NSW AAGPS Rugby 2012

[SealClubber77]

My contacts did tell me that the Riverview v Joeys game was a physical encounter which, i'd heard O'Donahue went well although did hear he was stupid enough to run into the right shoulder of Harry Rorke. No player in the 2012 GPS rugby season will succeed against Harry Rorkes shoulder... fair point?

You've been a member since Thursday.... you have no contacts just a blatant view boy bias.

 

[CTPE]

So after three weekends of GPS teams trialling against each other we have the following results in firsts:

19th May:

Newington 19 def Kings 10
Joeys 17 def Scots 12

26th May:

Kings 35 def Shore 28
Joeys 38 def Riverview 28
Scots 19 def Newington 17

2nd June:

Newington 17 def Joeys 12
Shore 10 def Scots 7
Kings 12 def Riverview 10

Some observations on results:

• Biggest winning margin is only 10
• Average winning margin is approx 5
• No team is unbeaten
• Riverview is the only team yet to win but have only had two GPS trials

Some observations from previous posts: (happy to be corrected)

• Joeys "take no prisoners" forwards have been their mainstay to date but their backline attack is yet to emerge and their defence out wide is suspect?
• Scots have got some great potency in their backs especially speed wise but may be lacking some forward firepower?
• Newington looking the goods all round with a very big and industrious pack and they also have two outstanding centres who have been creating havoc in attack and defence.
• Kings have a very mobile and hard working pack and probably the most potent backline from 15 to 9 but need their forwards to be able to deliver them consistent ball.
• Riverview have been very slow out of the blocks and need to spend the next 4 weeks working on their forwards fitness + they are looking pretty impotent in the backs to date.
• Shore are hard working all over the park and are very, very capable of surprising a number of sides.

It would if anyone can add the seconds results to date to see which teams are looking the goods depth wise.

The next trial on 16th June sees the following match ups:

1. Shore v Newington
2. Scots v Riverview
3. Joeys v Kings
4. Grammar v High

Rain forcast today, tomorrow and Wednesday and then again on Saturday will see see plenty of wet tracks and wars of attrition this coming weekend and I expect will suit New, View and Joeys - discuss.

 

[Rugby from the backrow]

We are always talking about players but I read little of the abilities of coaches their selection abilities or their game plans

 

[Joshua B Cummings]

We are always talking about players but I read little of the abilities of coaches their selection abilities or their game plans

Well you would believe the likes of ARU development would have a say in who they believe is follwing the 'pathway to gold'

 

[Hugh Jarse]

To bring it back to rugby.

I think a fundamental question at the heart of GPS selections is this- do you pick the best 15 players in the GPS, or do you pick a side to win every game? Because those options are by no means the same thing. Do you keep established combinations in the halves, centres, front row etc. even though one of those players may only be 2nd or 3rd best in their position?

Discuss.
.

I'm a fan of combinations, over superstars.

A champion team will always beat a team of champions. History is filled with examples of this old cliche working.

 

[Finland Fella]

I'm a fan of combinations, over superstars.

A champion team will always beat a team of champions. History is filled with examples of this old cliche working.

No, I think you have to pick the best 15 in the various positions.
Whether GPS win/lose/or draw matters little ... it's all just a vehicle for the cream of the comp to gain higher honours.

Otherwise it all becomes a huge political morass of unfareness ... DOH !

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I am not sure that many of the selectors, coaches, parents and old boys share your altruistic view that GPS rep teams are solely a vehicle for the cream to rise to the surface.

There is fairly serious money riding on performance, not to mention bragging rights. Why should parents (and the various "scholarship providers") pay all the extra money for a GPS education, if their selected rugby association rep team is not serious about proving the value of that investment by winning everything in sight.

If you don't have time for the best 15 to develop their combinations and become a champion team, then a team that plays as a team with good combinations will beat the best 15 individual players.

Representative selections, whether GPS, ISA, CHS, District village rep teams, 16A's vs 16B's have always been a political morass of unfairness and IMHO will continue to be so. Everyone will claim that they want a level playing field, provide that that level playing field is tilted in thier favour.

