Shute Shield 2013

[It is what it is]

It is what it is you add nothing constructive to the conversation whatsoever. I'd suggest you understand very little about SUFC, but you're entitled to your opinion regardless of how little information you base it on.

Maybe I know enough to call BS when I see it LS.
Please feel free to tear apart the points I made if they are so wrong.

 

[Late Starter]

Maybe I know enough to call BS when I see it LS.
Please feel free to tear apart the points I made if they are so wrong.

I really can't be bothered. You didn't really make any points anyway you were just ranting.

I'm happy to agree to disagree

 

[199madmave]

having only watched on the iView in Melbourne. i thought exactly the same thing. huge unit, but lazy and pretty slow and not that effective with either the ball in hand or at moving bodies in the ruck. was he just having an off day or buggered from the 2ndXV game beforehand ?

If the Rugby News program is correct Will did not play 2nds. He came off the bench for 1sts!

 

[Late Starter]

If the Rugby News program is correct Will did not play 2nds. He came off the bench for 1sts!

That's correct.

Will Skelton, Laurie Weeks, Peter Betham, Trent Dyer and Stephano Hunt were all fresh reserves for 1st grade and did not play in the 2nd grade fixture.

 

[swingpass]

having had a further look at the uni / eastwood game, actually Skelton did quite a few good things and was pretty involved in the second half especially.
i withdraw my earlier comment

 

[Tah and feathered]

That's correct.

Will Skelton, Laurie Weeks, Peter Betham, Trent Dyer and Stephano Hunt were all fresh reserves for 1st grade and did not play in the 2nd grade fixture.

Sydney Uni basically had 19 players who attract possible points as fresh reserve player points count as the Uni 2nds played on the same day and still kept under the 100 points with 17 or 18 rep players
Just by co incidence there team list is not on the NSW site
I just find it amazing how many zero point players have in colts and the reply is because they are juniors
Who polices if they are juniors or do the NSWRU take the word of the club? Because they have no one to check
I keep reading how Uni success is not because of them getting 75% of the better players but because of there programmes and other clubs should lift there standards
So for the past 10 years 11 clubs have not improved there rugby programmes and that is why the clubs are not challenging Uni.
Most clubs are doing there best with volunteer coaches and support staff and no money or limited money. Most clubs have access to gyms for there players to use but most are not at the ground like Uni most clubs don't have full time S&C trainers most don't have fulltime coaches who can watch tapes of games all day for analyse purpose.
I think Uni supporters who say other clubs should lift there standards need to understand not all clubs have unlimited resources

 

[No.8]

Its not the players (Uni players) fault just the nswru and aru...all clubs need a semi level playing field when it comes to professional player selection...its simple...

I think until Australia gets a 3rd tier/prosfessional comp that clubs in the Shute Shield should only be able to have a limit of 4-5 professional players in the squad - if new players like Folau come along - who could of done wonders for the Penrith area if he had signed for them - they need to be looked at more closing for what they can do for club rugby as a whole - not just the off chance they may play so the highest bidder wins.

 

[the coach]

Sydney Uni basically had 19 players who attract possible points as fresh reserve player points count as the Uni 2nds played on the same day and still kept under the 100 points with 17 or 18 rep players
Just by co incidence there team list is not on the NSW site
I just find it amazing how many zero point players have in colts and the reply is because they are juniors
Who polices if they are juniors or do the NSWRU take the word of the club? Because they have no one to check
I keep reading how Uni success is not because of them getting 75% of the better players but because of there programmes and other clubs should lift there standards
So for the past 10 years 11 clubs have not improved there rugby programmes and that is why the clubs are not challenging Uni.
Most clubs are doing there best with volunteer coaches and support staff and no money or limited money. Most clubs have access to gyms for there players to use but most are not at the ground like Uni most clubs don't have full time S&C trainers most don't have fulltime coaches who can watch tapes of games all day for analyse purpose.
I think Uni supporters who say other clubs should lift there standards need to understand not all clubs have unlimited resources

All "other players" (ie non rep etc) are allocated 2 points and this is discounted 1 point per year at the club, either in grade, colts, or junior U11 to U17. So the zero points players may have been with the colts for 3 years without having played as a junior and be discounted to zero points.

 

[Marlin Boy]

After Saturday's one sided finale a young gentlemen, a GPS alumni with numerous friends at Syd Uni made the following statement on Facebook:

"Sydney Uni are ruining Australian Club rugby."

His post received over 50 likes but what was more interesting were some of the University players responses. It was heated, and given the fact the Uni boys were on their Silly Sunday or Mad Monday it was particularly entertaining. The punters were having an absolute field day with many Super Rugby and Wallaby stars.

