blues recovery
Billy Sheehan (19)
Talk about not not aiding the debate. Now i have seen everything someone with a Sydney Uni logo accusing someone else of condescending behaviour. That will do me.
- Status
Given you have no idea about my background, I would think making personal innuendo is pretty silly.
You can debate the topic without making snide comments implying I have no knowledge of, nor insight into the greater problem of rugby in Sydney, just because of the club I support (and have done for about 33 years).
I would suggest you try doing that.
Drew
Bob Davidson (42)
This debate is getting sportal-esque, although with better grammer.
I think Uni does destroy the fabric of rugby here (I'm entitled to that opinion and no matter how much self justification from the Uni people I'll continue to feel it), but at issue is the NTS and the idea of the "elite athlete" and "career paths". These kids are taught that the sun shines out their bums because they're usually bigger, faster and stronger than kids in their age division, they then map out their life as a professional athlete and go where they think they can further their careers. The fact that Uni offers scholarships makes them the bad guy but hides the fact a lot of these kids are unloyal little bastards who are willing to accept the scholarships in the first place. If it wasn't Uni it would be someone else.
The fact that Uni turns their backs on legitimate academic students at colts level in favour of these mercenaries is deplorable. But it is also not a good look for any of the top line clubs to drop the guys who have played all season at finals time so the Super Rugby players can blow in and play the higher profile games.
On a final note, Randwick still cops a lot of flak for twenty years ago, maybe you Uni guys should get used to it.
I think Uni does destroy the fabric of rugby here (I'm entitled to that opinion and no matter how much self justification from the Uni people I'll continue to feel it), but at issue is the NTS and the idea of the "elite athlete" and "career paths". These kids are taught that the sun shines out their bums because they're usually bigger, faster and stronger than kids in their age division, they then map out their life as a professional athlete and go where they think they can further their careers. The fact that Uni offers scholarships makes them the bad guy but hides the fact a lot of these kids are unloyal little bastards who are willing to accept the scholarships in the first place. If it wasn't Uni it would be someone else.
The fact that Uni turns their backs on legitimate academic students at colts level in favour of these mercenaries is deplorable. But it is also not a good look for any of the top line clubs to drop the guys who have played all season at finals time so the Super Rugby players can blow in and play the higher profile games.
On a final note, Randwick still cops a lot of flak for twenty years ago, maybe you Uni guys should get used to it.
I don't mind people criticising Uni at all. I don't agree with everything they do, and especially the heavily overweight Colts program. But I will keep supporting the club, as I did when they were struggling along in 2nd division. And I remember the Randwick days, so I get where the criticism comes from.
I do mind people lowering the debate to snide personal comments, and the amount of hyperbole spouted as "fact", just because someone says it is.
I don't know the machinations of the club and whether payments are made, but Bruce is on the inner, and seems to have a pretty good knowledge of what does, and does not happen, so seems as credible as anyone, and more credible than quite a few. Some of the allegations aired here seem a bit over the top.
I would much rather see a tougher comp across the board - Colts and Grade. Unfortunately, the strength of the Uni club tends to suck in other players who are not induced, for the reasons others elaborated - there is more attraction to a strong club.
I do mind people lowering the debate to snide personal comments, and the amount of hyperbole spouted as "fact", just because someone says it is.
I don't know the machinations of the club and whether payments are made, but Bruce is on the inner, and seems to have a pretty good knowledge of what does, and does not happen, so seems as credible as anyone, and more credible than quite a few. Some of the allegations aired here seem a bit over the top.
I would much rather see a tougher comp across the board - Colts and Grade. Unfortunately, the strength of the Uni club tends to suck in other players who are not induced, for the reasons others elaborated - there is more attraction to a strong club.
P
Parra GM
Guest
Am particular interested to hear your thoughts on this Cyclopath.............
To even out the colts comp to start with (have to start at the bottom to see how it works) bring in a rule where there has to be 8 local juniors in the 1st Grade Colts side for every game.
You would also include schools that fall into that particular club's geographical boundaries.................so Kings for Parra, Waverley for Randwick etc.
To even out the colts comp to start with (have to start at the bottom to see how it works) bring in a rule where there has to be 8 local juniors in the 1st Grade Colts side for every game.
