Sydney Colts - 2014

[It is what it is]

http://www.rugbynews.net.au/past-premiers/colts-premiers-1970-to-current/

Hey sorry to jump a bit off topic here, but I was just looking all over the net but wasn't able to find any records of past colt championships in 1s, 2s and 3s aside from last year. Would anyone happen to know if there are records of this out there, or have any knowledge of the topic..

Cheers.

http://www.rugbynews.net.au/past-premiers/colts-premiers-1970-to-current/
Colts Premiers from 1970 onwards.

 

[Dave Beat]

Player Points Cap Round 2
Some clubs have improved their accuracy. The 50% maximum deduction still seems to be missed by some clubs.
How effective is a points cap scheme when 30 player points Rats Colts I lose to 24 point points Hobbits Colts I by 64 points?
One Club is over the limit by their own declaration, yet the match is still recorded as a draw.

Oh well, having started a bit of a commentary on the whole points thing here is Hugh's Round 2 observations:
Colts 1 Round 2
Souths - Improvement on last week, with no 0 point players, although Brandon P-A can only be reduced to minimum of 2 points.
Parra - No team as yet. No Comment.

Penrith. Improvement.

Gordon. Still 6 players reported at 0. With these players at 1 point mimimum, Hugh's adjusted score is 26. Still well within the points cap.

Norths. 4 ) point players. With a minimum of 1 point, The Hugh-o-meter reckons they come in at 29 declared + 4 = 33 points.

Wicks. 41 Declared points and in breach by their own admission. The Hugh-o-meter reckons Kamp is 4 points not "-", O'Donaghoe is minimum of 3 points not 1, and Crafts is awarded 2 points for the "-" on the team list. The actual score for the team as listed is assessed by the Hugh-o-meter as 41 + 4 + 2 + 2 = 49 points. They have overshot the target by 22.5%. Have they employed the Obeid family as their scrutineers?

Rats. Same issues with 0 point players. Assuming the 8 of these are at 1 point the Hugh-o-meter assesses them at 30 points. HTF can a 30 point team lose to a 24 point team by 64 points?

Colts 1 Round 1
While some clubs have improved the accuracy of their reports in Round 2, not much has been done to amend the cluster that round 1 was.

Wicks have listed their missing 2nd rower, but even though Rudolf is a junior from Wickland, he still attracts 1 point not "-". They still have no full back listed, and the same issues remain over Kamp, O'Donaghoe points. Katsouskis is still over declared at 6 points and he should be 3. Even with all those issues, they should be within the 40 points.

Rats. Have added a prop and changed previous listed prop to the bench, in doing so adding 2 points to their total. The Hugh-o-meter calculates their score at 26 declared + 6 @ 1 point not 0 = 32.

Colts 2 Round 2
No team lists from Parra, Norths, Uni or Eastwood, so no comment.
Souths. Good Improvement.

Rats. Still have 11 players at 0 points. The Hugh-o-meter has them at 11+11 = 22. Still plenty of space.

Penrith. Improvement in the 1's has not flowed throough. They have 1 @ 0 and 3 at "-" . From a declared 19 points, the Hugh-o-meter assesses an extra 1 + 3@2 points to make the total of 26.

Wicks. Katsouskis is beleived to be a reasonably loyal junior so should have a max 3 point dedcution to 3. Hugh-o-meter score should be 22 not the declared 25 points.

Gordon fall foul of the Fresh Reserves rule. All their squad should count for the points cap if they have taken the field, which the Hugh-o-meter has assumed happened. With 9 players incorrectly assessed at 0 and one at "-" then they may have maxed out at 21 declared + 9 @1 point and 1 @ 2 points = 32 points.

Colts 2 Round 1
Wicks have added a previously unreported #10.
Parra still appear to have taken the field with no left centre, but 3 reserves were listed.
Wests have named their fullback and this brings them to 29. Phew.

I hope I have less to report after round 3.

If the problem is with myrugbyadmin as has been suggested by @Belly2 Blues, then here's hoping that SRU are talking with the technical boffins at ARU to fix the issue.

So president - what do you suggest SRU do to the teams are playing above the allowed quota?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Same as they did last time. Dock any points for the game. Possible fine for the club to stock the wine cabinet for the next committee meeting.

 

[Blackers13]

Any chance we could talk about the football? I missed the Parra Manly game but I'm told it was a smash up derby. Any reports?

 

[Dave Beat]

Any chance we could talk about the football? I missed the Parra Manly game but I'm told it was a smash up derby. Any reports?

@lily i think got down there. if not i know it should be on the Manly Website shortly - feed back i got Parra played ball.

 

[Dave Beat]

Same as they did last time. Dock any points for the game. Possible fine for the club to stock the wine cabinet for the next committee meeting.

IMO the sooner the points are docked the sooner clubs will be aware they have to comply.

 

[Done that]

Amateur hour.

 

[Dave Beat]

Amateur hour.

What do you mean, didn't amateur rugby finish 96 from memory. That's nearing on 20 years now, not an hour.

 

[Tah and feathered]

So president - what do you suggest SRU do to the teams are playing above the allowed quota?

Norths 2nd colts are also over the points for the game v Randwick

 

[Dave Beat]

Norths 2nd colts are also over the points for the game v Randwick

I do hope it is addressed and adjusted quickly so all clubs are playing the same game. If Hugh Jarse can make it work surely the clubs can - it was quite clear at the start no player is "0" points.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

^^ How did you make that assessment @T&F?