I could not help and contribute to the debate and it was refreshing to see that quite a few Students appeared to agree with my point of view. A view shared with the rest of the competition who do not live in fantasy land:

"Good reading boys, love the passion. I have many opinions over the demise of Club Rugby and professionalism is by far and away the biggest contributor. Sydney University have adapted to the transition from the amateur to professional era better than any other club side. Their success is the blue print for many other clubs each and every year. As a board member at Manly we always look at what University do so well. From their dress appearance at the game, their performance on it ... all the way to Tim Davidson's exceptionally articulate and gracious post match speeches. Jeremy and Tim have already pointed out, their application at training is top shelf too (although as a professional athlete its probably somewhat of a prerequisite!). In saying that, University players are smart enough to understand that they have a distinct advantage over the rest of the competition. They are based on one of the biggest tertiary institutions in the country and can offer aspiring rugby players highly attractive educational benefits. When I see young Tom Kingston star for University in the grand final it's tough for us because you've watched this kid play in all your junior teams and rep sides and we want to see our local kids playing for their own hometown club. Nobody at Manly would begrudge somebody like Tom for his decision, we'd all do the same thing! We simply can't match what Uni can offer. Having the ability to cherry pick the creme de la creme of all schoolboy rugby stars is hardly a level playing field. University seem to forget that a player does not just begin his rugby development at the colts level. The Israel Folau signing was a slap in the face of the competition and the justification of a sponsored scholarship reeks of a 3rd party payment. It does appear there are aspects of the University's approach that are destabilising the integrity of the competition and you only have to look at the stats: 10 from 11 1st Grade Premierships and something like 11 straight in the colts suggests yeah maybe some intervention from the "powers" up top are in order. As we speak the club environment is changing and it looks like the grade competition may go amateur again. If we can't pay our players, how do we compete? There are more aspects in relation to the demise of the club competition . The death of the rugby club. When club rugby was in its prime the Rugby club was THE happening place in town. These days kids don't socialise at sporting clubs anymore. Most our players these days get off the field, check insty, take an insty, have a shower, check insty, go to the club maybe have a beer, smoke bomb and either a) go home or b) rendezvous with your mates at another venue where there are young attractive women and party from 9-10pm onwards. I can go further but I'll let these points resonate with you all. In closing I would say that Uni are an exceptionally well run club but has an embarrassment of riches at their disposal in terms of players, infrastructure and financial capacity. Liam, kudos for starting the debate but you might want to check your friend list pre posting what you and it appears the large majority in clubland are all thinking. To the uni boys, well done, best team in the comp, nobody is going to argue that point, but is this really a sporting fairytale or is this in your job description? Tim, congrats on the career, you have been an enormous asset to our competition. All the best in retirement."

 

[It is what it is]

If Shute Shield Clubs agree not to pay players, won't this just open the door for Subbies clubs like Balmain to take them?

 

[the coach]

If Shute Shield Clubs agree not to pay players, won't this just open the door for Subbies clubs like Balmain to take them?

Yes, it will.
Randwick lost a couple of players at the start of this year to Subbies when they announced there would be no payments. Unless the ban extends to the Subbies it's inevitable that players will move if they need / want the money.

 

[Tah and feathered]

The crazy part about clubs not being able to pay players is that Uni can still give out the scholarships and free accommodation on campus
The points system in grade is useless so to make it simpler by once you become a contracted super player you then become 15 points whether you are a local junior etc or not. Once you lose your contract you go back to your usual points.
Another option would be every club forfeit when they play Uni
Clubs are allowed 2 forfeits before they get fined
Uni can play amongst themselves for the Uni cup.

 

[the coach]

The crazy part about clubs not being able to pay players is that Uni can still give out the scholarships and free accommodation on campus
The points system in grade is useless so to make it simpler by once you become a contracted super player you then become 15 points whether you are a local junior etc or not. Once you lose your contract you go back to your usual points.
Another option would be every club forfeit when they play Uni
Clubs are allowed 2 forfeits before they get fined
Uni can play amongst themselves for the Uni cup.

It would certainly make the point!
But Uni would still have finished 3rd if all clubs forfeited to them and would still end up being premiers if that was carried on into the finals

There have been many suggestions to reform the points system and most are worth consideration, but there doesn't seem to be any will to do so by the SRU or NSWRU. I agree the so called loyalty discounts are the root of the problem. I think there needs to be a change to the 100% discount after 5 years at the club as this is what allows Uni to have a team full of FT professionals and yet still be well under the points cap.

PS: I wonder why, a week after the GF, Uni's teams and player points for 1st and 2nd grade are still not posted on the NSWRU website. What are they not telling us???

