NSW U16 - schools, NSWJRU / SJRU / CRJU 2013

[Rugby Mum 2]

Why don't you get off your high horse Slugga and calm down as you seem to want to deliberately miss the point. I am not denigrating MWZ just stating the obvious.

The MWZ team has good players and everyone knows that. It would have been a better competition to see full strength teams playing JUST like there was in 2012 - do you remember that clash - you know, when MNZ had a full strength side and one by 1 conversion. Lots of MWZ players made Sydney in 2012 as they should have as did MNZ (and MSZ).

It's not about winning, it's about having the strongest competition for positions. You can't get that if one team isn't running optimally.

 

[Brainstrust]

How crass of me to presume I have as much knowledge as you on all that is u16 rugby, thanks for setting me straight.
As I said you can only beat what's in front of you. The problem with your position is its heads I win tails you loose. It doesn't matter what the MWZ team does you can fall back on the argument that they didn't play 'real' rep teams ergo they have no claims to representation - I mean why bother having trials at all.
Finally I'm sure the MWZ boys feel fine about themselves and their success and would treat your snide commentary with the disdain it deserves.

Congrats to the MWZ boys, they played as a team, and handled the conditions better than the other sides. The Barbarians also deserve mention for finishing second. The idea that the barbarians are the left overs is rubbish. Last year they got 7-8 into Sydney which is well above their numerical entitlement. This year could be the same. The problem for MNZ begins with some strange first pick selections, ( to the benefit of the Barbarians) and then followed up with some even stranger on field positional choices. Against The barbarians they had Chapman a 7 playing a whole game as a lock, and left Leaver (arguably one of the strongest locks going around) sitting in the bench for most of the game. These types of decisions only serve to sap the confidence from a team, which isn't great when every other team is gunning to knock you off, add a few injuries and gone. Feed back around the ground was many parents and players were bewildered by what went on. It is a great skill to take the two best teams in the age group, Warringah and Gordon over 3 years being at your disposal, and put in that type of performance. Unfortunately the losers here will probably be a few of the MNZ boys who wont get to the next level. Rightfully the MWZ boys will feel ripped off if they dont get a strong representation. Cant wait to see how the selectors deal with this.

 

[The Taxi Driver]

Why don't you get off your high horse Slugga and calm down as you seem to want to deliberately miss the point. I am not denigrating MWZ just stating the obvious.

The MWZ team has good players and everyone knows that. It would have been a better competition to see full strength teams playing JUST like there was in 2012 - do you remember that clash - you know, when MNZ had a full strength side and one by 1 conversion. Lots of MWZ players made Sydney in 2012 as they should have as did MNZ (and MSZ).

It's not about winning, it's about having the strongest competition for positions. You can't get that if one team isn't running optimally.

Yes it was a controversial win from memory with MNZ snatching defeat from MWZ with a conversion at the death knell. Now that was a full strength side with Jack MgGregor, Henry Hutchinson, Guy Porter etc. playing MNZ but the MWZ put up a good tussle and were rewarded with Sydney jerseys. Better game to watch and I imagine easier for selectors to see boys playing hard for jersey numbers 1-15.

Agree that it is hard for the zones to put up 4 strong teams as MWZ/MNZ are the stronger zones. After this weekend though, it is in the laps of the clipboard holders.

 

[The Taxi Driver]

Congrats to the MWZ boys, they played as a team, and handled the conditions better than the other sides. The Barbarians also deserve mention for finishing second. The idea that the barbarians are the left overs is rubbish. Last year they got 7-8 into Sydney which is well above their numerical entitlement. This year could be the same. The problem for MNZ begins with some strange first pick selections, ( to the benefit of the Barbarians) and then followed up with some even stranger on field positional choices. Against The barbarians they had Chapman a 7 playing a whole game as a lock, and left Leaver (arguably one of the strongest locks going around) sitting in the bench for most of the game. These types of decisions only serve to sap the confidence from a team, which isn't great when every other team is gunning to knock you off, add a few injuries and gone. Feed back around the ground was many parents and players were bewildered by what went on. It is a great skill to take the two best teams in the age group, Warringah and Gordon over 3 years being at your disposal, and put in that type of performance. Unfortunately the losers here will probably be a few of the MNZ boys who wont get to the next level. Rightfully the MWZ boys will feel ripped off if they dont get a strong representation. Cant wait to see how the selectors deal with this.

Agree with these sage words. MNZ coaches made weird positional choices. At one stage No 8 was playing in centres? Leaver had a massive head gash at NSW Schools the week before so was on limited duties but agree. Chapman is a good 7 but a lock? Mmm. And the Warringah flanker playing as back up half back. That was pure genius.

