WLF3
Watty Friend (18)
Ah yes, the Joker lurks in the background.
CAS Rugby 2023
- Thread starter rod skellet
- Start date
It's in fact unanimous, point very well argued by counsel.
I'm all for a report of Brook dominating Augs, but I did wonder what was meant by it, considering the final score.
Ziggy
Herbert Moran (7)
Reports from Death Valley is that there is Alot of yelling by coaches at training today.
Looks like their number 2 and captain in a moon boot.
Ziggy
Herbert Moran (7)
Attachments
Looking like a tough season ahead for waverley, leaves the comp very open.
CAS Fanatic
Peter Burge (5)
Schedule and predictions for the upcoming week of trials?
schoolboyfooty
Allen Oxlade (6)
What are your sources?
Seem like you know a little too much about Waverley, are you a spy?
Snort
Nev Cottrell (35)
Cranbrook plays St Patrick's at Strathfield, I think - I'm expecting a win for Cranbrook. Last week St Pats drew 17-17 with Trinity (who had a red card against them, I understand, and played much of the game with 14) - and I think Cranbrook are a touch stronger than Trinity.
Snort
Nev Cottrell (35)
Also St Aloysius v St Stanislaus and I think Waverley v Riverview.
scrumhead99
Fred Wood (13)
Agreed. I think after the Auggies game Cranbrook will need to change some things, and they will be looking for a win.
On another note here are my tips for the weekend:
View to beat Wav, 21-7
Knox to beat Shore, 35-5
Barker to beat New, 10-7
Stannies to beat Aloys in the wooden spoon matchup, a high scoring affair, 28-27
Trinity to beat Gregs, 50-28
WLF3
Watty Friend (18)
Having just seen the View v Waves Rugby fixtures for this Sat, they are quite upsetting.
Other than each individual A age group View will be pitching lower teams against all the Waves Opens and age groups, eg the Waves 2s v View 3rds, Waves 3rds v View 5ths, and in the age groups it's Waves bs v Views cs and so on.
What a joke and a potential waste of time, as I predict View will get toweled up in each mismatch, and no one wins in that scenario.
The reason is that View have chosen to also play St Gregs, and maybe some other schools throughout the day.
That would be fine in much lower grades but not where like grades are available.
eg the Waves 14bs beat Newington 14bs 50-0 last Sat, and I can't imagine the New bs are too bad, I believe the Waves age group is strong,.
I have a nephew in the View 14bs and we have chosen not to tell him!
If anyone can justify this disgrace I am keen to hear, these trials are supposed to provide a pre season format that tests all comparable schools prior to their own comp, this fails that test miserably imo.
Other than each individual A age group View will be pitching lower teams against all the Waves Opens and age groups, eg the Waves 2s v View 3rds, Waves 3rds v View 5ths, and in the age groups it's Waves bs v Views cs and so on.
What a joke and a potential waste of time, as I predict View will get toweled up in each mismatch, and no one wins in that scenario.
The reason is that View have chosen to also play St Gregs, and maybe some other schools throughout the day.
That would be fine in much lower grades but not where like grades are available.
eg the Waves 14bs beat Newington 14bs 50-0 last Sat, and I can't imagine the New bs are too bad, I believe the Waves age group is strong,.
I have a nephew in the View 14bs and we have chosen not to tell him!
If anyone can justify this disgrace I am keen to hear, these trials are supposed to provide a pre season format that tests all comparable schools prior to their own comp, this fails that test miserably imo.
Snort
Nev Cottrell (35)
WLF, it's a fair point but I do feel sorry for the sportsmasters who need to juggle fixtures to get everyone a game. I assume that this happens because Riverview has more teams than Waverley, but perhaps not. Some schools who have E teams seem to end up playing their Joeys counterparts six times a season.
As for Newington's Bs, I'm not quite as sure as you that they would be strong. For quite some time now Newington has relied on having 15 very good players in its Opens, and not a lot else!
As for Newington's Bs, I'm not quite as sure as you that they would be strong. For quite some time now Newington has relied on having 15 very good players in its Opens, and not a lot else!
WLF3
Watty Friend (18)
Snort, Yes I have heard all that before and I did say that it would be fine where a school has more teams in an age group, then the fs can play some other school. However if any school has 5/6 teams in an age group I believe it is essential that these teams get matched up.