 

[It is what it is]

It would certainly make the point!
But Uni would still have finished 3rd if all clubs forfeited to them and would still end up being premiers if that was carried on into the finals

There have been many suggestions to reform the points system and most are worth consideration, but there doesn't seem to be any will to do so by the SRU or NSWRU. I agree the so called loyalty discounts are the root of the problem. I think there needs to be a change to the 100% discount after 5 years at the club as this is what allows Uni to have a team full of FT professionals and yet still be well under the points cap.

PS: I wonder why, a week after the GF, Uni's teams and player points for 1st and 2nd grade are still not posted on the NSWRU website. What are they not telling us???

The points allocations are still with the Dean of Mathematics for review.

 

[Hugie]

My view is to go in the opposite direction to what is being suggested.

1. Pay the 1st XV players for each club match payments, say $500- each a game (would have to be funded part by club part by ARU) this would cause the players to even out, pursuing the money (good old market forces). The players choose to play for whomever they like they aren't contracted they are semi-professionals.
2. Contracted players play for who they are told to play for, they are employees. They then get offered to clubs in a draft system (last gets first choice etc). This then evens out the contracted players.

The existing system is too artificial, contrived and doesn't accomodated good old market economics, so is open to "gaming" the system. The arguement about clubs developing the players is nonsense:

1. Mostly they don't develop the players anyway.
2. What professional sport has a points system? Professionals go where the money is.

Whilst this may sound expensive compared to what exists now it would be one hell of a lot cheaper than a 3T comp. AND simple.

 

[It is what it is]

My view is to go in the opposite direction to what is being suggested.

1. Pay the 1st XV players for each club match payments, say $500- each a game (would have to be funded part by club part by ARU) this would cause the players to even out, pursuing the money (good old market forces). The players choose to play for whomever they like they aren't contracted they are semi-professionals.
2. Contracted players play for who they are told to play for, they are employees. They then get offered to clubs in a draft system (last gets first choice etc). This then evens out the contracted players.

The existing system is too artificial, contrived and doesn't accomodated good old market economics, so is open to "gaming" the system. The arguement about clubs developing the players is nonsense:

1. Mostly they don't develop the players anyway.
2. What professional sport has a points system? Professionals go where the money is.

Whilst this may sound expensive compared to what exists now it would be one hell of a lot cheaper than a 3T comp. AND simple.

Why would the ARU or anybody support clubs if they "mostly they don't develop the players anyway"?

 

[Crashy]

I think thats the ARU's issue with funding SS clubs. Most just spend it on journeymen, kiws and mungo mercenaries - this doesn't help grow the aussie rugby base one bit and if Wentworthville or whatever other mungo team there is offers more cash - most follow that. Part of me thinks that the ARU should provide funding by paying for strappers, ground hire, insurance and a small cash grant - this in part would mean that at least their $ is not being wasted.. It would be pretty easy to do from the ARU's perspective.
Thats why I love my subbies club. We've never had any real money and probably never will. We dont get grants or development officers helping out, we just play coz its fun and you cant spend what you dont have.

 

[howyagoin]

My view is to go in the opposite direction to what is being suggested.

1. Pay the 1st XV players for each club match payments, say $500- each a game (would have to be funded part by club part by ARU) this would cause the players to even out, pursuing the money (good old market forces). The players choose to play for whomever they like they aren't contracted they are semi-professionals.
2. Contracted players play for who they are told to play for, they are employees. They then get offered to clubs in a draft system (last gets first choice etc). This then evens out the contracted players.

The existing system is too artificial, contrived and doesn't accomodated good old market economics, so is open to "gaming" the system. The arguement about clubs developing the players is nonsense:

1. Mostly they don't develop the players anyway.
2. What professional sport has a points system? Professionals go where the money is.

Whilst this may sound expensive compared to what exists now it would be one hell of a lot cheaper than a 3T comp. AND simple.

And where do all these clubs get $500 per player per game? $7500 per team per game x 16 = $120,000 a year on player payments. Some clubs don't even attract that much from a major sponsor!

 

[Hugie]

And where do all these clubs get $500 per player per game? $7500 per team per game x 16 = $120,000 a year on player payments. Some clubs don't even attract that much from a major sponsor!

Thoroughly agree with you on the funding.
This is why the ARU would have to help in the early days at least. This is a proposal that would be a lot cheaper than a 3rdTier competition AND a lot of clubs pay "petrol" money already.
Down here in the Illawarra a number of clubs have bought championships over the years paying Sydney players to come down. You're not going to stop player payments it's been going on for a very long time.

 

[howyagoin]

You'll never stop player payments (which come in many forms) but $500 per player per game would kill most clubs. The only ones able to afford that would be Uni, Manly, Souths...