DaSchmooze
Vay Wilson (31)
Good games Ziggy?
ISA 2025
- Thread starter DaSchmooze
- Start date
So well done to Barker on winning the inaugural CAS/ISA Red 1sts comp with 4 wins, a washout draw and a +94 points difference.
And same to Trinity on the Black 1sts comp with 4 wins, a washout draw and a +120 points difference.
Good luck to the ISA lads on their semis and finals over the next couple of weeks.
And same to Trinity on the Black 1sts comp with 4 wins, a washout draw and a +120 points difference.
Good luck to the ISA lads on their semis and finals over the next couple of weeks.
RugbyTears
Sydney Middleton (9)
Correct 2nds result was Waverley 8 and Oakhill 7. Penalty to Waverley on last play of the game and the Waverley kicker coolly slot it between the posts. Very close game right thru.
WLF3
Charlie Fox (21)
Oaks v Waves results today.
13as Waves 48-5
14as Waves 26-12
15as washout
16as Waves 10-5
2nds Waves 8-7 (Waves sound luck, penalty goal after the bell but didn’t see the game)
1sts Waves 20-19 ( again maybe Waves lucky, penalty after the bell but didn’t see any games)
A shame there was not a fully completed comp across all age groups for all schools, so who was the best this year, can’t fairly say, probably Auggies or Waves.
13as Waves 48-5
14as Waves 26-12
15as washout
16as Waves 10-5
2nds Waves 8-7 (Waves sound luck, penalty goal after the bell but didn’t see the game)
1sts Waves 20-19 ( again maybe Waves lucky, penalty after the bell but didn’t see any games)
A shame there was not a fully completed comp across all age groups for all schools, so who was the best this year, can’t fairly say, probably Auggies or Waves.
Tram Tracks
Allen Oxlade (6)
Trinity vs Stannies
Trinity 1sts
Trinty 2nds
Stannies 3rds
Stannies 16a and B
Trinity 15a ?B
Stannies 14a b and c
Trinity 13a ?B
Great to see a full card played without forfeits.
Rugby is alive and well!
Trinity 1sts
Trinty 2nds
Stannies 3rds
Stannies 16a and B
Trinity 15a ?B
Stannies 14a b and c
Trinity 13a ?B
Great to see a full card played without forfeits.
Rugby is alive and well!
Superlander
Bob McCowan (2)
These are the results of games Auggies and Barker played.
1st XV Barker win 21-13.
2nd XV Auggies win 15-14.
3rd XV Auggies win 19-12.
4th XV Auggies 4th XV win first half 20-0. Auggies 5th XV win second half 10-5.
16A Barker win 24-10.
16B Barker win 17-7.
16C Auggies win 34-12.
Auggies 15B win 59-0 Barker 15A
Auggies 15C win 31-14 Barker 15B
14A Auggies win 8-3.
14B Auggies win 62-0.
Auggies 13B lost 22-5 Barker 13A
Auggies 13D lost 21-14 Barker 13B
1st XV Barker win 21-13.
2nd XV Auggies win 15-14.
3rd XV Auggies win 19-12.
4th XV Auggies 4th XV win first half 20-0. Auggies 5th XV win second half 10-5.
16A Barker win 24-10.
16B Barker win 17-7.
16C Auggies win 34-12.
Auggies 15B win 59-0 Barker 15A
Auggies 15C win 31-14 Barker 15B
14A Auggies win 8-3.
14B Auggies win 62-0.
Auggies 13B lost 22-5 Barker 13A
Auggies 13D lost 21-14 Barker 13B
Superlander
Bob McCowan (2)
Auggies 15As won 24-0
DaSchmooze
Vay Wilson (31)
Thanks for the results everyone. It appears we are a end user driven!
I've done a table for CASISA Red below but it is now in speculation territory... take it with a grain of salt. But there are a few interesting points to note (and I will try and do something similar for CASISA Black when I can get more info on the games played)
1) This table is calculated from rounds 1 and 3 only
2) Values marked in BLUE indicate a speculated result from yesterday. Knox 15s and Pats 16s get a win whilst (and it pains me to say it in an ISA forum) Waves get the win in the 15s over Oakhill in what appeared to be all hard fought games up at Castle Hill but close losses to Oaks all day - sorry Oaks!