Furthermore, without trying to bang on too much, the Waves are nearly always very strong in the age groups, and again this year.
So it makes no sense and is a waste of time imo. No winners here!
AroundTheAnkles
Banned
It's an impossible situation, for example - Joeys D's will often beat another schools B's, not always but often. Other weeks they will get smashed. So it's fair to say they'd rather test themselves against their D counterparts but they'd also rather play and get smashed than not play at all.
WLF3
Watty Friend (18)
In all due respect AA, View isn't Joeys and I still don't see the logic.
Why would a school stuff up all the lower grades when at best I think if teams were matched evenly View might win 50% of all games.
I actually think that would also be a struggle against the Waves age groups.
I think I recollect this also happening last year v View, and the results were a joke.
I guess if you keep doing the same thing over and over again, the result will change!
WLF3, like Snort, I have banged on about evenness of match ups before.
I don't understand why associations don't ask schools to nominate a 'division' for each of their teams. If the Waverley 14A's nominate as division 1, and the Waverley 14B nominate as division 2 and that was known amongst the sportmasters / MICs, then schools can be matched up on that basis. eg. If the Riverview 14A's nominate as division 2, then the Waverley 14Bs play Riverview 14As and Waverly 14As need to find another division 1 team to play.
Nomination of 'division' can be subjective by each school, or could attempt to be more robust (ie. points system based on club players, rep players, years experience, rugby league club standard, league rep player, etc). Presumably the sportsmasters / rugby MIC meet up each week and for the first few weeks of the trial season could review the accuracy of the 'division'. I am sure they could easily review 5 minutes of iphone match footage each week to also ensure the nominated division is appropriate.
These division and their adjustment during the trial period then could inform the structure of the CAS comp. eg. Division 1 has all the teams who are considered division 1 after the trials. It might also mean that strong rugby schools have both their A and B team in the division 1 comp and the weaker schools have their A team in division 2 or 3.
I guess what I have described above is pretty similar to the SJRU grading approach and I know that many will say it doesn't work for schools as it means that have teams spread all across Sydney and therefore is logistically impossible (especially for those with boarders), wrecks school spirit, etc, etc.
If rugby wants to stay viable at the school level, then I can't see another alternate (other than a division structure between merged associations).
I don't understand why associations don't ask schools to nominate a 'division' for each of their teams. If the Waverley 14A's nominate as division 1, and the Waverley 14B nominate as division 2 and that was known amongst the sportmasters / MICs, then schools can be matched up on that basis. eg. If the Riverview 14A's nominate as division 2, then the Waverley 14Bs play Riverview 14As and Waverly 14As need to find another division 1 team to play.
Nomination of 'division' can be subjective by each school, or could attempt to be more robust (ie. points system based on club players, rep players, years experience, rugby league club standard, league rep player, etc). Presumably the sportsmasters / rugby MIC meet up each week and for the first few weeks of the trial season could review the accuracy of the 'division'. I am sure they could easily review 5 minutes of iphone match footage each week to also ensure the nominated division is appropriate.
These division and their adjustment during the trial period then could inform the structure of the CAS comp. eg. Division 1 has all the teams who are considered division 1 after the trials. It might also mean that strong rugby schools have both their A and B team in the division 1 comp and the weaker schools have their A team in division 2 or 3.
I guess what I have described above is pretty similar to the SJRU grading approach and I know that many will say it doesn't work for schools as it means that have teams spread all across Sydney and therefore is logistically impossible (especially for those with boarders), wrecks school spirit, etc, etc.
If rugby wants to stay viable at the school level, then I can't see another alternate (other than a division structure between merged associations).
CAS Fanatic
Peter Burge (5)
Based on the match report Cranbrook had 13 entries into Auggies 22 compared to their 5 into Cranbrooks. Good signs yet obviously issues with execution on the day.
Union on Top
Peter Burge (5)
Last year, Cranbrooks undefeated 2nds team played View’s 3rds and only one by a try. Cranbrooks 3rds who only lost to Knox last season played against Views 5ths and were well beaten, 26-7. So I do believe these games will not be blowouts, but I do back Waverly to win both games.