NSW Country - - - NRC Official Team Thread

[kiap]

Just read that Cam Treloar is in the squad. As said elsewhere, he is a good fella however I don't see value selecting a 34 year old in a comp that is supposed to be a pathway.

It's a fair question, although I think it's okay to have a few old heads in there, so long as: (a) they are still playing hard rugby at a high enough standard; and (b) there's not too many of them.

The comp needs some wily old tough customers for the younger players to play with/against and to learn from, both on and off the field. IMO, this NRC should be more than an U20 tournament. I think the ARU added one of those earlier in the year anyway.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Just read that Cam Treloar is in the squad. As said elsewhere, he is a good fella however I don't see value selecting a 34 year old in a comp that is supposed to be a pathway.

Macca I couldn't disagree more. Firstly because they need players that are ready to play at the level immediately. Secondly because young players need to earn their spot, not be gifted it based on age.

 

[TOCC]

I think for the sake of this tournament we need to stop looking at it purely as a development pathway, if this competition is played at a high level in a competitive environment then a by-product of that will be player development.

I think it should be open to all players, of all ages and all nationalities. It shouldn't be restricted to just Australian eligible players, the best players available should be selected. There are quite a few rugby players running around in Australia who have represented Tonga, Fiji or Samoa at a point in their life, if those players are the best wingers, centres or locks available then they should be selected.

A highly competitive competition will do more as a development pathway then one which restricts player selection to a certain age bracket or eligibility requirement.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Ironically TOCC, if it is looked at as a development pathway only, whilst likely widening the pool of prime aged players (20-25) it will negatively affect the development anyway as they will not be pushed and tested by the best potential players. All that would do is waste spots on players who won't ever make it, but are only there because they are young enough.

 

[Brian Westlake]

Macca I couldn't disagree more. Firstly because they need players that are ready to play at the level immediately. Secondly because young players need to earn their spot, not be gifted it based on age.

But isnt this what Servo fed us on a plate saying that it IS ALL about the young 'uns coming up?
HE IS HE ONE that wanted it for the YOUNG players that haven't had the opportunity YET to show their wares. A 34 year old doesn't bring a hellava lot to the table in the way of pathways.
Secondly, you say that the players need to play NOW at this level. Have any of the players sans Aus/S15 played at this level?
And what have such players as the aforementioned and a couple more done to EARN their spot? Travelling the world as a Rugby player is lucrative and fun, whilst not being the most taxing. I can state this as fact

 

[Brian Westlake]

I think for the sake of this tournament we need to stop looking at it purely as a development pathway, if this competition is played at a high level in a competitive environment then a by-product of that will be player development.

I think it should be open to all players, of all ages and all nationalities. It shouldn't be restricted to just Australian eligible players, the best players available should be selected. There are quite a few rugby players running around in Australia who have represented Tonga, Fiji or Samoa at a point in their life, if those players are the best wingers, centres or locks available then they should be selected.

A highly competitive competition will do more as a development pathway then one which restricts player selection to a certain age bracket or eligibility requirement.

The best level 3 players?


I want to see how you pick this!!!!

 

[MACCA]

Macca I couldn't disagree more. Firstly because they need players that are ready to play at the level immediately. Secondly because young players need to earn their spot, not be gifted it based on age.

Fair point. I get mixed signals. There will be 16 Super 15 /test players allocated to every franchise.
That leaves 18 spots to make up the squad of 34. James Grant is on record as saying that 10 of these will be from the Bush.
That leaves 8 from Easts & Randwick - less whoever else they find like Cam Treloar who is outside the Super 15 quota of 16 players and doesn't play for Easts or Randwick. That means there will be a maximum of 7 non contracted Super 15 Randwick & Easts players vying for spots.
The 16 Supe players will be the ones the rookies have to displace. I reckon the balance of the squad should be up & comers. Then I learn that they have picked a player from Norths colts.....
Maybe you have to go to the Bush to get a gig. The Eagles heirachy were wanting to promote Rugby in the Bush and they do own the thing so its their call.

