NSW AAGPS 2018

[rod skellet]

I'm not underestimating CAS, nor do I take confidence or otherwise from the number of GPS rep players who were in yr 11 (even 10) last year. It just struck me as a larger than normal number. But i could be completely wrong.

That said, i would hope that the 6 players from 1s who were comprehensively beaten last year would have gained/learned from the experience and be better players for that now.

Should be a very close game imo.
.

about 15 points close.

 

[Wristman]

about 15 points close.

I do have us as favourites. GPS should be better than last year. CAS not quite so strong.
But we were favourites last year......
From the years of GPS/ CAS games I have seen, the CAS sides are usually drawn from fewer schools allowing combinations to be maintained.
GPS teams in recent years have been a diplomatic mix of 5 sides (with the odd Shore star like Rixon thrown in).
That is how it should be, but I would love to see some combinations maintained, particularly in the backs.
Strang & Savala at 9 &10 and Easy and Bell in the centres would make a lot of sense.

 

[Crackerjack]

^^^^^
Astute observations, Wristy, on both side of the CAS/ GPS ‘divide’.

 

[Rich_E]

I do have us as favourites. GPS should be better than last year. CAS not quite so strong.
But we were favourites last year..
From the years of GPS/ CAS games I have seen, the CAS sides are usually drawn from fewer schools allowing combinations to be maintained.
GPS teams in recent years have been a diplomatic mix of 5 sides (with the odd Shore star like Rixon thrown in).
That is how it should be, but I would love to see some combinations maintained, particularly in the backs.
Strang & Savala at 9 &10 and Easy and Bell in the centres would make a lot of sense.

Would make sense to extend combos to:

9 Strang (S)
10 Savala (S)

12 Easy (I)
13 Bell (I)

11 Williams (K)
14 Sua'ali'i (K)
15 Connolly (K)

Not saying must have, but would be quality backline.
.

 

[Rich_E]

Re Strang, I can see now why some have said he could have made Scots 1sts in 2016, in year 10. Is a shame he missed all of 2016 and 2017 with injury. Although the other 9s that did play were bloody good.
.

 

[rod skellet]

Would make sense to extend combos to:

9 Strang (S)
10 Savala (S)

12 Easy (I)
13 Bell (I)

11 Williams (K)
14 Sua'ali'i (K)
15 Connolly (K)

Not saying must have, but would be quality backline.
.

That backline is terrifyingly good

 

[Rich_E]

Other good sets of 'combinations' would be:

10 Minogue (K)
12 Stewart (K)
13 Mac Smith (K)

11 Scolari (J) / Tricks (S)
14 Ryan (J) / Zucchiatti (S)
15 Wilson (J) / Mossman (S)

2nds maybe
.

 

[HeresToRugby]

All very deserving players (there are others not mentioned from other schools) in the previous 2 posts but this 'combinations' argument is becoming a bit overrated and I'm glad you blokes don't pick the team based on such logic. Quite possibly the ones mentioned are the best 2 sets of backs in that order but the concept is not one I would have thought is how selections are determined.

My understanding was that representatives are picked on their skill not how they get tagged along with someone who happens to play in the same team or even next to them. If the selectors' brief is purely pick a side to win so be it but please correct me if the idea of rep is not to pick the best 15 in each team. This is not State of Origin all of a sudden where the flavour of the day is Moloney and Cleary because they play in the same team (they are the best anyway in my opinion).

Surely if they are the best then they deserved to get ranked accordingly and I'm sure they are good enough to fit in and still have a great chance of winning. If combinations are such an issue they may as well pick the best GPS school up to this point which would be Scots. Kings would be 2nds and possibly Joeys or Riverview the 3rds. It's all quite bemusing.

 

[WLF]

Would make sense to extend combos to:

9 Strang (S)
10 Savala (S)

12 Easy (I)
13 Bell (I)

11 Williams (K)
14 Sua'ali'i (K)
15 Connolly (K)

Not saying must have, but would be quality backline.
.

Rich_E, that makes absolute perfect sense, but you have left out 1 most important ingredient, the politics!
I hope common sense can prevail in all selections at all levels.

 

[WLF]

All very deserving players (there are others not mentioned from other schools) in the previous 2 posts but this 'combinations' argument is becoming a bit overrated and I'm glad you blokes don't pick the team based on such logic. Quite possibly the ones mentioned are the best 2 sets of backs in that order but the concept is not one I would have thought is how selections are determined.

My understanding was that representatives are picked on their skill not how they get tagged along with someone who happens to play in the same team or even next to them. If the selectors' brief is purely pick a side to win so be it but please correct me if the idea of rep is not to pick the best 15 in each team. This is not State of Origin all of a sudden where the flavour of the day is Moloney and Cleary because they play in the same team (they are the best anyway in my opinion).