You would also include schools that fall into that particular club's geographical boundaries.................so Kings for Parra, Waverley for Randwick etc.
U
Upright
Guest
The NTS program appears to be looking to develop young players - fair enough hopefully it may benefit rugby at large. Sadly it appears that it is also being used as a feeder for the Sydney Uni Colts program. As an ex Uni player I believe strongly that Uni Colts rugby should only consist of those boys who are studying at Sydney University, otherwise we are simply another district club. I watch in embarressment when I see lads who won a spot at Uni on their academic ability who also enjoy playing rugby being forced to sit on the bench for Uni Colts 3rds while spots are being filled by boys who have no association with the Uni at all, other than being brought in to win Colts comps. Not surprisingly many of these "imports" were in NTS. That is wrong. Those boys should be playing for Norths or Manly or whoever and quite possibly making the Colts comp a more competitive one. Quite simply if you don't earn a spot at Uni you should not be playing there. Remember also that winning is not the sole reason for playing - of course we (Uni) win Colts because we go out and grab the 20 most outstanding 18/19 yer olds each year and pretend we have done something great. We have to decide if we are Sydney Uni or if we are Camperdown District Rugby Club wearing Uni's colours.
That is pretty left field. So hypothetically Sydney Uni Colts Is would consist of 7 Australian schoolboys reps and 8 local scraggers who were part of the one junior team that the uni fielded back in 2002?
I don't think that is the answer at all. The solution is not to intentionally destabilise Uni (although a few measures wouldn't go astray, such as only students of the Uni can play in their Colts sides), rather to create incentives for top schoolboys to stay and play for their local sides- Gordon, Parra, Warringah etc. Now as the NSWRU isn't exactly rolling in cash this could prove difficult, and frankly I am not overflowing with ideas how to do it. But proposing ideas which are aimed at destabilising Uni certainly won't progress the debate, regardless of their worthiness.
CTPE
Nev Cottrell (35)
Perhaps one of the issues that needs to be considered in this debate is Uni's relative lack of junior village clubs comparitive to other clubs in the comp. Uni has affiliatons with only two junior clubs (Canterbury and Petersham) whilst other clubs have a much bigger junior pool to draw from; (eg Gordon - 9 junior clubs, Eastwood - 7, Warringah - 7, Parra - eight). I know that a couple of other clubs have low junior bases as well and no doubt need to look elsewhere for players too. Granted they may not be as financial as Uni but is that Uni's fault? They had the foresight to see that establishing a large capital fund was going to get them where they wanted to be.
The annual earnings on a well invested $2m when added to sponsorship monies and other income generated annually would no doubt provide a great base for any club to establish and maintain very competitive teams both at colts and senior levels. Maybe it also comes down to good management as well - there have been plenty of examples over the years where poor financial mangement has led to a devastating demise in a club's success on the field.
The annual earnings on a well invested $2m when added to sponsorship monies and other income generated annually would no doubt provide a great base for any club to establish and maintain very competitive teams both at colts and senior levels. Maybe it also comes down to good management as well - there have been plenty of examples over the years where poor financial mangement has led to a devastating demise in a club's success on the field.
Stands
Jimmy Flynn (14)
I think it would be surprising how many Uni Colts players are actually on full tuition scholarships as compared to how many of the colts players are actually there for the Rugby program of fitness and skill development. My info is that it is not nearly as much as it is being implied here.
P
Parra GM
Guest
Barbar, it aint completely aimed at destabilising Uni. Its aimed at stabilising the comp. If it was intended to destabilise Uni I wouldnt have included the schools reference. One could argue that Newington for example would be a 'Uni school'. Wests for example could lay claim to Trinity and St Pats for local junior consideration. Uni have 2 local clubs atm, with rumours that Balmain juniors are forming under their banner. That is fantastic. Truth is though, they were given Canterbury by Southern Districts some years ago. And some Canterbury people worked hard to start Petersham juniors with little or no support form Petersham Subbies. So over time those clubs will prosper and allow Uni to lay claim to those players as their own. And no-one will argue. Incentives to top schoolboys to stay in their district just moves the problem from Uni to someone else. Maybe it should be a rule. Just as others have suggested they must be a student at the Uni to play for them (which I agree with surprise surprise) maybe it should be a rule that for colts...............you must play for your district club you came out of until you're old enough to play grade.