 

[Unders Line]

Does anyone have a link to the u15s and u16s Sydney teams? I cant seem to locate them

 

[Brainstrust]

Does anyone have a link to the u15s and u16s Sydney teams? I cant seem to locate them

The 15's are usually announced on the day at the ground, after the last game is played, so the boys probably know but I can't see it on the SJRU website, and the 16's should be announced on Wednesday after schools and Sydney have sorted who gets who.

 

[Rugby Mum 2]

Congrats to the MWZ boys, they played as a team, and handled the conditions better than the other sides. The Barbarians also deserve mention for finishing second. The idea that the barbarians are the left overs is rubbish. Last year they got 7-8 into Sydney which is well above their numerical entitlement. This year could be the same. The problem for MNZ begins with some strange first pick selections, ( to the benefit of the Barbarians) and then followed up with some even stranger on field positional choices. Against The barbarians they had Chapman a 7 playing a whole game as a lock, and left Leaver (arguably one of the strongest locks going around) sitting in the bench for most of the game. These types of decisions only serve to sap the confidence from a team, which isn't great when every other team is gunning to knock you off, add a few injuries and gone. Feed back around the ground was many parents and players were bewildered by what went on. It is a great skill to take the two best teams in the age group, Warringah and Gordon over 3 years being at your disposal, and put in that type of performance. Unfortunately the losers here will probably be a few of the MNZ boys who wont get to the next level. Rightfully the MWZ boys will feel ripped off if they dont get a strong representation. Cant wait to see how the selectors deal with this.

The Barbarians were definitely not leftovers in fact it was a strong team as I have stated above. It deserved its wins as did MWZ.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Bout time we had some passion on this thread. Keep it up people.

Perhaps coaches are taking their lead from our National Coach regarding playing players out of their normal position. He has made it a real artform.

 

[Rugby Mum 2]

Bout time we had some passion on this thread. Keep it up people.

Perhaps coaches are taking their lead from our National Coach regarding playing players out of their normal position. He has made it a real artform.

Hold the passion! I will need a bex and a good lie down by Wednesday as the tension is palpable - reputation vs performance vs vested interest - a wickedly complex combination.

 

[Wood Rat]

If you go thorough the Barbarians listings:
Strang - Warringah/Pres A
Hancock - Gordon, Pres A (MNZ 2012)
McRae - Warringah, ISA 1 (MNZ 2012)
Tutunoa - Warringah - CHS 1 (MNZ 2012)
Stubbs - Warringah, CAS 1 (injured 2012)
Clifford - Gordon, Pres A (injured)
Psaltsis - Gordon
Milham - Warringah, (MNZ 2012?)

These boys should have been in a full strength MNZ team and it would have been smoking. MNZ also lost No 12 Hawkins and no 6/8 Girdler (one game only). Both would have made a difference. If a full strength team played it would have put pressure on selections across the field within the team as to who would be on the run on team.

Then there would be a true match up in both forwards and backs when playing MWZ.

Unfortunately I don't think the Barbars' coach was aware of the quality of the team he had. There were another three lads in this team from the ISA team that clearly didn't know its place the previous week Baily Doulton, Frazer Toohey and Andy ? (Oak Hill/ Eastwood)

It is notable that the instruction going onto the field before the first game was "Don't contest for the ball keep structure let them have it and let them make the mistakes."

Knowing the players here and watching the game they followed the coaches instruction contrary to their ability or playing instinct. This was possibly also contrary to what would be needed to be selected particularly if the selectors were not aware of this instruction . You would hardly call the 12/7 win to MWZ dominating.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Come on Wood Rat, a 12 - 7 victory is far more dominant than the 5-5 victory scored by All the Presidents Men over ISA last weekend.

 

[Slugga]

Why don't you get off your high horse Slugga and calm down as you seem to want to deliberately miss the point. I am not denigrating MWZ just stating the obvious.

The MWZ team has good players and everyone knows that. It would have been a better competition to see full strength teams playing JUST like there was in 2012 - do you remember that clash - you know, when MNZ had a full strength side and one by 1 conversion. Lots of MWZ players made Sydney in 2012 as they should have as did MNZ (and MSZ).

It's not about winning, it's about having the strongest competition for positions. You can't get that if one team isn't running optimally.

You’re the one claiming you know it all rugby mum so I'll come down off the horse when you remove the log off your shoulder. And I’m afraid your comment ‘just so there is a softer team for MWZ to feel good about themselves’ is indeed denigrating them, but let’s put that aside shall we.

The fact is you threw your two bits in about the 16’s that was unrelated to the topic I was addressing and then got your knickers in a knot because I have a problem with your argument. To be honest I couldn’t care less.

My issue is that the winning 15’s zone has only 4 selected in the Sydney team. I’m sure you would have screamed blue murder last year if your winning MNZ had similar numbers selected, yes?

