NSW AAGPS 2017

[White line fever]

RC, SPOT ON!!!

Everyone can be a winner if constructed properly.

A no brainer.

 

[BRUMBIEJACK]

I'm really interested in the possibility of Schools playing outside their association. With all due respect to the passion of those who don't like the idea, but lift your head out of the scrum and look around.

Firstly, the discussion suits this thread as GPS Rugby all but drives the schoolboy game.

• One round was the status quo for nearly a century, so I'm not sure why such resistance.
• Having a divisional set-up for first round amongst all interested schools will make for more even matches and goals for achievement with promotion relegation.
• This is Schoolboy Rugby, not life & death stuff. Surely more exposure to other schools will provide a better experience for the kids

Now for a reality check.

• Keeping everything in house ensures rugby is seen as an elitist sport which the riff raff of the masses should be no part of.
• Junior Rugby Union (including schools) is dying because people are being actively excluded.
• To win the GPS (or any association) competition and then claim to be the best is arrogance bordering on the absurd.

The ARU (mostly GPS alumni) are constantly accused of living in an ivory tower and ignoring the opportunities to expand the game and develop players. Surely a change in attitude from the GPS will benefit all schoolboy rugby, and subsequently the Wallabies.

'...as GPS rugby all but drives the game.' OK, I'll take the bait - are you $%#@!! kidding me. That may well be part of the problem. As a CAS parent whose comp contributes its good share of Wallabies I find that a bit strange. Indeed, given the relative lack of 'music scholarships' one could argue that the other comps do more to develop rugby players from the bottom up & engender a type of loyalty we would love to have in clubs, state, national as opposed to a 'have rugby boots will play wherever'. I actually think the combined comp would be interesting - even more interesting to see what kind of existential angst occurs when the schools that drive the game actually get beaten by schools that are self-evidently there to make up the numbers.

 

[White line fever]

Wow Brumbie J,

Clearly evident is that I too am a CAS parent and old boy.
I share your beliefs about the historical CAS contribution to our sport.
But you know what, more importantly is the need for us all to join and get this right for the longer term benefit/survival of the sport.

Rugby Central summed it up very precisely.

I think our first step is to start thinking outside the square and UNITE, we must!
Otherwise start liking blokes who kick a round ball, hug each other when they win the toss, and it's BYO flairs and bring gutless group violence to the ground.

If we spend our energy as a group,then we stand a chance.
A combined first up comp, with the right schools and grades,and probably relegation system, I think achieves many many benefits.
Not to mention the thing that the other codes do better much, PROMOTE THEMSEVES.

 

[HFTH]

I wonder if he will apply the same logic to those who wish to train for rowing in winter? (yea right)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are signs that rugby no longer has full support at Shore. That is, AFL posts on the main oval, impressive number of reps in 2016 but only 1 win.....no good junior rugby player would want to attend Shore if they want rugby to be a big part of their schooling. To be fair, I think the school is abandoning its roots to please short sighted parents.
Pulver has a history with Shore. Perhaps someone with roots to Joeys should be running the ARU.

 

[White line fever]

J

There are signs that rugby no longer has full support at Shore. That is, AFL posts on the main oval, impressive number of reps in 2016 but only 1 win...no good junior rugby player would want to attend Shore if they want rugby to be a big part of their schooling. To be fair, I think the school is abandoning its roots to please short sighted parents.
Pulver has a history with Shore. Perhaps someone with roots to Joeys should be running the ARU.

hfth,
I hope that is wrong,I have many good shore mates who would be livid if so!
Another example of mummy, and other sports winning out.
Now that you mention this, and I guess you know, then I would hope that the GPS posters who have had difficulty in embracing a new order, can.

Would be nice to hear their thoughts again given that at the end of the day,regardless of association and in terms of the bigger picture, we ARE on the same page.

 

[sidelineview]

Wow Brumbie J,

Clearly evident is that I too am a CAS parent and old boy.
I share your beliefs about the historical CAS contribution to our sport.
But you know what, more importantly is the need for us all to join and get this right for the longer term benefit/survival of the sport.