 

[Lee Grant]

I think a fundamental question at the heart of GPS selections is this- do you pick the best 15 players in the GPS, or do you pick a side to win every game? Because those options are by no means the same thing. Do you keep established combinations in the halves, centres, front row etc. even though one of those players may only be 2nd or 3rd best in their position?.

It's a good question barbarian.

I have seen a lot of schools rep teams that didn't work together very well with reputed schoolboy stars shoe-horned into a Ones side and the Twos playing better as a team. Even when Kurtley Beale and Quade Cooper were playing for the NSW and Qld schools Ones with other top schools players, their players didn't play well together and the Twos teams from both states ended up playing in the final.

It was strange to see those two Ones teams play that year - their combinations were horrible.

But how can you judge a player on his ability to play with players they don't play with regularly without mixing them up and seeing how they cope? When they play for their state or their country this is what they will have to do.



This doesn't really relate to the GPS but in the ISA they have taken a different tack to get results against the other school associations. Because they have only one training session this year (as someone wrote in the ISA thread, though I can't verify it) they loaded their Ones team with players mostly from St.Augustines, to make use of their combinations.

Although they are the dominant team year in, year out, nobody claims that all the Auggies boys are better than the all the lads in the Twos.

That is going to the other extreme and there have lots of complaints about the treatment given to the non-Auggies boys and how it will affect their chances of state selection. [PS I don't want to re-visit that subject in this thread, please use the ISA thread.]

I can see why the ISA did what they did, but I also see the unfairness just mentioned. It would take very experienced state selectors to compare lads playing with and against Twos players from their association with Ones players benefiting from being compared at a higher level of play, and from the combinations flowing through from their school.

Yet mixing them up more would detract from team play.



Back to the GPS - there is no such dominance of one school, and it's only when there is an unusual year when there is, do we get complaints about lads from poor teams that year being disadvantaged by being compared to others in their position from the top school.

For the GPS I don't have a definitive answer to your question - except to say we have to pick who we think are the best players and forget combinations unless they are too obvious to overlook. Part of the assessment of players has to be how they facilitate others in their school team and add value to them, and shy away from individualists. These facilitating fellows play in rep teams best.
.

 

[Brian Westlake]

My contacts did tell me that the Riverview v Joeys game was a physical encounter which, i'd heard O'Donahue went well although did hear he was stupid enough to run into the right shoulder of Harry Rorke. No player in the 2012 GPS rugby season will succeed against Harry Rorkes shoulder... fair point?

JBC. Fair point. If you had been there to see it though do you think you have shown the courage to run head long into the meat of 'view pack? Maybe quite a lot of young lads will fall victim to The Big Shoulder of Rourke through the year?
And with this weather, there is going to be lots of forward battles

 

[Brian Westlake]

To bring it back to rugby.

I think a fundamental question at the heart of GPS selections is this- do you pick the best 15 players in the GPS, or do you pick a side to win every game? Because those options are by no means the same thing. Do you keep established combinations in the halves, centres, front row etc. even though one of those players may only be 2nd or 3rd best in their position?

Discuss.
.

BaaBaa

Do you think that without any sniping that some combo's may be put forward?
ie;
The New Centres?
SJC front three?
Kings back three? (unseen as yet, but read more than enough to want to see them)?
Best half and stand off seem to be an absolute dilemma at the moment?

Just no Sniping. Strengths of the player?

 

[Finland Fella]

This doesn't really relate to the GPS but in the ISA they have taken a different tack to get results against the other school associations. Because they have only one training session this year (as someone wrote in the ISA thread, though I can't verify it) they loaded their Ones team with players mostly from St.Augustines, to make use of their combinations.

Although they are the dominant team year in, year out, nobody claims that all the Auggies boys are better than the all the lads in the Twos.

That is going to the other extreme and there have lots of complaints about the treatment given to the non-Auggies boys and how it will affect their chances of state selection. [PS I don't want to re-visit that subject in this thread, please use the ISA thread.]

I can see why the ISA did what they did, but I also see the unfairness just mentioned. It would take very experienced state selectors to compare lads playing with and against Twos players from their association with Ones players benefiting from being compared at a higher level of play, and from the combinations flowing through from their school.

Yet mixing them up more would detract from team play.