 

[Wood Rat]

It's frequently said...... ask the players. They know who they would rather not play against or alternatively who they would play with. Given the lads are not particularly subtle with their info it's not hard to be a fly on the wall.

The Barbars team rightly felt confident in their ability. What was achieved was the creation of a reasonably even competition. The other achievement was a house divided. It's been a long time since some of these played against each other. Five of the rats pigs have provided the nucleus of a team rarely dominated for significant periods over six years.
Looking at the Gordon/barbar players there is likely to have been a similar relationship in this team.
I am fairly confident that the game of most significance for players on both sides of Hadrian's Wall was with MNZ and of course the blotted each other out

 

[Rugby Mum 2]

You’re the one claiming you know it all rugby mum so I'll come down off the horse when you remove the log off your shoulder. And I’m afraid your comment ‘just so there is a softer team for MWZ to feel good about themselves’ is indeed denigrating them, but let’s put that aside shall we.

The fact is you threw your two bits in about the 16’s that was unrelated to the topic I was addressing and then got your knickers in a knot because I have a problem with your argument. To be honest I couldn’t care less.

My issue is that the winning 15’s zone has only 4 selected in the Sydney team. I’m sure you would have screamed blue murder last year if your winning MNZ had similar numbers selected, yes?

Darling my knickers are never knotted, I find it all too constricting.

And yes, I would have been very cross indeed but that would be a ridiculous hypothetical for the 16's age group (looking back to 2012). All I remember was that there were only one or two disgruntled people regarding selections last year but in the main, the best boys were selected, and these boys are all in the respective rep teams be it GPS, ISA, CHS etc in 2013- so someone got it pretty right re the talent pool.

I won't comment on the 15s as I don't know anything about them and don't care to find out.

Frankly I only care if my son is selected. As it transpired he was selected for Sydney and NGS later in the year. If his team lost every game, I expect he may still have been selected.

With my extensive knowledge and reading the various posts for about 1 year, I have found out that no-one cares about the 15s, they care a fraction more about 16s and the really serious focus is on NSW Schools 1/2 and CS and then schoolboys.

Now enough from you, I am emailing the selectors now.

 

[Slugga]

Darling my knickers are never knotted, I find it all too constricting.

And yes, I would have been very cross indeed but that would be a ridiculous hypothetical for the 16's age group (looking back to 2012). All I remember was that there were only one or two disgruntled people regarding selections last year but in the main, the best boys were selected, and these boys are all in the respective rep teams be it GPS, ISA, CHS etc in 2013- so someone got it pretty right re the talent pool.

I won't comment on the 15s as I don't know anything about them and don't care to find out.

Frankly I only care if my son is selected. As it transpired he was selected for Sydney and NGS later in the year. If his team lost every game, I expect he may still have been selected.

With my extensive knowledge and reading the various posts for about 1 year, I have found out that no-one cares about the 15s, they care a fraction more about 16s and the really serious focus is on NSW Schools 1/2 and CS and then schoolboys.

Now enough from you, I am emailing the selectors now.

I assumed you were the selector

 

[Wood Rat]

Why anyone in their right mind would split the Warringah/ISA front row is beyond me .

That last scrum of the MNZ/Barbars 1st half was very entertaining. You know the one that went for about 5 minutes while those two props sorted each other out, I am clearly biased but the other 28 people out there were somewhat superfluous for quite some time

Given this pair + the hooker fronted a scrum that had Parramatta scrum going backwards at a jog at concord and Sundays ref asked the Barbars front row to go easy on the MSZ team.....

 

[Gooner]

Yo

If you knew anything about the 16s age group, you would be in a better position to comment.

In the 16s, the MWZ and MSZ were true rep teams, the MNZ/Barbarians were effectively half/3/4 strength so I don't see how that is fair to the MNZ boys who won it last year (no Barbarians in 2012) just so there is a softer team for MWZ to feel good about themselves? The MWZ team would not have won any games if it was split into two teams. It did however play good footy but against weakened opposition.

All teams have a swag of really good players and depending on positions played, it should be those boys who are selected.

Then of course you throw in NSW Schools to the mix which doubles the politics and horse trading and also applies to a lot of boys who played in last weeks School trials.

You need to look at things more objectively. Choose a different colour lense. The West team which in fact never selected a number of Parra players which should have got a go would have out muscled and outplayed any North team put on the park.

 

[Gooner]

The selection process for the 16's did not split any team. Each zone selected its first 15 and then the Barbarians selected their team. Player no's 16 to 23 are then selected. Each zone therefore had their top 15 available. No one was split in two.

That puts rugby mums 2 argument to bed.

 

[Gooner]

Anot

Your wrong

Another disgruntled Northern Zone parent. Take your medicine and move on.

 

[Rugby Mum 2]

I assumed you were the selector

I should be but alas just spend too many weekends watching 16yr old boys run around the field.