3) Values marked in RED indicate that that team had one or two declined games
So what to make of all of this?
The 1XV matches went (for most part) as per prediction. The Knox/Auggies game was probably closer than most had predicted and the Barker/Oakhill game was more of a blow out, but the results would be as were you would expect them. However, if you told me prior to this term that - as far as program is concerned - that Barker and Knox would occupy the bottom two placings on the ladder, I would have laughed.
There is a massive caveat with this though. Barker would have benefitted from playing Pats in week two and at best I would see Pats winning 2 games of the 6. But none-the-less, these results are intriguing.
Two weeks a trend does not make - but for the sake of the argument, let's use this table as a guide for the following program assessments.
1 - Waverley. Predicted to be too strong and that was the case. Where other programs have some good teams and some less so, Waverley showed consistency both at CAS and CASISA level and they come away from the experiment as deserved victors. It's great to see this result from them. I'm old enough to remember that there were people on this very forum death riding their program years back, so to see this across all age groups from them is great to see.
2 - Auggies - "But, but.... if they played us at home we would have beat them" will be the cry from Brookvale and this could well be true - certainly in 1XV. But yet again, program strength requires all teams to be firing so whilst the lack of a beaches battle hurt Auggies, I think their 2nd place is a just indication of where they are at.
Equal 3rd - Oakhill. It's hard to know what to make of this outcome from Oakhill. They would have assumed that they could jag some wins against Waverley so their program result wasn't what they would have expected... they were a long way off 2nd. They will now head to the semis with some question marks over their performance and I wonder whether they will bounce back next week in Bathurst.
Equal 3rd - goes toBarker ... I mean Knox... I mean... Pats? What? Really? Pats? No way!!!! 
Look - I don't want to get too cute about this. Barker has one good afternoon out at Strathfield and they probably land in 3rd place (and the same could be said for Oakhill too). But still, my heart is Blue, Black and Gold so I'll take the gloating opportunity for at east one week I think this result is indicative of where Pats Rugby has been all year. Slowly chipping away at it, taking the results when they can get them and trying to limit the losses when they happen. The round 1 fixtures against Waverley would have been a highlight for them and they can be proud of what they achieved.
5th and 6th - Barker and Knox. I'll group these two together as the commentary I have for both of them is the same. I have to question the wisdom of diverting funds to programs that only service the older age groups. It does more harm than good and seeing the white flag being waved in the younger age groups is that chicken coming home to roost. And when I say diverting funds, I mean in quality coaching for your younger teams.
Parents will become suspicious of schools that value winning above anything else because by default, not everyone can win. So that being the case, where is the development of these younger age groups? Do you only get access to quality coaching if you are a quality player? Where do our quality players come from if we don't develop them ourselves? Is the only team worth diverting resources to your 1st XV? But I'd even take it back a step further and ask, why are you treating these teams like lepers? They have won games before and have some idea of how to play. Why shelter them? Isn't there value in learning how to deal with adversity? You can't claim it's in the best interests of the team when you happily permit big scores being run against other teams in older age groups (or against minnow programs). Smaller programs manage to deal with this on a weekly basis... why can't you?
Which brings me to my final point -
I've really enjoyed this concept and it has been great following it. Ive taken way more interest in younger age footy than what I previously had and it has been telling. Whilst the emperors aren't completely naked, they appear to be only wearing shiny jewels and that's about it, and this is what concerns me most. I sincerely hope this concept gets up off the ground but it will only do so if there is genuine jeopardy in the outcome, and all schools buy into it. I fear that if your program is shown up to be not as good as what that brochure claims it is, there will be a retreat back to the way we used to do things.
