Under-20 Competitions including Oceania & World U20s

[The Ghost of Raelene]

NZ played at a speed the Aus team didn't have. Resembled a A v B session.

When this is the case you have no margin for error with bad line out throws, kicks not finding touch or going straight to the NZ back 3. Biggest positive I saw was the Prop that came in after the Argentina game was a rock.

Rae Rae

 

[Garry Owens]

And further on the size thing if you want to tee off on Mac and Floyd how come Sam Walker ( who is smaller than both of them ) has had the success he has had ?

I raise Mac and Floyd v Sam Walker as (supposedly) League was very interested in both who chose to stay in Rugby when they had the option of going to League.

Mason Gordon's size has nothing to do with it . Have a look at the Kiwi 10 and 15 ( who wasn't very big either ) Compared to his counterpart he's just not that good. But that isn't all on him. He , like a lot of these guys get over valued and fanboy'd by their School Coaches , their Agent and the good ol boys nod and wink network , and so , never get properly Coached or developed. And I feel sorry for 80% to 90% of the lads that are in this circumstance, because, no one has ever been honest with them and have overly projected them.

There was a young lad who isn't a bad player in Colts 1 Rugby -that got invited to a prep camp on the sole recommendation of this kid's prior Coach . No due process. Just one good ol boy waxing on about his charge to another good ol boy.

Anyone think that the same things happen in the NZ pathways ?

Or the best teams in the NRL ? A peer of these lads , Jack Howarth is a classic example in how the Storm have managed ( and developed ) him. The difference between him and say Robert Toua ( NC and 1 year his junior ) who was often compared to Howarth in School Rugby is night and day.

Have a look at who the Rebels have selected as their core ...all of them share the same things in common in how they were under developed and over projected in coming through the system

It seems as though there is a lot of strategic tokenism in selections, leadership core and those that get anointed , in a cynic's view , of growing the base of the game in fledgling and/or minority to majority group markets. Well it's hard to piss in the tall weeds with the big dogs. League learnt this 25 years ago during the Super League fiasco and Adelaide Rams and Perth whatever they were. The lesson they learned was never forget your roots but first understand who and where they are - and then take care of your own backyard first. Fast forward 25 years and it has seemed to work pretty well for them.

So again , do the NZ Pathways engage in this type of practise of narrow channel of over projected good ol boy'ism and tokenism ?

69 - 12 suggests not.

 

[Garry Owens]

Unfortunately for the aussie side (especially the forward pack) the old adage of " a good big man will always beat a good small man" rang true.

The NZ boys just took their tasks with gusto and dedication which resulted in speed and accuracy at a higher level than the Aussie lads could handle. TBH I think there was a difference in the fitness levels as well. Seemed like the NZ lads were going as hard in the last minute as they did in the first.

I disagree about good big v good small.....good sir. In a one on one positional match up -contest probably so. But overall speed and power and the ability to maintain it over the duration is key and ultimately aerobic and anaerobic endurance wins out ( more often in frames with less unnecessary mass ) Speed of the ball ( IE ability to move to space ) is always going to beat foot speed too.

The NZ'rs didn't look supersized to me. But you have knocked it out of the park when you reference their conditioning and their superior drilling and skill set.

The other thing that hasn't been touched on yet is that in watching it you could see / feel the fear factor and the complete lack of confidence. Mentally they were nowhere near it. Aside from 90% of them not being good enough they were all beaten between the ears before they ran on I suspect

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

And further on the size thing if you want to tee off on Mac and Floyd how come Sam Walker ( who is smaller than both of them ) has had the success he has had ?

Mason Gordon's size has nothing to do with it . Have a look at the Kiwi 10 and 15 ( who wasn't very big either ) Compared to his counterpart he's just not that good. But that isn't all on him. He , like a lot of these guys get over valued and fanboy'd by their School Coaches , their Agent and the good ol boys nod and wink network , and so , never get properly Coached or developed. And I feel sorry for 80% to 90% of the lads that are in this circumstance, because, no one has ever been honest with them and have overly projected them.

The size chat doesn't really concern me so much about the backs. Aus have had some fantastic smaller players like the Lucas boys, Walton, Hutchinson, Flook etc and we have had the big boys come through as well like Mark Nawaquinatawase and others.

Mason Gordon just looked slow. He saw gaps and naturally tried to get through but it slammed shut on him every single time. Will be interesting to see what happens in Melbourne. Would they leave him in QLD to play Club and develop for a while? Would be my advice at this stage.

Rae Rae

 

[whistler]

These guys were setup to fail. There were certainly guys that shouldn't be there, but they have the reputations and the super contracts. If i were the rebels and the reds i certainly would be uneasy with what i saw.