Back to the GPS - there is no such dominance of one school, and it's only when there is an unusual year when there is, do we get complaints about lads from poor teams that year being disadvantaged by being compared to others in their position from the top school.

For the GPS I don't have a definitive answer to your question - except to say we have to pick who we think are the best players and forget combinations unless they are too obvious to overlook. Part of the assessment of players has to be how they facilitate others in their school team and add value to them, and shy away from individualists. These facilitating fellows play in rep teams best.
.

I guess it comes down to what the Rep Games are actually there fore.
If they are a cold and fundamental exercise in getting the win and geting it playing ugly if necessary, you know just to prove to everybody that the quality of our rugby is better than the other conference, then you do what the ISA are doing.
If however your into rewarding excellence and you hold the actual selection in a GPS 1stXV up as a treasured prize in itself, then you pick the most deserving in the respective positions.

I'm firmly in the camp of the latter.

 

[stonecutter]

Sorry, but you can't have your cake and eat it here. You either pick combinations to allow some continuity to performance and then don't number the squads as I's or II's (which in most cases are close to parity in ability anyway) and the result is of no consequence, and if combinations are the sole selection criteria then where is the line drawn anyway, this front row plays well together but they need the 2nd row to help push and the backrow as well, PLEASE! next thing we'll have a Wallabies team full of underperforming Waratahs based on selecting Ben Robinson. What LG alluded to in the ISA is an example of where some players get selected as members of a good team, but rely on the talents of weekly team mates to make up for their lesser talents. This is then usually exposed when they can't rise to the required levels and can hurt their team mates selection hopes, as well, as they try to cover the holes that are not normally there. The next mistake is to select players out of position. Foketi on the wing is a popular choice here, but playing wing compared to the centre role is completely different both mentally and physically, not to mention a slur on the abilities of the players who finish off scoring opportunities and counter from kicks each weekend.

Of course the harder option is to find a panel of selectors who can manage to eliminate their own ego's and past affiliations from the process and give them 3 or 4 games to select the most technically efficient players for each position. Generally GPS are the one association that gets closest to this and finds the right players. As it was posted elsewhere, this is still only someones opinion and why the II's from each association should be viewed with the same diligence because many of these calls are 50/50 between I's and II's ( a good example could prove to be the GPS centre pairing this year).

There will be many quality players in the II's teams this year and the sooner they remove the perception of superiority from the I"s and II's mentality to something like GPS/CAS/ISA/CHS (blue, black, red) or (white, green, gold) the better. Ask any player in the II's if he thinks he's inferior to a player in the I's and duck the response.

 

[GPS_Rugby 101]

the selectors shouldn't be pressured into including young guns such as deegan last year...it is true that tepai and taane are good but they can be used together next year. there is no need for some kind of build up of any sort. As far as i can remember, gps 1st xv didn't lose a game last year and stewart and barclay were an integral part of that, so why would you ruin that combination that has served its purpose in the past? The obvious conclusion here is that the selectors should stick with a combination that has worked and not be lured into hunting for juicy new talent..there will be more of an outcry if stewart and barclay are not selected as opposed to tepai and taane.

You do raise a valid point, but the one question i ask is, how do you know Stewart and Barclay will perform as a combo like they did last year, it has been almost a year since these two have played together and that is more than enough time for these players' traits and tendencies on the field to change. Choosing them again is a much greater risk to the chemistry of the team.

Whereas you have Tepai and Taane who have been playing out of their skin and "together" might i add. They are a proven centre combo that will produce results for the GPS team.

 

[elcapitano]

how do you leave three players out that made nsw side last year barclay, stewart and Foketi should all be included! In other news Jack watts broken arm doesnt seem to be healing, i have heard his season is now in doubt. a loss for joeys however he will be easily replaced by nick pennisi

 

[Bundyon626]

It's a good question barbarian.

I have seen a lot of schools rep teams that didn't work together very well with reputed schoolboy stars shoe-horned into a Ones side and the Twos playing better as a team. Even when Kurtley Beale and Quade Cooper were playing for the NSW and Qld schools Ones with other top schools players, their players didn't play well together and the Twos teams from both states ended up playing in the final.

It was strange to see those two Ones teams play that year - their combinations were horrible.

