I think Porter was the unluckiest boy at the tournament
I think so too: I thought his omission was unaccountable but i'm sure the selectors had reason for it.
I asked Steve Phillpotts a couple of years ago how they selected the team—did they have fellows assigned to the back three and/or the front row e.g. and he said that they did but that the findings of the unit selectors would be put before all the selectors regularly for review.
As part of the assessment of the units there were many criteria the boys were judged on for their position, including generalities—and there were a few non-rugby matters also.
We, the spectators, see a lot of things that are easy to see - the break, the pilfer, the perfect pass, the crunching tackle, the ball being thrown and caught at the lineout, and the flashy player etc.
We are not so skilled at spotting good play that helps those things find their mark.
Also - any implication that because three of the four selectors (who are teachers) teach at Qld Schools, they must have bias to Qld boys is disgraceful. Likewise the idea that there has to be a quota for each team is plain silly.
And if anybody thinks that the (non-voting) Chairman from the ARU (Adrian Thompson) or the ARU selector (Manu Sutherland), both of whom I count as friends, would be party to anything like those matters, they have another thing coming.
And no, I didn't study which team each Aus Schools player came from, because I don't give a rat's arse; so long as the best ones are picked.
Sure, I have a few question about some selections of lads that didn't take my eye but I am more likely to blame my eye than the selectors' eye
We have been well-served by the Aus Schools selectors in recent years; so I think we should put away conspiracies if ever such were entertained.
They should be judged by their results and if Aus Schools doesn't do so well this year it may not be their fault anyway but because of the cattle—especially a shortage of dominant forwards.
.
