QLD GPS Rugby 2010

[Doc]

How bad are Churchie going?

I heard BGS were competitive with Nudgee for a good part of the game.

I've seen Chuchie 4x now this year and I laughed heartedly every time people mentioned them as the 4th 'big' team. Very average side. They drew with GT in a trial. It was GT's 1st game of the year and Churchies 4th or 5th so Gt were always going to improve.

To be fair also yesterday GT dropped enough ball to win 12 matches making Churchie look alot better than they really were.

 

[RugbyReg]

How bad are Churchie going?

they must be going pretty bad. Terrace beat them!

 

[Doc]

How bad are Churchie going?

they must be going pretty bad. Terrace beat them!

You mean Terrace who are in equal second?

 

[rugbywhisperer]

How bad are Churchie going?

they must be going pretty bad. Terrace beat them!

You mean Terrace who are in equal second?

because TSS had a bye

 

[Doc]

How bad are Churchie going?

they must be going pretty bad. Terrace beat them!

You mean Terrace who are in equal second?

because TSS had a bye

Merely pointing out that a team with a 2/3 record deserves bit more than 0/3.

Hopefully TSS used the weekend off to get the boys acquainted to the school given 10 out of their 28 man squad have been there less than 18 months.

In all seriousness I am hoping to see them next time they are up here (think they have GT this week but won't be heading there). The game vs Churchie wasn't all that impressive and I'm pretty sure they can be capable of some good football.

 

[rugbywhisperer]

Gee you are selective in who you attack.
You allow some somments as acceptable, you see nothing wrong with an inane comment pointing out a team is in second place when they have a 2/3 against a 2/2 after the third round - this is nothing less than gross wankerism.
As for the TSS squad - who gives a rats - as for 1stXV there are only zero who are new this year that I am aware of - and your comment may be true if you count the 16's as well - but some extra detail would be needed there as I am pretty sure you are wrong. I will stand corrected if you can prove otherwise.

Grow up please.

 

[Geronimo]

Settle down RW, I think he may only have been responding to Noddy's quip about how bad Churchie are if they were beaten by Terrace. I went along to this game with some mates, arrived late (Terrace were up 7-0) but for the next 20 minutes it was all Churchie. They lost their no 7 (Malouf), who I was looking forward to seeing when he smashed the Terrace 12 but came off second best. The second half Terrace came back and deserved their win. If terrace made the most of their opportunities I think they may have won more easily but their halfback and fullback were very ordinary. We will have to target these next week. Their strengths are the No2 (Ready), who takes it up very strongly, No 8 (Bridges) and No10 (Lucas) who sets up plays especially with his cut-out pass. For Churchie they rely on the centre combination but I was very disappointed with Frater who seems to get lots of mentions here. I believe TSS should not have too many problems next week

 

[RugbyReg]

just to let you know, I'm a Terrace Old Boy. I was more having a (friendly) quip at Refabit who tipped Churchie to beat us.

 

[Doc]

Being a coaching an into player development etc as well as a bit of a stat nut I thought I'd throw together the following to compare and see how sides go across the year. I will do a second stat compilation on birthdate ala Outliers but just wanted to compare schools on age and time at school (Importiness Score or IS). The major shortcoming of this info is that it is based on the schools official First XV squad. Obviously each school has different size squads and there is also the issue of U16s bringing the numbers down.

The data processed was 1. Age 2. Time at school

Age: Under 16 eligible players=16
Under 17 Eligible= 17
Under 18 Eligible= 18

Pretty simple. So an U16 A team would score 16.0, while a traditional open team with zero repeats or year older kids would score 17.0 etc.


Time at school (IS) was scored as their enrollment date.
2010=0 years at school
2009= 1
2008=2
2007=3
2006=4

So a team of players who have all been at the school since year 8 would score 4.0 etc.

One would theorize that the oldest teams would be the most successful while the teams with least time at school also the most successful. Again please note that these are based on squads. So perhaps one school might field all 18 year olds in a match day XV but are ranked low on age here as the rest of squad is 16.


AGE RANKING
1. TSS 17.17 years
2. TGS 17.0 years
3. BBC 16.92 years
4. BGS 16.90 years
5. ACGS 16.86 years
6. GT 16.82 years
7. BSHS 16.80 years
8. NC 16.76 years
9. IGS 16.69 years

IS RANKING
1. IGS 2.19 years
2. NC 2.23 years
3. BSHS 2.42 years
4. TSS 2.64 years
5. ACGS 2.76 years
6. TGS 2.84 years
7. BGS 3.0 years
8. BBC 3.52 years
9. GT 3.78 years

It is always the likes of TSS and ACGS that get tarred with the 'import' brush, but what about TGS? 2nd oldest squad with short time at school. Interesting to see that the age at time at school correlate for some eg IGS, NC, BSHS, BBC, GT.

 

[rugbywhisperer]

The Age figure For TSS is intriguing.
How does it equate to the 1xv being evenly split between grades 11 and 12 yet the they would only have 2 or 3 players of that Age.
Well done by the way

 

[Doc]

The Age figure For TSS is intriguing.
How does it equate to the 1xv being evenly split between grades 11 and 12 yet the they would only have 2 or 3 players of that Age.
Well done by the way

TSS is 18 year old heavy. Year 12 over 3 years, repeaters or just kids who were held back etc. Over 1/3 is squad.

Surprising BBC is up there too, which is odd due to their enrollment data eg 'imports'. IGS has a few but has a massive amount of 16 year olds and the biggest squad lowering their age.