According to their team sheet on the web site, the 15 run on players account for 28 points. They are allowed 30 points.

The 7 reserves listed in Colts 2 were all on the 3rd Colts sheet. All are at zero points because none have been declared as Fresh Reserves. Two boys on the Colts 2 Bench (Grange - 2 points, and Harding - 3 points) were listed as reserves for Colts 3. Assuming that they took the field at some stage in Colts 3, they would be therefore not be "fresh" reserves for Colts 2.

While it is a little unusual to have 3 and 4 point players in Colts 3's, this could be as an unintended consequence of the revised player points cap.

 

[Dave Beat]

^^ How did you make that assessment @T&F?

According to their team sheet on the web site, the 15 run on players account for 28 points. They are allowed 30 points.

The 7 reserves listed in Colts 2 were all on the 3rd Colts sheet. All are at zero points because none have been declared as Fresh Reserves. Two boys on the Colts 2 Bench (Grange - 2 points, and Harding - 3 points) were listed as reserves for Colts 3. Assuming that they took the field at some stage in Colts 3, they would be therefore not be "fresh" reserves for Colts 2.

While it is a little unusual to have 3 and 4 point players in Colts 3's, this could be as an unintended consequence of the revised player points cap.

I thought T&F referenced 2nd's. I havent checked and I'm away at present - how many points are they allowed?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

The Jarse-o-meter was run over the recently added Norths Colts 2 team sheet. 2's are allowed 30 points. The Jarse-o-meter calculated 28 (same as declared).

Norths seem to have corrected previous "anomalies", although the round 1 teamsheets have not been corrected. Well done on the corrections to the Round 2 sheets.

Interesting that Norths Colts 1 is rated at 33 points, with their Colts 2's rated at 28 points. Comparing the player rosters, IMHO the 1's would put 40 points on the 2's.

 

[the baz]

Norths 2nd colts are also over the points for the game v Randwick

Not a correct statement. by my calculations, and i am still by no means an expert on this points system, norths 2's are under their allocation.

 

[Tah and feathered]

When I saw the points for Norths 2nds this morning they had 32 points
They made a mistake and have since corrected

 

[Hugh Jarse]

How things change during the day?

It may be that in the earlier declaration, they mistakenly counted some of their listed bench as "Fresh", or failed to apply correct deductions for the likes of Clancy, who played a couple of junior club years with Mosman Whales.

 

[Moonball]

It is spelled out pretty clearly in the rules what should happen -



7.5.1 If a Club breaches this rule by exceeding the cap permitted in 7.3.2, in any one Competition Round, the penalty will be the loss of five competition points and the respective Club Championship points for each grade or each of the grades in which the breach occurred irrespective of the result of the match or matches.

7.5.2 If a form is incorrectly completed or provides false or misleading information regarding a player‟s category or discount under rules 7.1 or 7.2 above, the Club and or player will be referred to the CEO and may be asked to appear before the Judiciary.

7.5.2.1 Clubs found guilty by the Board of exploiting the rules under rule 7 may have competition points deducted and or suffer further penalty as determined by the Board.


All we need is the people running the comp to administer the rules they set out. Please do it now not like what happened to WH 1st grade in 2004 where they had 19 comp points taken off them just prior to semis so these clubs realise your serious and the rest of the comp does not become the joke the first 2 rounds have been.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

The Judiciary could be rather busy if 7.5.2 were rigidly applied.

My point in running the Jarse-o-meter over the early rounds is to help clubs/teams avoid getting in a situation like @Moonball has described above.

Most clubs have at least one person associated with that club/team regularly reading these threads.

If the hat fits and your team has been mentioned in one of my previous posts, it could be in your long term interests to have a quiet word with your team managers or club admin staff.

A kick in the bum now is much better than having the teams dreams of finals success/participation shattered later in the season.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Randwick v norths.
Tough day for randwick, losing 3's and 2's pretty convincingly, and drawing in ones. Randwick used the big boys to steam roll the smaller norths sides, but ran out of steam in 3's and 2's, with most of the norths tries coming from width. Norths should have wrapped up ones as they dominated the first half, but switched off in the second (or randwick switched on) and randwick dominated. A draw was a fair result, but both teams have plenty to work on. It was an entertaining game, and plenty of spite in the 2's and 3's (not impressed with one player spitting on another as they were scored against). Would be interesting to be a fly on the wall at either clubs training this week.

I missed the boldface text in my first read of this report.

If this occurred as reported, then that it disgraceful behaviour, and should not be tolerated in any form in our game.

It is behaviour expected in another code, and in saying that, I know that most of those I know associated with that code would also think it was totally inappropriate behaviour.

Judiciaries are interested in acts such as this.

In terms of standardised guidance for Illegal and/or Foul Play and Misconduct, IRB Regulation 17 applies, and is used by nearly all judiciaries to assist to determine sanctions for citings.


Judiciary Entry Point Based on Scale of Seriousness of the Player’s conduct, which constitutes the offending.

<snip>

Law No 10.4(k) Spitting at Players
Lower End 4 weeks, Mid Range 7 weeks, Top End 11+ weeks, Maximum Sanction 52 weeks

<snip>

 

[Schoolofhardknocks]

Where do you see the match sheets with the points for players that everyone is taking about I would like to run my eyes over them?