Ideas like this would even out the colts comps......Over time. And all ideas should be explored. Throw in making the Super Rugby players go to a bottom 6 club and then we might see a competition with integrity. Now I HATE rugby league. But I must amit, that at any given season kick off, any number of clubs are capable of winning the comp. And that is the beauty of that competition.
See I think that is a pretty unreasonable demand. Many uni-aged kids will want to move out of home to either a) the inner city (on campus or otherwise), or b) another city. Must they be made to travel back to their suburban home to train and play? What of kids who have not played club rugby since they were 11 or 12 due to school commitments?
We don't want to get into a situation where a few games for a juniors club is going to lock you in for years to come.
Again, reform shouldn't be approached by limiting the rights and freedoms of the current crop of juniors. We merely should make the suburban clubs more appealing, so that when potential colts are looking for a club they consider their home club on the same level that they would Uni.
Iluvmyfooty
Phil Hardcastle (33)
What happens in a situation where 2 or 3 Aus Schoolboys get an atar that enables them to go to Sydney Uni to do whatever course they want. Does this then become a bidding war between the Uni and whatever local clubs the lads have played for. Should no club be allowed to actively recruit then it will be up to the player to choose his club?
And what happens to country lads that have no affiliation with any Sydney club but may be good enough to be an Aus Schoolboy?
And what happens to country lads that have no affiliation with any Sydney club but may be good enough to be an Aus Schoolboy?
Stands
Jimmy Flynn (14)
This is ridiculous, what right does a district team have over players and schools and where the kids should play? Please don't try and tell us that they developed the players, in the districts that I have been involved in it has been the village teams and schools that have spent the majority of time with the kids development, and the district team is involved for a few weeks before State champs (with the District team being successful most of the time).
I wouldn't go so far as Parra GM suggests. But, as a start, I think the idea that all Uni Colts players should be students there on their merits. No incentives in the way of reduced ATAR, cash inducements or whatever, and make this as transparent as possible. How? I don't know. The issue with College scholarships / fees is trickier, as they are, in my understanding, separate entities so not "controllable".
Making players play for their local club until grade age is reached is ridiculous. I would have had to play for Gordon or Norths as a Colt, and I felt absolutely no affinity for either, as I had been going to Uni games since age 9-10. That is where I wanted to play. I realise many do not share that perspective, but it is fairly junior level amateur sport for most, so those type of rules are silly. Not to mention plenty of blokes might want to play for the same team as their mates from school, who might want to go elsewhere.
"Special" players like Barnes; hard to know how to handle that. If he went to any club, most others would gripe they didn't get a chance to pick him up. And no, Uni didn't need him as much as others, I agree. Draw it out of a hat? It's not like it is a situation that happens that much. What about what that player wants? Are they just a commodity to be told where to go? Maybe so, maybe not...I tend to think not.
Making players play for their local club until grade age is reached is ridiculous. I would have had to play for Gordon or Norths as a Colt, and I felt absolutely no affinity for either, as I had been going to Uni games since age 9-10. That is where I wanted to play. I realise many do not share that perspective, but it is fairly junior level amateur sport for most, so those type of rules are silly. Not to mention plenty of blokes might want to play for the same team as their mates from school, who might want to go elsewhere.
"Special" players like Barnes; hard to know how to handle that. If he went to any club, most others would gripe they didn't get a chance to pick him up. And no, Uni didn't need him as much as others, I agree. Draw it out of a hat? It's not like it is a situation that happens that much. What about what that player wants? Are they just a commodity to be told where to go? Maybe so, maybe not...I tend to think not.
P
Parra GM
Guest
Now we have a great debate happening. And to be honest, now we're getting somewhere in my opinion. So my suggestions got hammered, I'll cop that. It happens. I do have answers to most of those questions but in the spirit of open debate, lets say my previous suggestions are canned.
So now for the next ones. I am going to use a word in this next suggestion that will make RUPA throw up...................which doesnt disappoint me to be honest.