Surely if they are the best then they deserved to get ranked accordingly and I'm sure they are good enough to fit in and still have a great chance of winning. If combinations are such an issue they may as well pick the best GPS school up to this point which would be Scots. Kings would be 2nds and possibly Joeys or Riverview the 3rds. It's all quite bemusing.

On the flip side, players who play together can bring out the best in each other, whereas strangers may find it much more difficult. Also winning teams probably get more higher selections, because they win.

It is a tough one, but I do believe last years CAS combo's were the reason CAS won, and they all went on to higher levels.

 

[Wristman]

All very deserving players (there are others not mentioned from other schools) in the previous 2 posts but this 'combinations' argument is becoming a bit overrated and I'm glad you blokes don't pick the team based on such logic. Quite possibly the ones mentioned are the best 2 sets of backs in that order but the concept is not one I would have thought is how selections are determined.

My understanding was that representatives are picked on their skill not how they get tagged along with someone who happens to play in the same team or even next to them. If the selectors' brief is purely pick a side to win so be it but please correct me if the idea of rep is not to pick the best 15 in each team. This is not State of Origin all of a sudden where the flavour of the day is Moloney and Cleary because they play in the same team (they are the best anyway in my opinion).

Surely if they are the best then they deserved to get ranked accordingly and I'm sure they are good enough to fit in and still have a great chance of winning. If combinations are such an issue they may as well pick the best GPS school up to this point which would be Scots. Kings would be 2nds and possibly Joeys or Riverview the 3rds. It's all quite bemusing.

Have to disagree HeresToRugby.
Rugby always been a team sport.
The best 15 individuals don't necessarily constitute the best team.
Some players more adaptable than others.
Preparation time for the GPS/CAS clash is minimal.
Combinations make life a lot easier for the coach and players.
Provides the players with confidence and allows them to perform more instinctively.
We should be selecting a winning team rather than merely a team of winners.
Would only be talking about a few differences across the 15 though.

 

[Armchair Selector]

I do believe last years CAS combo's were the reason CAS won, and they all went on to higher levels.

Yes and then what happened.........

Bottom line, players should be selected on merit not combinations. The purpose is for the NSW selectors to select teams to compete at Australian Schoolboys Championships to then be selected for Australian Schoolboys. Do you think AS gets selected on "combinations" .

In terms of Sua'ali'i, I would give him a go in GPS 2s or Blue and see how he goes. If he is ok then promote him. Dont forget all 4 GPS teams move around between Blue V White, CAS and CHS trials not to mention following games against NSWJRU U18s 1 and 2 on the Thursday night.

My back line picks on merit:

9 Strang (S) or Murray (J) was no worse than Strang last weekend and was one of Joeys best in the backs. Albert (I) likely Blue
10 Savala (S) or Minogue (K). Gibbs (J) likely Blue
11 Scolari (J) or Williams (K) Both born 11s
12 Easy (I) or Creagh (J) or Minogue (K) if they go with Savala at 5/8. Wouldnt surprise me if they picked Eveleigh from Joeys 2nds for Blue.
13 Bell (I) but also Ryan (J) or Easy (I) if Minogue gets the nod.
14 Dutailis (I) or Wilson (J) or Zuchiatti (S) and test Sua'ali'i (K) in Blue or 2s
15 Connolly (K) but also like Mossman (S) Lewis (N) likely Blue. Nick Chan (J) Blue in 17 might get a gig in Blue or White

 

[Rich_E]

All very deserving players (there are others not mentioned from other schools) in the previous 2 posts but this 'combinations' argument is becoming a bit overrated and I'm glad you blokes don't pick the team based on such logic. Quite possibly the ones mentioned are the best 2 sets of backs in that order but the concept is not one I would have thought is how selections are determined.

My understanding was that representatives are picked on their skill not how they get tagged along with someone who happens to play in the same team or even next to them. If the selectors' brief is purely pick a side to win so be it but please correct me if the idea of rep is not to pick the best 15 in each team. This is not State of Origin all of a sudden where the flavour of the day is Moloney and Cleary because they play in the same team (they are the best anyway in my opinion).

Surely if they are the best then they deserved to get ranked accordingly and I'm sure they are good enough to fit in and still have a great chance of winning. If combinations are such an issue they may as well pick the best GPS school up to this point which would be Scots. Kings would be 2nds and possibly Joeys or Riverview the 3rds. It's all quite bemusing.

I think you are taking my last few posts too literally / seriously.

To clarify, I dont think rep teams will or should be based largely on combinations. And of course there are plenty of players not listed that are in contention.

That said, I do think most of the players listed in posted 1150 are amongst the best in their position and should go close to making the 1sts, regardless of combinations.

Also, all the lads I listed at post 1153 would not be out of place in a 2s jersey.

My points, which i admit were probably not made clearly is that there are some awesome combinations developing at different schools and an embarrassment of riches in the backs at the moment.
.

