50-0 is still a bad score. Against Scots they versed half the year (The worser half, I might add) as well they still got beat 5 tries to 1. Newington in that year are almost as bad as Grammar and High. So I wouldn't be surprised if they won't win a game in that year.
- Status
50-0 is still a bad score. Against Scots they versed half the year (The worser half, I might add) as well they still got beat 5 tries to 1. Newington in that year are almost as bad as Grammar and High. So I wouldn't be surprised if they won't win a game in that year.
H
HarveyColon
Guest
Don't worry about newington being poor........that always seems to be solved quite easily
And you can't have "versed" someone its grammatically wrong: it's a pet hate of mine
And you can't have "versed" someone its grammatically wrong: it's a pet hate of mine
wreckless
Bob Loudon (25)
What about in a "head to head" poetry reading Harvey? Surely you could "verse" someone in that!!!
. Anyway - I agree with your sentiments! Wreckless
T
Tight head Lion
Guest
Scots verse Waverley today at Queens Park @ 2.15pm. Scots by 40+. There are also 16's earlier
smokinjoe
Ward Prentice (10)
Not Quite! Waverley 40 - Scots 31!
T
Tight head Lion
Guest
were you there? match report
H
HarveyColon
Guest
no way,...how?......who were scots missing?....were there red or yellow cards given or something?
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
oh yeah: my mother used today pride comes before a fall. You can start an excuses thread.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Snort
Nev Cottrell (35)
It was today. Shore 2nds played the first half, 1sts the second. The first half was one try apiece, but in the second Trinity scored two tries to one. What Shore 1sts did well was mostly done in the forwards. Their pack shoved Trinity back in rolling mauls several times, and the lineout worked like clockwork. Quite a bit of turnover ball was won. There wasn't much cohesion in the backs, but I guess this was a first run. Defensively, Trinity scored two long-range tries when the defence was outpaced and could not regroup. Shore's winger seemed to be the biggest player on the field but he saw very liitle ball.
Keen observer
Bob McCowan (2)
Trinity vs shore - yes Snort your correct in saying that a fresh shore 1st xv pushed a tiring trinity pack off the ball.... Just like they played on a pocket sized ground, ensuring that the intensity of contact and close proximity ensured an intense physical battle, fresh legs vs second half legs, limiting the opportunity for open expansive play...it was no wonder there was disappointment on all 30 shore players faces when they'd "lost" both halves... Played in the spirit of a trial no doubt as they formed a tunnel to clap on their second team of the match at half time....
Micheal
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Just to clarify - the teams that Shore used today were not the 1sts, 2nds and 3rds necessarily, nor were they at full strength. Team 2 and team 3 consisted of the boys that they are unsure about taking further in 1sts/2nds/3rds trials (primarily from Year 10 and 11), and therefore do not represent the full strength of Shore rugby. Team 1 consisted mainly of boys in Year 12, and upon the replacement of their halfback, Pulver, due to a head knock, they lost a lot of structure and perhaps didn't perform as strongly as they should have.
I hate to make excuses but I believes it unfair to say that the Trinitys 1sts beat Shore 1sts whilst losing to the Shore 2nds. This is the first contact session the teams have had and the teams do not even slightly represent the 1sts / 2nds / 3rds.
Hope that cleared stuff up.
I hate to make excuses but I believes it unfair to say that the Trinitys 1sts beat Shore 1sts whilst losing to the Shore 2nds. This is the first contact session the teams have had and the teams do not even slightly represent the 1sts / 2nds / 3rds.
Hope that cleared stuff up.
smokinjoe
Ward Prentice (10)
Defence issues - a bit lazy. Scots always say they'll beat everyone by "40+" points but every year it's the same old story. It's been a long long time since they actually did what they say they'll do! Time to put up.
Done that
Ron Walden (29)
Perish the thought that people might think you are making excuses !!
It's totally inconceivable that Shore might lose a Rugby match .
Thanks for clearing "stuff up" for us.
CTPE
Nev Cottrell (35)
Sounds promising for Shore as the Trinity pack is is quite highly rated with plenty of rep players like Junior Satiu, Cam Orr, Jackson McLean, Malaki Afele and Vince Moresello to name but a few (and assuming that they played)
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
I have been informed by a very reliable source that the GPS 1st XVs are to be subject to random drug testing.
Snort
Nev Cottrell (35)
All of them played except Orr. I'd say Shore won the lineouts easily, the scrums were fairly even, Shore shaded the turnovers and its rolling maul was highly effective. The disorganisation in the backs seemed to be due in part to Pulver's early injury and the fact that this was the first hit-out. Always a danger to read too much into trial form (although having said that, Scots losing to Waverley was a surprise and suggests that they may be more vulnerable than expected).
Man on the hill
Alex Ross (28)
My snouts tell me that 12 or 13 of the final XV for Shore were wearing 2012 1st XV shirts
CTPE
Nev Cottrell (35)
They must have been close to full strength to do that well against last years undefeated and record breaking CAS premiers
- Status