Bernard Williams
Frank Row (1)
Which forwards played in the ones. Great effort
I believe the three forwards that played in the 1s were, Duvall, Janson and Icanovski against trinity. Hoping to see them play again against View.
Which forwards played in the ones. Great effort
Wrong age group - Glascott is coaching 15s so nothing to do with him.Not all players played at the state champs to be selected into zone sides. Seems Sydney coach Glascot has pulled a few in at the 12th hour after watching the schools trials.
This can't be good for clubland.
Wrong age group - Glascott is coaching 15s so nothing to do with him.
Any 16A results, after Shore's first win against Scots it will be interesting to see how they perform, Joeys. Who only just beat them last time 24-22.
Thank you gentleman,with the exception of the TKSv TSC game we have a very competitive age group.
Is there any correlation between playing Harold Matts and Nsw u16s ?
On this forum it seems no correlation but the selectors must see different 9 out 25 players played/trained for HM ,must be some correlation wouldn't you think .
Didn't ISA have most of the HM players? The team that lost 2 out of 3 matches at trials but still got 9 players selected? It does seem that there is a correlation - an inverse one. Pres A which was undefeated had the fewest HM players; CAS had a couple more and came second; ISA had the most and came 4th. It would seem then that > HM players = less team success. Let's hope that doesn't translate to NSW getting whalloped by the Kiwis.
Didn't ISA have most of the HM players? The team that lost 2 out of 3 matches at trials but still got 9 players selected? It does seem that there is a correlation - an inverse one. Pres A which was undefeated had the fewest HM players; CAS had a couple more and came second; ISA had the most and came 4th. It would seem then that > HM players = less team success. Let's hope that doesn't translate to NSW getting whalloped by the Kiwis.
You're correlation is of very minimal significance. Comparing team performance on the basis of HM players in each team is absurd. At the end of the day what is needed to gain selection into these teams, is simply individual performance. The schools team that was picked is very strong and one that will compete. If you doubt the NSW team success based on the amount of HM players selected, I'd like to know who you would have picked instead to ensure the overall success of the team.
What is required to win once in the team is the ability to play as part of a team. Too many league players think the key to success is tucking the ball under the arm and running hard and one out at the opposition, cause what the hell you get 5 goes at doing this every set of 6 right? This won't bother the kiwis too much as they have bigger and stronger blokes doing this to them all the time. What might bother them is an up tempo game played at speed and high levels of ball handling skills. Fortunately the boys that have this are mostly in the team, they just don't happen to be the ones most mentioned by the Loig lovers.
If HM players = less team success , maybe you should pass your thoughts on to the coaches when ur in camp with the nsw 16s. I'll be interested to hear the coaches thoughts on this and also their opinion of Max Lehman and Albert Hopoate once they have had the chance to work with these boys ,and if the coaches think they will be upto Australian school boys standard in a couple of years time.
To beat the kiwis will be tough but a talented backline off
10/Elias ,
12/Easy,
13/Lehman
15/Hopoate, I recon could be damaging in general play.
Hopefully you will finally appreciate that the HM boys have a wider skill set than what you have constantly pointed out previously when you watch them train and play.
A team to play a fast paced game with skill and flair:
1. Bell
2. McLennan
3. Icanovski
4. Panozzo
5. Douglas
6. Moretti
7. Freeman
8. Titmus
9. Chambers
10. Ilias
11. Lehmann
12. Easy
13. Cameron
14. Byron H-D
15. Bell