Thanks to our CAS friends who have joined our forum for the past few weeks. I hope you continue to lurk here for a week or two to see how the ISA semis and finals go
I've done a table for CASISA Red below but it is now in speculation territory... take it with a grain of salt. But there are a few interesting points to note (and I will try and do something similar for CASISA Black when I can get more info on the games played)
1) This table is calculated from rounds 1 and 3 only
2) Values marked in BLUE indicate a speculated result from yesterday. Knox 15s and Pats 16s get a win whilst (and it pains me to say it in an ISA forum) Waves get the win in the 15s over Oakhill in what appeared to be all hard fought games up at Castle Hill but close losses to Oaks all day - sorry Oaks!
3) Values marked in RED indicate that that team had one or two declined games
| CASISA Red | 1XV | 2XV | 16 | 15 | 14 | 13 | Total: |
| Waverley | 6 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 34 |
| Auggies | 4 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 32 |
| Oakhill | 2 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 20 |
| Pats | 2 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 20 |
| Barker | 6 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 18 |
| Knox | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 14 |
So what to make of all of this?
The 1XV matches went (for most part) as per prediction. The Knox/Auggies game was probably closer than most had predicted and the Barker/Oakhill game was more of a blow out, but the results would be as were you would expect them. However, if you told me prior to this term that - as far as program is concerned - that Barker and Knox would occupy the bottom two placings on the ladder, I would have laughed.
There is a massive caveat with this though. Barker would have benefitted from playing Pats in week two and at best I would see Pats winning 2 games of the 6. But none-the-less, these results are intriguing.
Two weeks a trend does not make - but for the sake of the argument, let's use this table as a guide for the following program assessments.
1 - Waverley. Predicted to be too strong and that was the case. Where other programs have some good teams and some less so, Waverley showed consistency both at CAS and CASISA level and they come away from the experiment as deserved victors. It's great to see this result from them. I'm old enough to remember that there were people on this very forum death riding their program years back, so to see this across all age groups from them is great to see.
2 - Auggies - "But, but.... if they played us at home we would have beat them" will be the cry from Brookvale and this could well be true - certainly in 1XV. But yet again, program strength requires all teams to be firing so whilst the lack of a beaches battle hurt Auggies, I think their 2nd place is a just indication of where they are at.
Equal 3rd - Oakhill. It's hard to know what to make of this outcome from Oakhill. They would have assumed that they could jag some wins against Waverley so their program result wasn't what they would have expected... they were a long way off 2nd. They will now head to the semis with some question marks over their performance and I wonder whether they will bounce back next week in Bathurst.
Equal 3rd - goes to
Look - I don't want to get too cute about this. Barker has one good afternoon out at Strathfield and they probably land in 3rd place (and the same could be said for Oakhill too). But still, my heart is Blue, Black and Gold so I'll take the gloating opportunity for at east one week
I think this result is indicative of where Pats Rugby has been all year. Slowly chipping away at it, taking the results when they can get them and trying to limit the losses when they happen. The round 1 fixtures against Waverley would have been a highlight for them and they can be proud of what they achieved.5th and 6th - Barker and Knox. I'll group these two together as the commentary I have for both of them is the same. I have to question the wisdom of diverting funds to programs that only service the older age groups. It does more harm than good and seeing the white flag being waved in the younger age groups is that chicken coming home to roost. And when I say diverting funds, I mean in quality coaching for your younger teams.
Parents will become suspicious of schools that value winning above anything else because by default, not everyone can win. So that being the case, where is the development of these younger age groups? Do you only get access to quality coaching if you are a quality player? Where do our quality players come from if we don't develop them ourselves? Is the only team worth diverting resources to your 1st XV? But I'd even take it back a step further and ask, why are you treating these teams like lepers? They have won games before and have some idea of how to play. Why shelter them? Isn't there value in learning how to deal with adversity? You can't claim it's in the best interests of the team when you happily permit big scores being run against other teams in older age groups (or against minnow programs). Smaller programs manage to deal with this on a weekly basis... why can't you?
Which brings me to my final point -
I've really enjoyed this concept and it has been great following it. Ive taken way more interest in younger age footy than what I previously had and it has been telling. Whilst the emperors aren't completely naked, they appear to be only wearing shiny jewels and that's about it, and this is what concerns me most. I sincerely hope this concept gets up off the ground but it will only do so if there is genuine jeopardy in the outcome, and all schools buy into it. I fear that if your program is shown up to be not as good as what that brochure claims it is, there will be a retreat back to the way we used to do things.