I am surprised there has not been more commentary on the performance of the coaching staff. 2 decisions on the Friday night stood out. Aubrey looked dangerous and most likely. They needed points, but he was replaced. The scrum on skates, the prop yellow carded. Replacement prop comes on and scrum is better, but the original prop comes back on.

Down 40-0 at half time and not make changes? the 9 & 10, 15 struggled. The 9&10 on the bench looked much better in the previous outing but they don't come on at half time? What is there to lose? The starting 7 was ineffective and could not handle the physicality of the kiwis and they have a guy on the bench who has been playing first grade all year? There was no specialist lock on the bench?

Some of the team changes made no sense and some guys could feel hard done by. Removing reputations and super contracts. Looking purely at performances in games 1&2, yesterday's starting 9 is in his tracksuit with Wilson and Werchon playing. Yesterday's starting 10 is extremely lucky to have started and young Bowen was much better. Fullback is another issue. They didn't seem to have one. Grearly is not a fullback. Not sure where he fits in to be honest.

Make no mistake, the Jnr wallabies played a bunch of men yesterday, maybe not in age, but in aggressiveness and skill. Overall if you are not playing meaningful minutes in first grade how can you expect to step up? Put guys on the park who are playing against men week in week out and at least they would make a good account of themselves. Guys playing colts can't be expected to handle the aggression the kiwis played with yesterday.

There is a bunch of these guys who will be available next year. Get them playing against men. If their clubs aren't willing to give them that opportunity that probably tells you something about the chosen players.

 

[DELETE ACCOUNT]

These guys were setup to fail. There were certainly guys that shouldn't be there, but they have the reputations and the super contracts. If i were the rebels and the reds i certainly would be uneasy with what i saw.

I am surprised there has not been more commentary on the performance of the coaching staff. 2 decisions on the Friday night stood out. Aubrey looked dangerous and most likely. They needed points, but he was replaced. The scrum on skates, the prop yellow carded. Replacement prop comes on and scrum is better, but the original prop comes back on.

Down 40-0 at half time and not make changes? the 9 & 10, 15 struggled. The 9&10 on the bench looked much better in the previous outing but they don't come on at half time? What is there to lose? The starting 7 was ineffective and could not handle the physicality of the kiwis and they have a guy on the bench who has been playing first grade all year? There was no specialist lock on the bench?

Some of the team changes made no sense and some guys could feel hard done by. Removing reputations and super contracts. Looking purely at performances in games 1&2, yesterday's starting 9 is in his tracksuit with Wilson and Werchon playing. Yesterday's starting 10 is extremely lucky to have started and young Bowen was much better. Fullback is another issue. They didn't seem to have one. Grearly is not a fullback. Not sure where he fits in to be honest.

Make no mistake, the Jnr wallabies played a bunch of men yesterday, maybe not in age, but in aggressiveness and skill. Overall if you are not playing meaningful minutes in first grade how can you expect to step up? Put guys on the park who are playing against men week in week out and at least they would make a good account of themselves. Guys playing colts can't be expected to handle the aggression the kiwis played with yesterday.

There is a bunch of these guys who will be available next year. Get them playing against men. If their clubs aren't willing to give them that opportunity that probably tells you something about the chosen players.

The only comment I will make about the coaching, as we all know Nathan Grey's track record, is it is obvious there was a selection plan for next years Junior World Cup.
Over half of the side are 18/19 and eligible again next year. I have said it already elsewhere there are plenty of eligible 20 year olds playing in Shute Shield and QPR that were overlooked.

For any young bloke that is 19/20 this year the bloody Covid debacle has impacted their junior pathways game time and exposure over the past 2 years.

 

[SouthernX]

It’s not going to get better folks.

these boys are going to be playing 6 more weeks of club rugby and then it’s PlayStation/Xbox offseason. (Maybe some might play 7s rugby - but you never see super rugby players turn out with their club brethren for 7s)

guess what’s the kiwi boys are doing after club rugby. NPC/Mitre10 cup.

in my eyes, no one is to blame for yesterday until RA pulls it’s finger out and has a 365 days a year development plan/calander we can mould our next generation of players.

 

[Roger Tessman]

These guys were setup to fail. There were certainly guys that shouldn't be there, but they have the reputations and the super contracts. If i were the rebels and the reds i certainly would be uneasy with what i saw.

I am surprised there has not been more commentary on the performance of the coaching staff. 2 decisions on the Friday night stood out. Aubrey looked dangerous and most likely. They needed points, but he was replaced. The scrum on skates, the prop yellow carded. Replacement prop comes on and scrum is better, but the original prop comes back on.

