NSW AAGPS Rugby 2013

[wreckless]

I agree ILMF. Rarely do boys get away with one punch let alone 20. I think old matey is a delusional Scots boy (judging by his spelling and grammar) who is taking the loss a little harder than he should. And although I am a great fan of Andrew Kellaway and believe he is once in a generation rugby player, I think it would be a bit of a stretch for even him to survive 20 big ones without any issues or evidence. New simply were a better team, deal with it, you take your medicine and move on. Rather than winging about the New game, he ought concentrate on the Pink and Blue monster!

I think the alleged Kellaway "punching bag" was Nick ( 5 ) not Andrew (15 ). In any case - it didn't happen so just leave it and move on as you say GPS - C. Your last sentence re next weeks game is spot on! Cheers, Wreckless

 

[GPS Contender]

I think the alleged Kellaway "punching bag" was Nick ( 5 ) not Andrew (15 ). In any case - it didn't happen so just leave it and move on as you say GPS - C. Your last sentence re next weeks game is spot on! Cheers, Wreckless

Thanks for the correction wreckless, all agreed ! I also think New needs to take the Shore game very seriously. They are pretty set in their ways over there and they wont like being in Stanmore, for various reasons !!

 

[john cena]

20 punches- the thrower certainly has a future as a boxer with hand speed that allows him to throw 20 punches and connect with an opponent in the close confines of a ruck. The receiver also has a future as a boxer if he can take 20 punches not get cut, marked or or suffer any consequences of receiving such punishment.

gday ILMF, long time reader, i agree with you here and i commend the efforts of N kelleway to not retaliate with the dirty play. i think further action should be taken with regards to the new 12, it is very much like the head butt incident in the Kings riverview in rd 1leaving the kings recipient with serveral stiches, disgusting play. action from the school should have been taken.

 

[GPS Contender]

gday ILMF, long time reader, i agree with you here and i commend the efforts of N kelleway to not retaliate with the dirty play. i think further action should be taken with regards to the new 12, it is very much like the head butt incident in the Kings riverview in rd 1leaving the kings recipient with serveral stiches, disgusting play. action from the school should have been taken.

Dear poor old John Cena, don't you understand that the ILMFs post was clearly tongue in cheek? And you're agreeing with him? Listen boys concentrate on what's happening in class right now, it will serve you better in the long run !!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Dear poor old John Cena, don't you understand that the ILMFs post was clearly tongue in cheek? And you're agreeing with him? Listen boys concentrate on what's happening in class right now, it will serve you better in the long run !!

Give him a break.
He thinks wrestling is real!

 

[wreckless]

Thanks for the correction wreckless, all agreed ! I also think New needs to take the Shore game very seriously. They are pretty set in their ways over there and they wont like being in Stanmore, for various reasons !!

I absolutely agree! See my post at #3884!

 

[Lee Grant]

OK - no more talk about the fights last weekend or the referees - even as part of a post.

If your post is deleted and no reason is given it's probably because of that - it saves time for us moderators if we don't have to type out things.

Let's talk about rugby only.
.

 

[S'UP]

I repeat, Joey's 16'A are a champion team. The were beaten by a single point yesterday by a gallant Kings team. I expect that the Joeys 16A's will provide the nucleus of a successful period for the school. As supporters, I think there are a few posters who should stop to consider if they are passing the fundamental message that it is most important. You need to respect your opposition, the referee and ultimately the game. Have a great Dads day.

I was at the 16A's at TKS on Saturday and don't wish to comment on the referee's performance and I'll state I don't have a boy at either school. What I will say is that Kings dug deep throughout the whole game, but never really looked like scoring a handfull of tries, but they frustrate the hell out of Joey's who did look very dangerous throughout the whole game. The game as a whole was spoilt by the poor hands and execution of both teams. The continued turnover of ball frustrate Joey's which showed up in their determination at the breakdown to win the ball which resulted in penalties, the Kings pack did very well to repel the agressive Joey's forward pack. Therefore no fast ball to the Joey's backs hence no win for them.

 

[strokeside]

From left field, thanks GandG, the new advertising is great!!
Can't decide in what order, I should buy a new watch, blow up some tanks, or call up some single ladies!!

 

[DragonMan]

Just read the Scots vs New match report. Is Lussick off his kicking game this year?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

From left field, thanks GandG, the new advertising is great!!
Can't decide in what order, I should buy a new watch, blow up some tanks, or call up some single ladies!!

