NSW JRU State Championships & Representative Teams 2012
- Thread starter Thin Thighs
- Start date
- Status
Man on the hill
Alex Ross (28)
Correct
That's what I must have been thinking.
If there are a bunch of NSW Schools "blow ins" in the City (SJRU) squad for the city v Country game before Nationals, then that would disrupt the preparation for the SJRU U16 Nationals squad.
The eventual NSWJRU v QLDJRU game happens fairly soon after the end of the Nationals. Confusing?
If there are a bunch of NSW Schools "blow ins" in the City (SJRU) squad for the city v Country game before Nationals, then that would disrupt the preparation for the SJRU U16 Nationals squad.
The eventual NSWJRU v QLDJRU game happens fairly soon after the end of the Nationals. Confusing?
Rugby Mum
Watty Friend (18)
Hence the long choosing a schools and city side. Surely these teams cannot mix and match. If so throw some country kids in the mix and select a NSW ONE AND TWO side. Maybe a regional type carnival between these three teams prior to nationals as a selection by independent of all three associations. ARU Personell ..
Rugby Mum
Watty Friend (18)
This actually is City for the 16 s not NSW as that would have to incorporate kids from all NSW. Something not available with the Nationals for this age group.
It really is a buggers muddle isn't it? A classic camel is a horse designed by a committee situation.
I have just reread the Garling report and the various responses (some comment on that in the Garling Report Thread), and despite 18 months passage of time since that report, there doesn't seem to be much evidence of the necessary structural changes or reform being made.
I will say that ARU and more particularly the ARU community staff/division seem to be doing a good job in rather difficult circumstances. Problems seem to be at levels lower than that.
I have just reread the Garling report and the various responses (some comment on that in the Garling Report Thread), and despite 18 months passage of time since that report, there doesn't seem to be much evidence of the necessary structural changes or reform being made.
I will say that ARU and more particularly the ARU community staff/division seem to be doing a good job in rather difficult circumstances. Problems seem to be at levels lower than that.
Man on the hill
Alex Ross (28)
It's interesting - I had an opportunity be involved in a discussion on this very topic with someone who CLAIMED to know the difference between clay and the other stuff on this matter.
Ignoring various gold squads / academies etc, the game path to the top looks something like...
U15 SJRU Vs Country Juniors ==> NSWJRU Vs QJRU Vs ACTJRU
U16 SJRU Vs Country Juniors ==> NSWJRU Vs QJRU Vs ACTJRU
National U16 Championships - SJRU, NSW Schools & Country Juniors
U17 SJRU Vs Country Juniors ==> NSWJRU Vs QJRU Vs ACTJRU
U18 Australian Schools Championships
U20 Changed to align to IRB; previously it was Aust U19 & Aust U21
Waratahs / Reds / Force / Rebels
Wallabies
The following is how I now see the "bigger picture" - if you concentrate on any single element (above) too hard you miss the forest because of the tree.
#1 - understand and accept the concept of "for the greater good".
#2 - Organising a competition is different to organising a representative program / pathway.
#3 - If you track affiliations up the tree - it all starts and ends with the ARU- they are the puppet masters. so if ARU don't support something - guess what; no desire for change further down the food chain. You need to see how each union / association is related to the ARU - a bit like a family tree.
#4 - Status Quo - there is no Australian Junior Rugby. NSWJRU is affiliated directly to NSWRU and through that ARU, whilst NSW Schools are affiliated to Australian Schools, who are in turn affiliated to ARU. For the Garling report to kick along, Schools would have to affiliate to NSWRU. As long as you have a hole in your bum - that is just not going to happen - that is a structural change well beyond the scope of the report, it requires other states to also fall into line.
#5- getting over #3 & #4, it becomes all about PATHWAY. Selection in junior rep teams, despite the prestige associated with it, is a "mere" part of the pathway, not a destination in or of itself. Accept that and the structure becomes mildly irrelevant.
#6 - So it becomes about opportunity - multiple opportunity for players to shine - it stands to reason that having 3 NON EXCLUSIVE (U16) selection pathways in NSW - Schools, SJRU & Country, that any biases or failings evident in one selection system, will be countered by another. Ultimately - if a player can't crack one of those 3 squads, is he genuinely likely to push for honours beyond that?
Problem 1, The Gap
Yes there is a gap - it is assumed that anyone older than 16 will also be involved in the schools system (& I guess with the reported prevalence of scholarships etc, this might be 90+% accurate.) I can only assume that with the talent ID process being broad net approach from 15s and expanding at 16s to bring schools into the fold, that at some stage every participant has been in front of a selector.
Problem 2, New Faces / Late Developers
A tough one - I guess this is where the much reviled old boy network kicks in. Someone somewhere will see something and tell someone who is in a position to be able to do something about it!
Problem 3 - Young Dual Code Players
I haven't worked out how they are meant to fit in. I can only imagine that with limited resources, rule 1 might kick in "the greater good". if$100,000 gets you one player rated as a 9.5, or 5 players rated at 7 that you can work on, and you only have so much brass to spread about...
Oh well - that's my opinion - just painted a target on my forehead - let's hear it.