Down 40-0 at half time and not make changes? the 9 & 10, 15 struggled. The 9&10 on the bench looked much better in the previous outing but they don't come on at half time? What is there to lose? The starting 7 was ineffective and could not handle the physicality of the kiwis and they have a guy on the bench who has been playing first grade all year? There was no specialist lock on the bench?

Some of the team changes made no sense and some guys could feel hard done by. Removing reputations and super contracts. Looking purely at performances in games 1&2, yesterday's starting 9 is in his tracksuit with Wilson and Werchon playing. Yesterday's starting 10 is extremely lucky to have started and young Bowen was much better. Fullback is another issue. They didn't seem to have one. Grearly is not a fullback. Not sure where he fits in to be honest.

Make no mistake, the Jnr wallabies played a bunch of men yesterday, maybe not in age, but in aggressiveness and skill. Overall if you are not playing meaningful minutes in first grade how can you expect to step up? Put guys on the park who are playing against men week in week out and at least they would make a good account of themselves. Guys playing colts can't be expected to handle the aggression the kiwis played with yesterday.

There is a bunch of these guys who will be available next year. Get them playing against men. If their clubs aren't willing to give them that opportunity that probably tells you something about the chosen players.

The team was definitely let down up front with the Kiwis stronger and skilled in the set piece. Games are won up front and the players available to start yesterday didn’t have what was needed. Injuries a curse I. don’t agree with your comments on Grealy or Gordon both are fine young players in a disconnected team. Gordon moved into 12 with Bowen taking over 10 just after half time. Aubrey looked lost and were better to bring in the winger who score a couple of the tries against Fiji. Name escapes me. Teddy Wilson was my favourite player and was the change when he come on in the last 2 games. Thomas didn’t play his best rugby over the 3 games and hopefully we will see more if he gets a game with Australia A. Him and Grealy are set to join the team tomorrow. Whoever said Grey’s selections were focused next years World Cup is probably spot on. I get the strategy but maybe did Himself out of job after this years result.

 

[Garry Owens]

^Good post. But it still falls short of addressing the issue.

Do players just get fast tracked just because 2 or 3 enablers have done the Jedi Mind Warrior trick on everyone who believe these guys are legit pro prospects , and so , get ushered into Prem opportunity or a Super Rugby Contract ( with that old chestnut that if some clown has given you a Super Rugby contract then you should be playing Prems )

To your point though , and as to other commentary that has raised it within this thread , there is so little true developmental Rugby being played at a more meaningful level that would help a lot of these young guys give a better account of themselves.

But this aside, the Coaching and Management systems in our pathway development are third world - and like how a lot of business is done in the 3rd world is lacking in transparency , integrity and merit .

We have neither the Coaching or Management talent and therefore not the player talent - and it abundantly clear that Rugby Pathways have gone off a cliff in the last 4-5 years.

I think with what you can see / project as of right now ( and it has been there underneath for a good while with the curtain finally pulled back ) is that once we get past the peak of this current senior crop over the next 3 years , Rugby in Australia will be in for a long stint in the Dark Ages with no slight of light at the end of the tunnel. Dramatic ? Whatever . But have a look at the rate of decline of the game overall from the World Cup before the last one to now and where we project with the current crop moving into the next World Cup and then where we project thereafter with what our current 20's and 18's pathways look like and the complete and utter shitshow it is compared to other football codes pathways.

 

[DELETE ACCOUNT]

Kiwi lads showed how to run hard and straight instead of the bs hop, skip, jump jiggle that has snuck into the game in Aus. That crap does not confuse any defender and only makes an easier softer target to hit without momentum.

Someone please teach the lads about about the "collision" and "post contact" when carrying the ball.

 

[Roger Tessman]

It’s not going to get better folks.

these boys are going to be playing 6 more weeks of club rugby and then it’s PlayStation/Xbox offseason. (Maybe some might play 7s rugby - but you never see super rugby players turn out with their club brethren for 7s)

guess what’s the kiwi boys are doing after club rugby. NPC/Mitre10 cup.

in my eyes, no one is to blame for yesterday until Rugby Australia pulls it’s finger out and has a 365 days a year development plan/calander we can mould our next generation of players.

Rugby in Australia needs money.

 

[DELETE ACCOUNT]

Rugby in Australia needs money.

Can I expand this a little?

We need to spend the money we do have a little more wisely and then with a little bit of success the cashflow will naturally grow.
(Elite player contracts is one area for attention ie Izzy Folau debacle)

Look at Qld a few years ago, could attract a substantial sponsor/s but won the Super Rugby Au in covid and now have the corporate world kicking the door down. Just need to be smart with it so it doesn't dry up as quickly.