But how can you judge a player on his ability to play with players they don't play with regularly without mixing them up and seeing how they cope? When they play for their state or their country this is what they will have to do.



This doesn't really relate to the GPS but in the ISA they have taken a different tack to get results against the other school associations. Because they have only one training session this year (as someone wrote in the ISA thread, though I can't verify it) they loaded their Ones team with players mostly from St.Augustines, to make use of their combinations.

Although they are the dominant team year in, year out, nobody claims that all the Auggies boys are better than the all the lads in the Twos.

That is going to the other extreme and there have lots of complaints about the treatment given to the non-Auggies boys and how it will affect their chances of state selection. [PS I don't want to re-visit that subject in this thread, please use the ISA thread.]

I can see why the ISA did what they did, but I also see the unfairness just mentioned. It would take very experienced state selectors to compare lads playing with and against Twos players from their association with Ones players benefiting from being compared at a higher level of play, and from the combinations flowing through from their school.

Yet mixing them up more would detract from team play.



Back to the GPS - there is no such dominance of one school, and it's only when there is an unusual year when there is, do we get complaints about lads from poor teams that year being disadvantaged by being compared to others in their position from the top school.

For the GPS I don't have a definitive answer to your question - except to say we have to pick who we think are the best players and forget combinations unless they are too obvious to overlook. Part of the assessment of players has to be how they facilitate others in their school team and add value to them, and shy away from individualists. These facilitating fellows play in rep teams best.
.

Lee some very good observations, I was wondering based on your posts and other posts re the Coaches Selectors game plans and input into the sides, that I see little mention of anyone from lesser teams ie Grammer and High, also following on from a previous post I made was wondering the input that the ARU via the NGS or JGS have if any on the selections. My understanding is that there are no Joeys boys in these squads, but are there any boys in these squads that may be inline for GPS selection, based on any of the games you have seen or heard?

 

[GPS_Rugby 101]

how do you leave three players out that made nsw side last year barclay, stewart and Foketi should all be included! In other news Jack watts broken arm doesnt seem to be healing, i have heard his season is now in doubt. a loss for joeys however he will be easily replaced by nick pennisi

Doesn't this sort of defeat the purpose of picking the team based on form ? Yes Stewart and Barclay made the NSW side last year, but why should they just get given the GPS jersey because of reputation, the GPS jersey should be earned, don't you agree ?

Based on form, Taane and Tepai are playing better this year and so far deserve the GPS 1's jersey over last years centre combo

 

[Finland Fella]

Remember the outcry when Ian Healey got tapped on the shoulder by the selectors whilst still playing top class cricket ... moved aside after stoic service for some young upstart named Gilchrist. Sometimes the incumbent just can't match whats looming large in the rear vision mirror ...

 

[G-78-XV-V]

it seems to me that these current 'trial matches' between the big five could be seen for GPS selections only.
I doubt the selectors would choose any player wildly out of position just on reputation alone.... The sides are selected
after the next round, and train only once, possibly Sunday, before they play on Tuesday.......evidence; last year when Roods
was selected but then couldn't train or play they didn't shuffle the backline they simply brought the centre up from
the thirds

 

[HarveyColon]

would you all believe that today I offered some wet sydney grammar boys a lift in my van and one told me that he got a detention for simply kicking a rugby ball.......no wonder they can't perform if they're not allowed to practise

 

[Lee Grant]

Bundy

I'm not the one to ask about Gold Squads but others in the past have mentioned that NGS or JGS players get preference. But any discussion of that should be made in the "Selection politics .... " thread. That's where the conspiracy theorists go at it and for all I know they could be right.

There are probably some posts on the matter already so have a look.

I don't know what the selectors do about such teams as Grammar and High - or about any other school for that matter, as I am not privy to selection matters.

But I can't see how selectors can even select boys from the other GPS schools properly watching just one game a week. Selectors have to see more players more often.

As I have mentioned before: I wish that the GPS trial games were staggered so that selectors could see 4 Ones teams in one day. They could start one game at 11.30am for selectors to watch and afterwards they could mosey on over to the other match. They could even watch the 5th team play against somebody on Sunday.

They are only trials - and last year they even had an early competition game between Joeys and Riverview.

The sky did not fall down.
.