Cheers MOTH
Tried to post this in the Garling Report thread but the system wouldn't let me
From the Sydney Juniors Web site:
Then no players listed? Pretty poor form, although to be fair, they are usually fairly slick at getting the names posted.
Sydney Juniors would to like to congratulate the following players on their selection into the Under 16 Sydney Juniors Representative side for 2012.
Then no players listed? Pretty poor form, although to be fair, they are usually fairly slick at getting the names posted.
Man on the hill
Alex Ross (28)
Saturday lunch time and still zip to see - most uncharacteristic. Only schools have posted their squad
The Junior Cockatoos list for U16's is here
:http://www.countryjuniors.com.au/index.php?option=com_joomsport&view=blteam&sid=1&tid=3&Itemid=608
Anywhere between 15 and nearly 19. Two year window applies re paperwork for compliance for the young'uns.
Several lads in NSW U16's are already playing 1st XV rugby. Crichton (Scots) and Fotokava (View) were selected for GPS 3 team in the opens Schoolboys tournament. Walker (Augies) didn't play Under 16 Tournament at Knox
On the upperside, it is possible that boys doing pathways (2 years at Year 12 not the ARU "Pathway") can be turning 19 at some time in the rugby season. IIRC once they turn 19 they are no longer allowed to be selected for Rep teams. Can't recall if that limitation also applies to 1st XV.
The Year 10 boy (15 turning 16) in the 1st XV is the exception rather than the rule. Typically 1st and 2nd XV is year 11 and 12, 16 turning 17 and 17 turning 18.
Rugby Mum
Watty Friend (18)
So if the kids are in an Under 18's Opens draw but are Riverview XV players are all 17 is the paperwork required. All of a sudden all these kids in the other teams are 17 but in an opens draw?????? I understod being in the under 18s draw paperwork needed to be completed as on the form it says eg Under 16's playing 1st XV need to fill in the 2 year window forms..
Man on the hill
Alex Ross (28)
That will vary association to association, but to play at the schoolboy nationals players must be U18 on Jan 1st of the playing year - i.e. if they turn 19 at any time of the playing year they are ineligible for school boy rep rugby.
sir_richie
Frank Row (1)
The Year 10 boy (15 turning 16) in the 1st XV is the exception rather than the rule. Typically 1st and 2nd XV is year 11 and 12, 16 turning 17 and 17 turning 18.
Theres a good ball player who is 15 ATM,who is a first xv playing at hill sports high.(turns 16 at end of the year)
Holds his ground very well against 17-18.
Year 10 ATM. will he be eligable for nationals in yr12?(if he stays on course)
Theres a good ball player who is 15 ATM,who is a first xv playing at hill sports high.(turns 16 at end of the year)
Holds his ground very well against 17-18.
Year 10 ATM. will he be eligable for nationals in yr12?(if he stays on course)
Man on the hill
Alex Ross (28)
From what you have advised - yes. & from what you have said he'll be eligible from now. So long as he doesn't turn 19 while he in year 12 - no problems.
Have you been taking lessons from La Jarse in asking questions?
You asked what age are boys in the 1sts or seconds. I responded as best I could to a generic question you asked. Seems I did not apply the La Jarse questioning answering filter to establish what question you were actually asking. Based on your follow up remarks, your question is clearly related to the issue with the Country 16's playing in the Gold Coast tournament against other schools 1st XV and 2nd XV's. I should have put 2+2 together in which case my response would have been slightly different.
Here goes: 1st XV and 2nd XV play "open age" schools footy which is in most instances considered as Under 18's. This is the grading of the competition for the purposes of the ARU 2 year window. By definition U16 boys playing against U18 boys need to have the paperwork filled in to comply with ARU policy. If not ARU Insurance cover will not apply, and the organisers (or their parent organisation) risks questions being asked by ARU regarding their affiliation. Not a desirable situation.
The administrators that have allowed this situation to arise should have their bums kicked from here to kingdom come.
Careful though, Many kids in QLD in year 12 hence 1st/2nd XV types are only 17 (at 1 Jan) IIRC. The competition may be classified as Under 17, and therefore your U16 boys would be within the 2 year window. This would also apply to View boys who may play Under 18.Open Schoolboys down here in NSW, but provided they were all under 17 on Jan 1 2012, they could be eligible for an U17 tournament.
Hope it all turns out OK for the boys and that they get to actually play some challenging footy.
It must be frustrating for the boys and parents not knowing what is going on regarding the grading. One of the problems with doing business interstate, where their schooling system operates to different rules to ours.
Remember my advice doesn't come cheap. The cost to you is we need some intellligence reports on the QLDers to take into Nationals
. Also some comment would be useful, if you can get some, on how they structure their affairs around the Schools v Clubs v Country issues that seem to plague the landscape in our 16's to 18's footy.For a different thread, but it staggers me that in todays day and age we still operate archaic state based structures which are constitutionally correct and were relevant for the times that the Constitution was drafted, but are they relevant now, and are they in our best interests as a Commonwealth? Education is slowly dragging itself into a national standard, but I still think the QLD kids can finish High School one year earlier than those south of the border.
- Status