Rugby Central summed it up very precisely.

I think our first step is to start thinking outside the square and UNITE, we must!
Otherwise start liking blokes who kick a round ball, hug each other when they win the toss, and it's BYO flairs and bring gutless group violence to the ground.

If we spend our energy as a group,then we stand a chance.
A combined first up comp, with the right schools and grades,and probably relegation system, I think achieves many many benefits.
Not to mention the thing that the other codes do better much, PROMOTE THEMSEVES.

Outside of including CAS/GPS/ISA schools in a new 1-round comp format, what else do you propose to improve NSW/Australian rugby?

You're certainly putting a lot of emphasis on this idea to help revive rugby but you know the river runs a lot deeper than that.

Also, what do you think about the disparity that will exist between schools that offer music scholarships and schools that dont in this proposed new grouping?

 

[Lindommer]

There are signs that rugby no longer has full support at Shore..... Pulver has a history with Shore. Perhaps someone with roots to Joeys should be running the ARU.

There was, O'Neill.

 

[Azzuri]

I'm sure all in the AAGPS will relish the opportunity of playing the other associations at any time. It's not at issue... it happens now so who cares. Include 4 or 5 games at the beginning of the season, but the 2 round AAGPS comp should remain... and the CAS and others should retain and improve their comps as well. The two round home and away format for the AAGPS is an improvement on the old, tired and rooted one round formula.

Those that want to continue to use the hackneyed "100 years of one round comp blah blah" phrase as their argument are FOS especially as in their next hypocritical breath they bleat on about the need for change.

Once again the loudest voices on this thread advocating a change to the AAGPS are those (one in particular) who support the CAS.

It's a done deal now anyhow and in three years these very same people will all be jumping on the next silver bullet train to change for change sake.

 

[sidelineview]

Not all CAS supporters are in favour of the change.

It's ONE CAS supporter mainly who is ringing the bell loud and often.

 

[Azzuri]

Not all CAS supporters are in favour of the change.

It's ONE CAS supporter mainly who is ringing the bell loud and often.

Noted that you are not frothing at the mouth about it @SLV and agree that there is one who has distinguished himself above others but he has also had support from several acolytes. I'm waiting for Wikileaks and the Russians to hack his GAGR account to see what that reveals.

 

[Not in straight]

There are signs that rugby no longer has full support at Shore. That is, AFL posts on the main oval, impressive number of reps in 2016 but only 1 win...no good junior rugby player would want to attend Shore if they want rugby to be a big part of their schooling. To be fair, I think the school is abandoning its roots to please short sighted parents.
Pulver has a history with Shore. Perhaps someone with roots to Joeys should be running the ARU.

VOTE 1 MATHEW BURKE

 

[Inside Shoulder]

There are signs that rugby no longer has full support at Shore. That is, AFL posts on the main oval, impressive number of reps in 2016 but only 1 win...no good junior rugby player would want to attend Shore if they want rugby to be a big part of their schooling. To be fair, I think the school is abandoning its roots to please short sighted parents.
Pulver has a history with Shore. Perhaps someone with roots to Joeys should be running the ARU.

You mean the parents who can't see beyond the fact that some tiny percentage of kids who play rugby at GPS schools could make money from it and therefore expect a little more for their money than a rugby premiership?

 

[loiterer]

There are signs that rugby no longer has full support at Shore. That is, AFL posts on the main oval, impressive number of reps in 2016 but only 1 win...no good junior rugby player would want to attend Shore if they want rugby to be a big part of their schooling. To be fair, I think the school is abandoning its roots to please short sighted parents.
Pulver has a history with Shore. Perhaps someone with roots to Joeys should be running the ARU.

AFL was played at Northbridge, at the end of the season, after shore had finished all their home rugby games. Whilst, Shore's struggle with rugby have been documented on this thread it pales in comparison to their inability to be competitive in AFL. It makes their rugby programme look good.

