Rugby Mum 2
Bill Watson (15)
Have you forgotten ISA lost the first game? That makes Pres A undefeated.
NSW U16 - schools, NSWJRU / SJRU / CRJU 2013
- Thread starter Man on the hill
- Start date
- Status
Wood Rat
Alfred Walker (16)
I maintain my right to put my fingers in my ears and make loud noises is equal to anybody else's that visits this place
Newbie
Bill McLean (32)
I used to suffer from that affliction during the early years of my marriage, however my wife cured me with a few well targeted ashtrays and pots!
Jules Vern
Frank Row (1)
Yes ISA did (technically) lose the first game, but given it was 5 all draw, they were also undefeated.
wreckless
Bob Loudon (25)
I used to suffer from that affliction during the early years of my marriage, however my wife cured me with a few well targeted ashtrays and pots!
My son told me that he had to play "a married man," in the school play. I told him not to worry and that next time he’d probably get a speaking part. Boom Boom
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
The 4th placed AICES boys generally don't play Club Footy, therefore they only have one pathway.
The 5th placed ISA boys have Sydney Juniors pathway to fall back on. Wouldn't expect to see too many players from the 5th placed team in the NSW Schools Team would you?
NSW Schools should have plenty of 4th placed AICES and 3rd Placed CAS selected otherwise it will be an admission that the School Tournament Draw was organised by Digby Ioane's legal advisors.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
Are you sugesting NSW Schools will be a no show?
NWilliamson
Frank Row (1)
Does anyone know when the NSW schools and Sydney juniors teams will be announced
Newbie
Bill McLean (32)
The teams are usually finalised and announced by the Wednesday following the SJRU Regional Championships. They take place this weekend so you could expect the teams to be published on the various websites by the 3rd of July.
sarcophilus
Charlie Fox (21)
Check out the Programs on the weekend and compare them to those announced as selected in their zones or Bar Bars teams. I bet a lot of those in the teams that came 1st or 2nd at the schools have withdrawn from the club selection process. Schools will turn up with their backline intact. The decision on how to feed them will be interesting.
Is there any truth to the "Sydney gets first pick"?
and
who are the Sydney selectors this year?
sarcophilus
Charlie Fox (21)
does a consistent argument depend on who is involved. I believe I have read you supporting players that have committed to club and School Rugby having two pathways, Is this unless they are from the wrong association or the wrong zone or both
Aices clearly have had a good year at the selection trial "competition" and the interest level ion the match against CAS was so high that we haven't had anyone post a score after half time. I would not be surprised if a lot of the AICES players did play club rugby but only a hand full play above village
when considering legal advisors I think O J Simpson more than Digby may have been used as the contact for advice on defence lawyers selection
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
Players who play both club (genuinely, not just registered for convenience) and School should get the benefit of two pathways (School and Juniors/School and Country) at Under 16 Nationals.
Questions should be asked about why boys from the 5th best team in a tournament are selected in the Schools Team. The reality is that the questions should be directed to the Muppets organising the tournament and the draw that allow a situation like this to occur.
Many of the ISA boys are very competent footballers, far more so individually than the CHS, CCC, Country and AICES boys I saw at the Rat Park trials.
The two pathways things is crap and needs to be rationalised because it only encourages rorting. What a fine message to show to the new generation. The kids know and see through all the BS about Juniors and Club. All they (and their parents) want is to get a shot at the National U16's.
Time to go to NSW I, NSW II and Combined States. One level playing field (if there is such) for all.
The writing is on the wall for the National U16 tournament to be changed significantly from what it has been for last 8-10 years. My snouts say as soon as 2014. Wait and see.
Questions should be asked about why boys from the 5th best team in a tournament are selected in the Schools Team. The reality is that the questions should be directed to the Muppets organising the tournament and the draw that allow a situation like this to occur.
Many of the ISA boys are very competent footballers, far more so individually than the CHS, CCC, Country and AICES boys I saw at the Rat Park trials.
The two pathways things is crap and needs to be rationalised because it only encourages rorting. What a fine message to show to the new generation. The kids know and see through all the BS about Juniors and Club. All they (and their parents) want is to get a shot at the National U16's.
Time to go to NSW I, NSW II and Combined States. One level playing field (if there is such) for all.
The writing is on the wall for the National U16 tournament to be changed significantly from what it has been for last 8-10 years. My snouts say as soon as 2014. Wait and see.
Wood Rat
Alfred Walker (16)
[quote="Hugh Jarse, post: 505253, member:
Questions should be asked about why boys from the 5th best team in a tournament are selected in the Schools Team. The reality is that the questions should be directed to the Muppets organising the tournament and the draw that allow a situation like this to occur.
Many of the ISA boys are very competent footballers, far more so individually than the CHS, CCC, Country and AICES boys I saw at the Rat Park trials.