 

[Doc]

About to look at month of birth (ala Outliers). I thought I would put predictions here, just so things are kept fair etc.

The bulk of players will come from 1992 and Jan-Jul 1993. Nest Highest should be Jan-Jun 1994, followed by AUg-Dec 1993. I would imagine the representation for Aug-Dec 1994 to be very limited.

Editing as I forgot the Novemember GPS Rule. So Jan-Jun should be Nov-May

 

[Doc]

I just finished the birth month analysis, a couple of surprises.

Interesting trends:
Early months of the year are represented well (as one would expect) as is November which is essentially the start of GPS age years if kids want to play down etc. The March-May belt appears to be the best chance of playing 1s, especially as a two year player without repeating etc

Worst month to be born and play First XV? August. Seems odd, but when you consider most parents hold kids born in Sept/Oct back a year, August becomes the 'youngest' month.

Total number of players= 246

By Year
1992- 45 or 18.3% (U18)
1993- 129 or 52.4% (U17)
1994- 72 or 29.3% (U16)

By Month (Across all years)
Jan- 21 or 8.5%
Feb- 19 or 7.72%
Mar- 29 or 11.7%
Apr- 28 or 11.3%
May- 24 or 9.75%
Jun- 21 or 8.5%
Jul- 16 or 6.5%
Aug- 9 or 3.65%
Sep- 20 or 8.1%
Oct- 19 or 7.7%
Nov- 24 or 9.7%
Dec- 16 or 6.5

By Half Year
November 1991-April 1992= 7
May 1992- October 1992= 17
November 1992- April 1993= 70
May 1993- October 1993= 63
November 1993- April 1993= 55
May 1993-Dec 1993=33




1992 1993 1994
January 1 12 8
February 3 9 7
March 2 15 12
April 2 14 12
May 0 17 7
June 3 10 8
July 2 12 2
August 1 6 2
September 4 13 3
October 7 5 7
November 12 9 3
December 8 7 1

 

[Geronimo]

IS RANKING
1. IGS 2.19 years
2. NC 2.23 years
3. BSHS 2.42 years
4. TSS 2.64 years
5. ACGS 2.76 years
6. TGS 2.84 years
7. BGS 3.0 years
8. BBC 3.52 years
9. GT 3.78 years

Well done Doc, just so that I am reading this right, you are saying that using the top and bottom here, Ippy has not many that started in grade 8 and Terrace (given there will be a couple of grade 11 ie 2007) have basically all started in grade 8.
I also thought Nudgees age average would have been higher. Where did you get this info?

 

[Doc]

IS RANKING
1. IGS 2.19 years
2. NC 2.23 years
3. BSHS 2.42 years
4. TSS 2.64 years
5. ACGS 2.76 years
6. TGS 2.84 years
7. BGS 3.0 years
8. BBC 3.52 years
9. GT 3.78 years

Well done Doc, just so that I am reading this right, you are saying that using the top and bottom here, Ippy has not many that started in grade 8 and Terrace (given there will be a couple of grade 11 ie 2007) have basically all started in grade 8.
I also thought Nudgees age average would have been higher. Where did you get this info?

Geronimo, you are reading that right.

The top 3 there also are the youngest so that would impact but they should still be above 3 if they were there from year 8 etc.

The schools have to submit info to GPS Authorities. DOBs, commencement dates and such. Most involved in GPS rugby would have access to it.

 

[rugbywhisperer]

I am still struggling to get the meaning.
If a school has a player in 1stXV that is new in grade 10 say - it lowers the score but what is the point other than giving an average time at school which in itself is relatively irrelevant unless statistics are all you are looking at.
Unless there are some other underlying data that is not shown - eg - who is on scholarship (which is never going to be divulged) then on its own the data is fairly meaningless.
But well done anyway - you do need to get out more but well done.

 

[Doc]

I am still struggling to get the meaning.
If a school has a player in 1stXV that is new in grade 10 say - it lowers the score but what is the point other than giving an average time at school which in itself is relatively irrelevant unless statistics are all you are looking at.
Unless there are some other underlying data that is not shown - eg - who is on scholarship (which is never going to be divulged) then on its own the data is fairly meaningless.
But well done anyway - you do need to get out more but well done.

There is no real meaning just looking at the info. In a perfect setting every school should be in the 3.0-4.0 range, meaning a team of grade 11 and 12s who have been there from day one. Obviously this is not the case. What I'm keen to do is look at squads vs match day 15s. That would be more telling. Squads would have a few 3-4 year players who are in the 2's due to imports etc.

If anyone has any of the round three starting 15s it would be great if you could PM me the lists.

And I agree with getting out more but I do this rugby stuff for a living so this sort of babble breaks up my day.

 

[Refabit]

Round 4 sees some more great games in prospect.

Ipswich who squeaked home last week against a solid BBC side, take on a disappointing and winless Toowoomba team in the local derby. Tip Ippy by 20.
Terrace get the chance to show their mettle against the gun TSS outfit fresh from a week off. Hollywood to referee. Tip TSS by 15.
Undefeated BSHS are back at Fursden Rd trying to give Churchie a 0-4 start to the season. Reffed by Acto so fast and open game. Despite the whole of Nudgee praying for a Churchie win it will be State High by 20.
Finally a more consistent BBC take on Grammar with 1 win apiece. Can both compare notes as to what its like being spanked by Nudgee. Tip BBC by 14.

 

[RugbyReg]

who is Hollywood?

 

[Refabit]

Mr Walker - very experienced whistler