You could watch someone blow up some ladies

 

[Whose That Guy]

In relation to "ChrisNg" report on the Riverview V Shore game, there are a few little corrections, Lincoln Whitely didn't play, he was ruled out on Friday night with a terrible cork he suffered against Scots and thought he would get over it but had failed to, and there was no penalty conversion taken and i thought the 15(B.Freeman)had slotted a few conversions, big game this weekend for riverview and kings, you would think the others would be a walk in the park but anything can happen when it's your last game for the school you've been at for 7 years, bit of school spirit will come out in joeys and shore, majority of the players being there since year 7.... dunno if i could say the same about the boys at newington and scots

 

[GPSrow]

A pet hate of mine:

If the Under 19 Rugby Laws do not permit lineout jumpers to be lifted by the legs (that is, lifting by the shorts only), why do I see several forwards with tape on their thighs each week?!?

I've seen tape on both Shore and Joeys forwards in recent weeks. Some appear to have even tried to hide the tape from the Referee by using black tape against their dark shorts! C'mon coaches, earn some respect by playing by the rules.

Please explain this rule??????? I have seen boys in most senior grades for New and a lot of other schools doing the same (down to the 4ths) lifting by the legs but most not using tape?

 

[George Smith]

Please explain this rule??????? I have seen boys in most senior grades for New and a lot of other schools doing the same (down to the 4ths) lifting by the legs but most not using tape?

The U19 Law Variation is to reduce situations where the lifted player may be put in a dangerous situation. This is on the basis that U19 lads do not have the technique and/or strength to properly support someone that high in the air.

On a related note I have seen many times this year GPS 1st XV players 'dropped' by their mates. These mates either lose their grip or just are eager to get to the next breakdown. Either way it could have dire consequences and should be penalised as 'dangerous play'.

Remember, these U19 Variations to the Laws is for all junior players and exceptions cannot exist for the semi-professional GPS rugby player.

 

[Quick Hands]

Please explain this rule??????? I have seen boys in most senior grades for New and a lot of other schools doing the same (down to the 4ths) lifting by the legs but most not using tape?

Well, you lift by the legs, but the shorts are sufficiently long to mean that your hands are still on the shorts, therefore you comply with the law. The tape stops the shorts from slipping up

 

[Hugh Jarse]

<snip>

Remember, these U19 Variations to the Laws is for all junior players and exceptions cannot exist for the semi-professional GPS rugby player.

3rd grade colts also play Under 19 rules, no leg lifts, scrum limited to 1.5 metres push etc...

 

[George Smith]

Just a reminder to several posters here that multiple accounts are not allowed

Dear "cyclepath", the possible use of cross referencing the respective ISP addresses would prove very interesting in relation to school servers.

 

[Lee Grant]

In relation to "ChrisNg" report on the Riverview V Shore game, there are a few little corrections, Lincoln Whitely didn't play, he was ruled out on Friday night with a terrible cork he suffered against Scots and thought he would get over it but had failed to, and there was no penalty conversion taken and i thought the 15(B.Freeman)had slotted a few conversions,

That's my fault. Chris actually wrote that he thought that LW didn't play, but the paper had Whiteley scoring two tries; so I thought he made a mistake.

They also had Freeman scoring a sixth try and kicked no conversions - but he kicked a penalty kick.

By assuming misprints, I have reconciled it - Riverview scored 5 tries and 4 conversions - no penalty kicks.

Hurley scored two tries and McKay scored one and somebody else scored two - It wasn't LW so who was it - anybody know?

This game was played at Shore and the Shore people were responsible for forwarding the score to the papers.

The Shore people would not necessarily know Whiteley who was scheduled to play no. 8 - as per the programme.

Who played no. 8 for View against Shore? He was probably the scorer of two tries.
.

 

[GPStyle]

That's my fault. Chris actually wrote that he thought that LW didn't play, but the paper had Whiteley scoring two tries; so I thought he made a mistake.

They also had Freeman with no conversions and penalty kick.

Now I have reconciled it - Riverview scored 5 tries and 4 conversions.

Hurley scored two tries and McKay scored one and somebody else scored two - It wasn't LW so who was it - anybody know?

This game was played at Shore and the Shore people were responsible for forwarding the score to the papers.

The Shore people would not necessarily know Whiteley who was scheduled to play no. 8.

Who played no. 8 for View yesterday? He was probably the scorer of two tries.
.

Lee I think Conor Menzies was wearing the no. 8 jersey however Jack hayson was positionally playing number 8.
Lee you wouldn't know what happened between the joeys and Kings 2nd XV game?

 

[wreckless]

Dear "cyclepath", the possible use of cross referencing the respective ISP addresses would prove very interesting in relation to school servers.

Hey GS - I just got it! Ha Ha - that's pretty good!!!!