And that word is draft................
A player draft..................
One of the issues with the Shute Shield is that it is not a 'Premiership' quality comp in the true meaning of Premiership. Having 4 full grades and 3 full Colts grades means that there a guys who really have a 'Subbies' perspective to their rugby but are happy to play 3rd and 4th grade for their District club coz they love it. Let them continue to do it I say. But with changes.
Lets have the Shute Shield Premiership as a 2 grade and 1 colts Premiership. then all lower grades would come into a lower level Championship competition so they still play for their clubs in the lower grades. But this is a competition above 1st division Subbies. The requirement for the 2 grade and 1 colts set up would be that each club is able to go out and recruit whoever they want to the tune of 40 grade and 25 colts players. After that ALL of the remaining players of that level who are 'unsigned' to a club then go into a draft where the bottom ranked clubs from the previous season have 1st pick etc etc. Very similar to what happens in AFL.
Maybe have a cap that for the 25 Colts I squad a limit of 2 Australian Schoolboys per 25 are allowed (unless they went to a local school or played for a local junior club). Would be keen to hear your feedback.
This system would then still allow the genuine lower grade player to stay at his club, the old ex first grader still playing lower grades to stay at his club but then also spread the talent throughout the colts which will then ultimately spread into grade.
Over to you gentlemen
So now for the next ones. I am going to use a word in this next suggestion that will make RUPA throw up...................which doesnt disappoint me to be honest.
And that word is draft................
A player draft..................
One of the issues with the Shute Shield is that it is not a 'Premiership' quality comp in the true meaning of Premiership. Having 4 full grades and 3 full Colts grades means that there a guys who really have a 'Subbies' perspective to their rugby but are happy to play 3rd and 4th grade for their District club coz they love it. Let them continue to do it I say. But with changes.
Lets have the Shute Shield Premiership as a 2 grade and 1 colts Premiership. then all lower grades would come into a lower level Championship competition so they still play for their clubs in the lower grades. But this is a competition above 1st division Subbies. The requirement for the 2 grade and 1 colts set up would be that each club is able to go out and recruit whoever they want to the tune of 40 grade and 25 colts players. After that ALL of the remaining players of that level who are 'unsigned' to a club then go into a draft where the bottom ranked clubs from the previous season have 1st pick etc etc. Very similar to what happens in AFL.
Maybe have a cap that for the 25 Colts I squad a limit of 2 Australian Schoolboys per 25 are allowed (unless they went to a local school or played for a local junior club). Would be keen to hear your feedback.
This system would then still allow the genuine lower grade player to stay at his club, the old ex first grader still playing lower grades to stay at his club but then also spread the talent throughout the colts which will then ultimately spread into grade.
Over to you gentlemen
Torn Hammy
Johnnie Wallace (23)
For Colts apparently there is a point system.
Something like 8 pts for Oz schoolboys, 5 pts for NSW schoolboys, 3pts GPS etc, with a max of 50 points.
Anyone know more about this? I heard that the maximum will reduce to 40 to spread the talent more.
Something like 8 pts for Oz schoolboys, 5 pts for NSW schoolboys, 3pts GPS etc, with a max of 50 points.
Anyone know more about this? I heard that the maximum will reduce to 40 to spread the talent more.
lincoln
Bob Loudon (25)
Agree - there are significant numbers of boys at Uni, particularly those at the somewhat unfairly maligned colleges, a big part of USyd's heart and soul, who have given the game away because they have no chance of getting a run at Uni. The point being that Uni has more than enough natural resources to fill its ranks without importing from outside and thereby weakening other clubs (reminds me of when Ray Brown was imported into Manly league to play reserve grade so he wouldn't be at Wests to play against them).
P
Parra GM
Guest
Geez, showing ya age there Lincoln..................but hey, I remember that too!
CTPE
Nev Cottrell (35)
Back to NTS itself there seems to be so little info available about it on the ARU website. Found this though on the Reds website which provides a bit more info about how it is conducted:
http://www.qru.com.au/Reds/FutureReds/NationalTalentSquad.aspx
http://www.qru.com.au/Reds/FutureReds/NationalTalentSquad.aspx
- Status