 

[Garry Owens]

Rugby is Australia has no money ?

Hmmmm. See last week the NRL has just shelled out $25M for its first "entertainment asset" buy to diversify revenue , and also , has just launched its first series of NFT's (Ultimate Queenslander) where proceeds will be directed back into Coaching and facilities at the grass roots.

There's no romance without finance eh?

 

[Roger Tessman]

^Good post. But it still falls short of addressing the issue.

Do players just get fast tracked just because 2 or 3 enablers have done the Jedi Mind Warrior trick on everyone who believe these guys are legit pro prospects , and so , get ushered into Prem opportunity or a Super Rugby Contract ( with that old chestnut that if some clown has given you a Super Rugby contract then you should be playing Prems )

To your point though , and as to other commentary that has raised it within this thread , there is so little true developmental Rugby being played at a more meaningful level that would help a lot of these young guys give a better account of themselves.

But this aside, the Coaching and Management systems in our pathway development are third world - and like how a lot of business is done in the 3rd world is lacking in transparency , integrity and merit .

We have neither the Coaching or Management talent and therefore not the player talent - and it abundantly clear that Rugby Pathways have gone off a cliff in the last 4-5 years.

I think with what you can see / project as of right now ( and it has been there underneath for a good while with the curtain finally pulled back ) is that once we get past the peak of this current senior crop over the next 3 years , Rugby in Australia will be in for a long stint in the Dark Ages with no slight of light at the end of the tunnel. Dramatic ? Whatever . But have a look at the rate of decline of the game overall from the World Cup before the last one to now and where we project with the current crop moving into the next World Cup and then where we project thereafter with what our current 20's and 18's pathways look like and the complete and utter shitshow it is compared to other football codes pathways.

The issue is that we have a bunch of knobs running the development of players in Australia. Way too many player selections that are premature and politically generated. Agree with everything you are saying. I’m at the point where I’m throwing my hands up and see if my kid likes NRL.

 

[Roger Tessman]

Rugby is Australia has no money ?

Hmmmm. See last week the NRL has just shelled out $25M for its first "entertainment asset" buy to diversify revenue , and also , has just launched its first series of NFT's (Ultimate Queenslander) where proceeds will be directed back into Coaching and facilities at the grass roots.

There's no romance without finance eh?

Isn’t that shit. Money is poorly managed by Australian Rugby.

 

[Roger Tessman]

Why was the games pulled on Stan. Result or ref decisions?

 

[Garry Owens]

^ Mercy rule

 

[Garry Owens]

^Mercy rule?

 

[Roger Tessman]

Game now on Stan

 

[For the Love of the Game]

New to the platform. (So might repeat a lot that has been said)

Saddened about what I witnessed on Sunday. Was actually relieved when some pulled the STAN plug as it was embarrassing to say the least.

I think it is time that we start calling a spade a spade.

We where nowhere. We were outplayed, out coached, out classed, out everything!

Can not believe that this is the best Australia has to offer. What further amaze me is that most of these boys are contracted players, so they are getting paid to play the game. It is their full time job. They are training in a professional environment week in and week out and this is what they have to offer? Then to put the cherrie on the top, according to a post above, Thomas and Grealy, after dismal performances, gets rewarded with a call up to join Australia A. We are sending the wrong message by rewarding poor performance in any way or form. If I was a player that was called up after a under 20’s comp I would think I must have done a great job, no wonder the players are starting to develop attitudes and get delusional with regards to their abilities and where they fit in. Do you want to tell me there is no one in club land that deserves a call up? (9’s Cooper-Jones/Wests, Christian/Brothers, Pilz/East, Jeans/Bond, McNamara/Sunny Bank, Albert/East Sydney. 15’s Oats/UQ, Whiteside/Wests, Samuela/Bond….) I will back any of them to play all over the two that got the call up.

We need to accept the fact that not all school boy 1st XV stars, regardless of how much their coaches, dads and uncles rates them and how good their highlight reels are, will become tomorrows super stars or even be able to handle themselves at the next level up. We also need to accept the fact that your surname is not a guarantee of your future success and stop signing 17 year olds from highlight reels. That only creates and enable the next generation of delusional, over rated, incompetent PAID players. No matter how good your highlight reel and how good a school boy player your were, if you have not earned your colours in Club land for at least a couple of years contracts should not even be an consideration.

The whole system needs a revamp or Australia will never play World Cup Semi Finals again, let a lone lift the Webb Ellis Cup ever again.

Time to wake up Rugby Australia!