Thanks to our CAS friends who have joined our forum for the past few weeks. I hope you continue to lurk here for a week or two to see how the ISA semis and finals go
WLF3
Charlie Fox (21)
A BIG thanks to you DaS and Ziggy for the work you both have put in this year!Thanks for the results everyone. It appears we are a end user driven!
I've done a table for CASISA Red below but it is now in speculation territory... take it with a grain of salt. But there are a few interesting points to note (and I will try and do something similar for CASISA Black when I can get more info on the games played)
1) This table is calculated from rounds 1 and 3 only
2) Values marked in BLUE indicate a speculated result from yesterday. Knox 15s and Pats 16s get a win whilst (and it pains me to say it in an ISA forum) Waves get the win in the 15s over Oakhill in what appeared to be all hard fought games up at Castle Hill but close losses to Oaks all day - sorry Oaks!
3) Values marked in RED indicate that that team had one or two declined games
CASISA Red 1XV 2XV 16 15 14 13 Total: Waverley 6 6 4 6 6 6 34 Auggies 4 6 4 6 6 6 32 Oakhill 2 4 3 5 2 4 20 Pats 2 2 6 2 4 4 20 Barker 6 2 5 0 4 1 18 Knox 4 4 2 4 0 0 14
So what to make of all of this?
The 1XV matches went (for most part) as per prediction. The Knox/Auggies game was probably closer than most had predicted and the Barker/Oakhill game was more of a blow out, but the results would be as were you would expect them. However, if you told me prior to this term that - as far as program is concerned - that Barker and Knox would occupy the bottom two placings on the ladder, I would have laughed.
There is a massive caveat with this though. Barker would have benefitted from playing Pats in week two and at best I would see Pats winning 2 games of the 6. But none-the-less, these results are intriguing.
Two weeks a trend does not make - but for the sake of the argument, let's use this table as a guide for the following program assessments.
1 - Waverley. Predicted to be too strong and that was the case. Where other programs have some good teams and some less so, Waverley showed consistency both at CAS and CASISA level and they come away from the experiment as deserved victors. It's great to see this result from them. I'm old enough to remember that there were people on this very forum death riding their program years back, so to see this across all age groups from them is great to see.
2 - Auggies - "But, but.... if they played us at home we would have beat them" will be the cry from Brookvale and this could well be true - certainly in 1XV. But yet again, program strength requires all teams to be firing so whilst the lack of a beaches battle hurt Auggies, I think their 2nd place is a just indication of where they are at.
Equal 3rd - Oakhill. It's hard to know what to make of this outcome from Oakhill. They would have assumed that they could jag some wins against Waverley so their program result wasn't what they would have expected... they were a long way off 2nd. They will now head to the semis with some question marks over their performance and I wonder whether they will bounce back next week in Bathurst.
Equal 3rd - goes toBarker... I meanKnox... I mean... Pats? What? Really? Pats? No way!!!!
Look - I don't want to get too cute about this. Barker has one good afternoon out at Strathfield and they probably land in 3rd place (and the same could be said for Oakhill too). But still, my heart is Blue, Black and Gold so I'll take the gloating opportunity for at east one week
5th and 6th - Barker and Knox. I'll group these two together as the commentary I have for both of them is the same. I have to question the wisdom of diverting funds to programs that only service the older age groups. It does more harm than good and seeing the white flag being waved in the younger age groups is that chicken coming home to roost. And when I say diverting funds, I mean in quality coaching for your younger teams.
Parents will become suspicious of schools that value winning above anything else because by default, not everyone can win. So that being the case, where is the development of these younger age groups? Do you only get access to quality coaching if you are a quality player? Where do our quality players come from if we don't develop them ourselves? Is the only team worth diverting resources to your 1st XV? But I'd even take it back a step further and ask, why are you treating these teams like lepers? They have won games before and have some idea of how to play. Why shelter them? Isn't there value in learning how to deal with adversity? You can't claim it's in the best interests of the team when you happily permit big scores being run against other teams in older age groups (or against minnow programs). Smaller programs manage to deal with this on a weekly basis... why can't you?