 

[Lindommer]

PLEASE don't tell me Shore are good at soccer.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

^^^Think they won the AAGPS Diveball this year.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

^^^ Another Sheldon playing in double digits?

Old Man Sheldon must be disappointed that both of his boys have chosen to be baton twirlers rather than rugby players. Back in the day, he was a decent enough loose forward.

 

[Not in straight]

AFL was played at Northbridge, at the end of the season, after shore had finished all their home rugby games. Whilst, Shore's struggle with rugby have been documented on this thread it pales in comparison to their inability to be competitive in AFL. It makes their rugby programme look good.

For a school with a strong Rugby history, I do hope that AFL continues to struggle and eventually the school might abandon this program.

If parents want there kids to play AFL, then I am sure there are plenty of fine establishments in Melbourne willing to take their money.

 

[Lindommer]

With Roberts-Thomson and Playfair as Old Boys there's now a tradition of aerial ping-pong players from Northbridge.

 

[Quick Hands]

PLEASE don't tell me Shore are good at soccer.

It appeals to the Mosman mothers - keeps little Hamish and little Oliver out of harm's way.

In fact Shore won the first XI soccer with 6 wins and a draw. (from a 1 round competition)

 

[White line fever]

WLF. Man, you are persistent. But seriously. This thread has become like ground hog day.

Every day you make the same or a similar case for a COMP involving teams from different associations. And, every day, when you don't get the support you are hoping for, you accuse GPS supporters of, to quote you, "having difficulty in embracing a new order" or "pushing back about change".

While I can't speak for everyone, most of the GPS supporters I have spoken to don't think, to quote you again, that "GPS schools are the only schools who can play solid rugby". Nor do most of them think that "we must have a home and away GPS comp".

But as far as I am aware, a comp between schools from different associations is NOT the model that is being considered by the school's decision makers. And I think you need to understand that alot of the resistance you are seeing from GPS supporters is not resistance to the model you are proposing. It's resistance to the model the school decision makers are considering. They are two quite different propositions.

From what I understand, the school decision makers are considering a model that comprises essentially 2 parts.

The first part is a reduction in the number of COMP games that GPS schools play from 10 to 5. I think this is a regressive step because, at least in the old one round model, they played 7 comp games. So 5 games is a step in the other direction.

The other part is replacing the second round of 5 COMP games with trial games with schools from different associations. With this part, I think that including other schools is progressive. But i think that making them trial games, at the expense of comp games (see above) is regressive.

So when I take a balanced view of the proposed model, I think the bad (only 5 comp games) outways the good, (playing more games against non GPS schools).

I also think that while the current system is not perfect, and there are other models like the one you advocate that may be better, the current system is better than the proposed system. I also think it is better than the previous one round of 7 games system for a range of reasons others in this thread have explained over and over.

I can understand how you might think that my position shows resistance to change of any form. Hopefully you can now see that it is not that. Hopefully you can now see that it is resistance to a change that I don't agree with.

Rich E, I'm not exactly sure if I know what you are saying in some of your paragraphs but I think it's that you don't mind change but the change suggested isn't the best option. I think.
I don't think I've put down a specific model, other than to say broaden the number of teams and get the match ups close.I have suggested a concept.

The word "trial" is misleading, and maybe it should be a comp, all I am saying is that more teams playing seriously against each other is good.

There are several people on this thread who think like I do,have a recent read.
Like you this topic has been raised outside this thread and from what I have heard the vast majority think it is a great idea.

I also remember when the "old" system of 1 round was changed, people were not happy because of the reduction in schools played, compared to a home and away comp.

Azzuri, your comment about no need to change the 100 year old comp then the hypocracy etc,as a come back,is twisted,WHAT many of us are really saying,which I think you know,is that the the current system can be improved,no more complicated!

Bottom line is there are a major group of school heads thinking through all of this.
You can get the odd knob head in a group like this, but generally they are quite intelligent people, who understand culture,history etc.

Why don't we wait and see exactly what the outcome is and then comment.