The two pathways things is crap and needs to be rationalised because it only encourages rorting. What a fine message to show to the new generation. The kids know and see through all the BS about Juniors and Club. All they (and their parents) want is to get a shot at the National U16's.
Time to go to NSW I, NSW II and Combined States. One level playing field (if there is such) for all.
The writing is on the wall for the National U16 tournament to be changed significantly from what it has been for last 8-10 years. My snouts say as soon as 2014. Wait and see.[/quote]
Just a shot in the dark, maybe the organisers knew what they wanted to see. By setting the draw in the manner they did what could be considered the four top teams played at least two others of the top teams. There were only two game combinations not played between the four teams. The way the coaches from the different associations employed their charges may have been a little naive to this reflected in the change in intensity in the CHS game as swathes of players were swapped and coaches allowing selectors to direct or make suggestions to see how players went in positions other than those nominated. It didn't happen but there was not much difference in watching the finals we did and watching the two presidents teams play for the 5th and 6th position.
Really these were selection trials.
Questions should be asked about why boys from the 5th best team in a tournament are selected in the Schools Team. The reality is that the questions should be directed to the Muppets organising the tournament and the draw that allow a situation like this to occur.
Many of the ISA boys are very competent footballers, far more so individually than the CHS, CCC, Country and AICES boys I saw at the Rat Park trials.
The two pathways things is crap and needs to be rationalised because it only encourages rorting. What a fine message to show to the new generation. The kids know and see through all the BS about Juniors and Club. All they (and their parents) want is to get a shot at the National U16's.
Time to go to NSW I, NSW II and Combined States. One level playing field (if there is such) for all.
The writing is on the wall for the National U16 tournament to be changed significantly from what it has been for last 8-10 years. My snouts say as soon as 2014. Wait and see.[/quote]
Just a shot in the dark, maybe the organisers knew what they wanted to see. By setting the draw in the manner they did what could be considered the four top teams played at least two others of the top teams. There were only two game combinations not played between the four teams. The way the coaches from the different associations employed their charges may have been a little naive to this reflected in the change in intensity in the CHS game as swathes of players were swapped and coaches allowing selectors to direct or make suggestions to see how players went in positions other than those nominated. It didn't happen but there was not much difference in watching the finals we did and watching the two presidents teams play for the 5th and 6th position.
Really these were selection trials.
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
If they are only selection trials, then why is the draw the way it is, and why have all the shields, cups, plates, bowls, knives and forks?
Brainstrust
Watty Friend (18)
Selection to higher honours is NOT based where teams finish in the tournaments. Any suggestion that because Ccc or AICES etc finished ahead of isa, will get or deserve to get more boys in, is just not right. Along with schools selectors, the sjru guys were there, along with the ARU HPU guys across the weekend. The idea is to try and get the best 46 payers for schools and Sydney at the nationals. How they carve that up and how it is balanced is up to negotiation, and true enough they don't always get it spot on but it will be pretty close , as it generally is. Yes the tournament can be seeded differently, but a 5 all draw by isa v GPS a's was a better representation for isa than the 60 blot score that AICES had put on them, regardless of where they finished on the table ...
The Taxi Driver
Allen Oxlade (6)
Well said . It is all about having the strongest 46-50 boys (assuming some shadows due to injuries) across two teams. There would only be a handful of boys in this group that have only one pathway; I know three but I am sure there are more. People get a bit funny about the silverware.
It won't hurt the ISA boys chances as the key forwards are known to selectors. Let's hope all those guys with ARU bomber jackets and clipboards know what they are doing.
George Smith
Ted Thorn (20)
Huge, your snouts are correct. This will be the last time the National U16s Tournament will be held.
From 2014 expect to see the pathway to be amended to focus on 15s, 17s, 20s. This will go somewhere towards addressing the current 16s issues as well as provide a better stepped pathway to focus on the 20s.
Whilst our Schoolboys (U18s) team has been enjoying success recently our U20s teams' results have been unacceptable.
We play teams that from the NH where they have come off a mini 6 Nations Tournament prior to the World Cup. Our lads pre-tournament warm up is a trials/camp!
Maybe we should amend Bill Pulver's super-rugby B comp and replace it with a National conference style U20s comp. This could be discussed and developed on the post: National Tournaments 2014
Tahspark
Ted Thorn (20)
The Blacktown Council Wet Weather Web site says all ovals are closed.
The Juniors must have some connections, or I wouldn't want to have to face all the parents and kids who make the trip out to Grantham (with snorkels and flippers) if some officious bureaucrat Ranger from Blacktown Council is out there and calls the whole thing off.
There has been a ton of rain over night.
Are the CHS tournament organisers (AKA droughtbusters) behind this?
The Regionals have either done a deal with the Council or snuck in under the guard of any potentially officious bureaucratic ranger whose no doubt enjoying a cuppa in the comfort of the home hearth.
Meanwhile back at the ground I'm told that the boys from the North took the honours against the South 27-0.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
- Status