 

[Rich_E]

^^^ In fact, contrary to the 'combinations' concept, i think we could continue to expect some lads to be selected out of position. For example, thinking about some of the Scots players, it wouldn't surprise me if the selectors wanted to have a look at some stage at Savala at 15 and Jeremy Williams at 6. Neither would be crazy selections imo either.
.

 

[WLF]

Yes and then what happened...

Bottom line, players should be selected on merit not combinations. The purpose is for the NSW selectors to select teams to compete at Australian Schoolboys Championships to then be selected for Australian Schoolboys. Do you think ASB gets selected on "combinations" .

In terms of Sua'ali'i, I would give him a go in GPS 2s or Blue and see how he goes. If he is ok then promote him. Dont forget all 4 GPS teams move around between Blue V White, CAS and CHS trials not to mention following games against NSWJRU U18s 1 and 2 on the Thursday night.

My back line picks on merit:

9 Strang (S) or Murray (J) was no worse than Strang last weekend and was one of Joeys best in the backs. Albert (I) likely Blue
10 Savala (S) or Minogue (K). Gibbs (J) likely Blue
11 Scolari (J) or Williams (K) Both born 11s
12 Easy (I) or Creagh (J) or Minogue (K) if they go with Savala at 5/8. Wouldnt surprise me if they picked Eveleigh from Joeys 2nds for Blue.
13 Bell (I) but also Ryan (J) or Easy (I) if Minogue gets the nod.
14 Dutailis (I) or Wilson (J) or Zuchiatti (S) and test Sua'ali'i (K) in Blue or 2s
15 Connolly (K) but also like Mossman (S) Lewis (N) likely Blue. Nick Chan (J) Blue in 17 might get a gig in Blue or White

What happened then was that the winning inside CAS 1 backs combination both made the NSW1 side, ie 10 and 12.
Then rather than keep it that way, the first thing the NSW1 coach did was put no. 10 back at fullback, and not give no.12 any game time in game 1, and next to none in game 2, completely butchered the NSW 1 team and as a result some players.
So NSW1 went badly.

The Aussie Schoolboy selectors did the same, and it was a joke.

It does depend on the situation and the players, but I think typically it works, and there are plenty of examples over the years in both League and Union.

 

[HeresToRugby]

On the flip side, players who play together can bring out the best in each other, whereas strangers may find it much more difficult. Also winning teams probably get more higher selections, because they win.

It is a tough one, but I do believe last years CAS combo's were the reason CAS won, and they all went on to higher levels.

Yes I’m sure it helped but maybe they had the best players. This was not the strategy for GPS teams of the past and they had major success.

 

[WLF]

Yes I’m sure it helped but maybe they had the best players. This was not the strategy for GPS teams of the past and they had major success.

Agree HTR, it does depend on the particular players and they were also the best players,aside from having a combination.
Unfortunately they were still split up, I think everyone could see what happened and were bewildered.

Generally speaking I still favor combos, particularly if sides are winning.

 

[Show and go]

What happened then was that the winning inside CAS 1 backs combination both made the NSW1 side, ie 10 and 12.
Then rather than keep it that way, the first thing the NSW1 coach did was put no. 10 back at fullback, and not give no.12 any game time in game 1, and next to none in game 2, completely butchered the NSW 1 team and as a result some players.
So NSW1 went badly.

The Aussie Schoolboy selectors did the same, and it was a joke.

It does depend on the situation and the players, but I think typically it works, and there are plenty of examples over the years in both League and Union.

If ur a talented player it doesn’t matter who plays beside you . Selectors want to see who can adapt to whatever situation arises . It’s also much better for a players improvement to play with different players otherwise there is no development of each players skills.
Will Harrison was always going to be the no 10 for Aus Schoolboys so Donaldson trying out at 15 was a good thing as he made Aus schoolboys anyway.

 

[Rich_E]

If ur a talented player it doesn’t matter who plays beside you . Selectors want to see who can adapt to whatever situation arises . It’s also much better for a players improvement to play with different players otherwise there is no development of each players skills.
Will Harrison was always going to be the no 10 for Aus Schoolboys so Donaldson trying out at 15 was a good thing as he made Aus schoolboys anyway.

I agree. Im not here to argue whether Harrison is better than Donaldson or vice versa. But it seems clear to me that Aust selectors had decided that Harrison was their first choice for 10 and requested that NSW play Donaldson and Woodcock at 15 to see whether they may be options for that position. Which turned out well for Donaldson, all things considered ie playing 15 would have to have been better than not making schoolboys at all.
.

 

[Show and go]

Would make sense to extend combos to:

9 Strang (S)
10 Savala (S)

12 Easy (I)
13 Bell (I)

11 Williams (K)
14 Sua'ali'i (K)
15 Connolly (K)

Not saying must have, but would be quality backline.
.

Very good backline add Tricks (11) Scots and u have all the combos and set pieces sorted.