Which brings me to my final point -
I've really enjoyed this concept and it has been great following it. Ive taken way more interest in younger age footy than what I previously had and it has been telling. Whilst the emperors aren't completely naked, they appear to be only wearing shiny jewels and that's about it, and this is what concerns me most. I sincerely hope this concept gets up off the ground but it will only do so if there is genuine jeopardy in the outcome, and all schools buy into it. I fear that if your program is shown up to be not as good as what that brochure claims it is, there will be a retreat back to the way we used to do things.
Thanks to our CAS friends who have joined our forum for the past few weeks. I hope you continue to lurk here for a week or two to see how the ISA semis and finals go
I too believe in this concept and I am confident that this is just the beginning of this new ISA/CAS comp across both tiers.
The take outs are exactly as DaS stated, and a lot has been uncovered.
In the end this is all about improving the strength of each schools entire program, that is surely the overriding strategy of this program.
Let's see who pays attention!
BTW DaS, the death riding of the Waves program you mentioned was only short lived, and naive, it was because a person of influence at the school had no interest at sport at all, and it was the only time in history that a boy who started in year 5 and got to year 12 and didn't see the , 1st XV win a CAS comp. That was precisely how long this person stayed! and it shows you the influence a leader can have, just like a business!
But that was clearly a blip, normal programing resumed a few years ago.
It was a real shame that the Battle of the beaches, as you put it ( and I think that's a terrific tag), didn't happen but in my honest (biased) opinion the wins would have been shared equally, and so the Waves would have still won the experiment
.I can say that because it can't be proved otherwise.
The other very pleasing take out is the closeness of ability of both associations, and I think you can include the GPS teams these days as well.
It is also apparent, I think, that everyone involved in these new games appear to be very happy to be playing other schools who they haven't traditionally played, and the games are not just trials.
All in all, it has breathed even more life in the best style of rugby played in the nation, schoolboy rugby!
I'll give my other CAS/ISA Red ladder (n a simple 2pts win basis) that takes into account the term 2 games between those teams. My premiership teams in Red. Similar conclusions.
Black I had been tracking but it really wasn't a full 7-team comp, and we had the weird Aloys v Chev game in wk2, but I think it's safe to say Trinity and Cranbrook on top.
Knox probably has some work to do staying in the Red group next year particularly as it loses some of its rep players from the 1sts.
| CAS/ISA Red | 1XV | 2XV | 16 | 15 | 14 | 13 | Tot |
| Waverley | 5 | 7 | 5 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 43 |
| Auggies | 6 | 9 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 9 | 41 |
| Oakhill | 4 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 31 |
| Barker | 9 | 5 | 8 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 29 |
| Pats | 1 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 20 |
| Knox | 5 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 16 |
Black I had been tracking but it really wasn't a full 7-team comp, and we had the weird Aloys v Chev game in wk2, but I think it's safe to say Trinity and Cranbrook on top.
Knox probably has some work to do staying in the Red group next year particularly as it loses some of its rep players from the 1sts.
Last edited:
2 for a win, 1 for draw/ washout, 0 for loss/ forfeit.
Goes back to term 2 and just looks at results between the 6 teams, and ignores the other results.
Possibly unfair to Waverly in the 15s as they had two washouts v one for Auggies, with both teams undefeated.
Each age group should add to 30, reflecting 5 rounds of 3 games with 2 points on offer each game.
Goes back to term 2 and just looks at results between the 6 teams, and ignores the other results.
Possibly unfair to Waverly in the 15s as they had two washouts v one for Auggies, with both teams undefeated.
Each age group should add to 30, reflecting 5 rounds of 3 games with 2 points on offer each game.
Last edited:
Comeonmate
Herbert Moran (7)
could you make one for the black ⬛️ pool please?
DaSchmooze
Vay Wilson (31)
Do you have results from the 14s and 13s?
DaSchmooze
Vay Wilson (31)
Still looking for results but yes - I'll have one done for Black
DaSchmooze
Vay Wilson (31)
If anyone has any results for Pius v Cranbrook that would be great