 

[Brian Westlake]

Fair point. I get mixed signals. There will be 16 Super 15 /test players allocated to every franchise.
That leaves 18 spots to make up the squad of 34. James Grant is on record as saying that 10 of these will be from the Bush.
That leaves 8 from Easts & Randwick - less whoever else they find like Cam Treloar who is outside the Super 15 quota of 16 players. That means there will be a maximum of 7 non contracted Super 15 Randwick & Easts players vying for spots.
The 16 Supe players will be the ones the rookies have to displace. I reckon the balance of the squad should be up & comers. Then I learn that they have picked a player from Norths colts...
Maybe you have to go to the Bush to get a gig. The Eagles heirachy were wanting to promote Rugby in the Bush and they do own the thing so its their call.

Hang On!
Horwitz, Kellaway, Croke, Metz... Now down to three.

 

[MACCA]

Hang On!
Horwitz, Kellaway, Croke, Metz. Now down to three.

Am hoping all but Croke are considered Waratahs although don't think Metz is under contract.
Easts & Wicks players may be screwed.
Like to see how the 10 Country players would fare in the Shute Shield. Perhaps the Country players are playing in the SS now anyway.

 

[Brian Westlake]

Am hoping all but Croke are considered Waratahs although don't think Metz is under contract.
Easts & Wicks players may be screwed.
Like to see how the 10 Country players would fare in the Shute Shield. Perhaps the Country players are playing in the SS now anyway.

The Lamont boys are playing in Newcastle aren't they?
Worthy.

 

[Eyes and Ears]

Fair point. I get mixed signals. There will be 16 Super 15 /test players allocated to every franchise.
That leaves 18 spots to make up the squad of 34. James Grant is on record as saying that 10 of these will be from the Bush.
That leaves 8 from Easts & Randwick - less whoever else they find like Cam Treloar who is outside the Super 15 quota of 16 players and doesn't play for Easts or Randwick. That means there will be a maximum of 7 non contracted Super 15 Randwick & Easts players vying for spots.
The 16 Supe players will be the ones the rookies have to displace. I reckon the balance of the squad should be up & comers. Then I learn that they have picked a player from Norths colts...
Maybe you have to go to the Bush to get a gig. The Eagles heirachy were wanting to promote Rugby in the Bush and they do own the thing so its their call.

I believe it is a maximum of 16 not 16 each. More likely to be 5 Wallabies who don't play, 5 super rugby, 10 country and 15-20 club players.

 

[TOCC]

The best level 3 players?


I want to see how you pick this!!!!

??

Im not picking anything, I'm not a coach at one of these teams..
I think my point was clear enough, players shouldn't be excluded from this tournament because they are considered too old or because they aren't eligible for the Wallabies. It should be about picking the best players available.

 

[Pete King]

How does a bloke like Croke get in front of players like Connor, Munro and Harris. Just that little bit older Connor and Munro with 2 full seasons of first grade behind them. Munro 2013 Best and fairest and Connor will be 2014.

 

[Train Without a Station]

How have they come to a conclusion that 10 country players will be in the team?

This seems like a ridiculous quota. Initially you may say there are 10 country players who are capable, but if half cannot play because they have you know, jobs and shit, what do you do? Pick the next 5 even if they are inferior to club players?

All these potential quotas and favouring of players based on their current allegiance is what will be the downfall of this competition.

Just pick the best fucking players. Doesn't matter how old they are, and where they are from. Pick the best fucking players you can get your hands on. That's what will make a decent competition and that's what will achieve the goal best, which is to bridge the gap between Club Rugby and Super Rugby.

Let's just remember, that's what the goal is, not to bridge the gap between Country Rugby and Club Rugby.

