others - and also in a rugby sense. The club nominations may have redressed some injustices in schools selections also.

By my rough count only 25% or so of the lads playing in the hit out, for that is all it was, had played in 'tests' for the Oz Schools Ones. That figure would increase some if you include participation with Oz A Schools and even more so if you include the main state teams, but it suffices to say that quite a few lads outside of elite schools players were caught in the net.



None of the players yesterday screamed out that they had been dudded in selection for EPS teams; so the suggestion when the Academy names were first listed that the best could be cherry-picked by Super squads if they had injuries was seen to be a fiction. One had said that early in this thread and also suggested that the only Super cherry-picking to be done would be of experienced club players.

The best predictions are true when you make them.

 

[Lee Grant]

Looking at the names posted on the ARU web site for the academy game, there are a few more names eligable for the U20's. Also there are a few missing who were injured and didn't play.

I didn't report on all the players eligible for the Oz Under 20s this year in my post so, yes, there are a lot more eligible than I mentioned. I asked Anthony Eddy to call out to me from the team lists who was eligible and I ticked the names. He came up with 24 of them though he missed Malouf; so make that 25.

 

[twenty seven]

I didn't report on all the players eligible for the Oz Under 20s this year in my post so, yes, there are a lot more eligible than I mentioned. I asked Anthony Eddy to call out to me from the team lists who was eligible and I ticked the names. He came up with 24 of them though he missed Malouf; so make that 25.

So thats a fair few just there. Be interesting to see how many trial. That must be coming up soon.

 

[Tahboy]

Been reading the reports about the Academy game especially about Will Skelton and I saw him play a couple of times with sydney Uni colts and I think they did him no favours by the way they played him
He was unleashed on the opposition defence once Uni got into the oppositions 22 and he would get a lot of touches of the ball but he would be unsighted in other parts of the field
I don't think this helped his game develop and he was never taught how to jump in the line outs which will stop any chances of him progressing as a lock. I think Uni placed more importance of winning than helping Willie develop as a player
Maybe they should have let him join another club who place importants on helping players develop