I've seen the discussions in the QLD Country thread, and having played a fair bit of Gold Coast Rugby, one of the stronger Country eligible competitions, I can say that I don't know of any players whom I played against that were good enough to take that next step. If I am right about that, there's no point just keeping spots open for them, better off giving it to a club player that may be good enough. Let's remember, most country players who have aspirations of making it are playing Club Rugby anyway.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think there's a place for a few Cam Treloars in the NRC. Veterans with Super Rugby and international experience should provide a bit of a hard edge and professionalism that will also help develop the younger players.

There's going to be opportunities for far more players in the NRC without Super Rugby contracts than will be able to get them each season so that pathway is already set up.

I'm guessing some of the country players in this team will also be curent Shute Shield players.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Exactly BH.

Currently including EPS there is 175 full time contracted players in Australia.

Take out the 30 Wallabies and that's down to 145.

Take out 5 injured players for each franchise and that's down to 120.

Take out another 5 at each franchise to allow for departing overseas players, retiring players or players going to play in Japan in the off-season and that's now down to 95.

Spread that across each NRC team and that's only 10.5 players per team.

Let's say there's 7 Wallabies not playing to come back so we'll call it 11. That's leaving 12 spots per team for starting players only out of the uncontracted. If they go with a small squad of 30, that's 19 new spots available per team.

Is there 171 players out there (funnily enough almost the same amount as originally contracted to Super Rugby franchises) that are ready to step up above club rugby? Let's look at Sydney alone (excluding NSW "Country" here). Are there 57 players in the Shute Shield that look like they are too good for that level? I'd be doubtful because that would be one third of the starting players in the Shute Shield. If one third of Shute Shield players were ready to play a level above, players like Angus Roberts wouldn't look so out of their depth when playing Super Rugby.

 

[MACCA]

How have they come to a conclusion that 10 country players will be in the team?

This seems like a ridiculous quota. Initially you may say there are 10 country players who are capable, but if half cannot play because they have you know, jobs and shit, what do you do? Pick the next 5 even if they are inferior to club players?

All these potential quotas and favouring of players based on their current allegiance is what will be the downfall of this competition.

Just pick the best fucking players. Doesn't matter how old they are, and where they are from. Pick the best fucking players you can get your hands on. That's what will make a decent competition and that's what will achieve the goal best, which is to bridge the gap between Club Rugby and Super Rugby.

Let's just remember, that's what the goal is, not to bridge the gap between Country Rugby and Club Rugby.

I've seen the discussions in the QLD Country thread, and having played a fair bit of Gold Coast Rugby, one of the stronger Country eligible competitions, I can say that I don't know of any players whom I played against that were good enough to take that next step. If I am right about that, there's no point just keeping spots open for them, better off giving it to a club player that may be good enough. Let's remember, most country players who have aspirations of making it are playing Club Rugby anyway.

Agree with your comments - James Grant was quoted as saying the Eagles will have 10 Country players. As said elsewhere, they might be playing Shute Shield now (at least I hope some are)

 

[Hugh Jarse]

<snip> Are there 57 players in the Shute Shield that look like they are too good for that level? I'd be doubtful because that would be one third of the starting players in the Shute Shield. If one third of Shute Shield players were ready to play a level above, players like Angus Roberts wouldn't look so out of their depth when playing Super Rugby.

There have been 543 players play in at least 1 Shute Shield game this year, either starting or off the Bench.

The quoted 57 players ready for NRC duty represents close to 10% of the overall Shute Shield player pool rather that 33%.

 

[kiap]

Agree with your comments - James Grant was quoted as saying the Eagles will have 10 Country players. As said elsewhere, they might be playing Shute Shield now (at least I hope some are)

I think that figure of 10 was longer-term. He was looking at four or so initially.

 

[Train Without a Station]

HJ, that's a misleading way to look at it. Players who have played 1 game area really irrelevant. Unless you are regularly making Shute Shield as a 1st choice player, you are not worth consideration at the higher level.

Each week 180 players start in the Shute Shield. I'd argue if anything, the amount that regularly start would be lower than 180 in fact.