I did notice quite a bit of negative comment around TJ Ashfords appointment, perhaps not the right guy for the job?So could the warriors bring in Simon Mannering to coach the flegg team or John Ackland?
General Warriors Junior Pathways
- Thread starter Teets
- Start date
- Status
It goes deeper than that. Most coaches are as good as the quality of their players really.
The problem with the Matts age group is that the best players in key positions were signed by other clubs and moved to Australia a few years ago to prep them for these rep teams by putting them through their school footy system. The u17s are also a smaller group thanks to 1st 15 obligations. Some of these boys are on rugby scholarships worth 25k per year that can't be put at at risk with what is essentially a pre-season league tournament. I was told by a St Pauls boy that the school was stopping any aspiring 1st 15 players from doing SJ Shield and Matts. That's St Pauls, THE league nursery FFS!
Next year's pool of players will face the same problem to a lesser degree. There still isn't enough competition for playmakers in the u16 grade to run a rep team around IMO. Actually there is but they'll be mostly committed to school rugby. The retention of talent in this years U15 grade will determine how well the Matts team go in the future. 2009 was a bigger birth year than most so there's a larger pool of players to pick from thankfully.
Ball is different because a number of the players are out of school and the money is lot better in league than it is in rugby for lower grades. Super Rugby u20s get paid peanuts, I heard of a boy that made the NZ schools side a few years ago getting 2k per year from the Blues I think. The Warriors start to get some talent back from 1st 15 as a result.
Last edited:
John Nick
Contributor
Thx great explanation
I know it's only highlights but fk me, how are they so switched off defending on their tryline? Defensive positioning is the fullbacks job.
I know a bunch of boys involved in both first XV & warriors pathways. The correct approach is to time manage these boys, ensure they’re included in both programmes & they’re afforded the necessary recovery to avoid burnout from such a busy schedule. The reality is both programs benefit from the athletes being involved in the programs & the professionalism of the warriors and many first XVs is only going to benefit the overall athlete. Any school (or warriors program) that outright bans or tries to impose sanctions on an athlete wanting to pursue a rival code is only shooting themselves in the foot long term imo.
Yeah but some schools do it. St Peters are probably the worst for punishing players that try to play league as well as rugby. It could end up backfiring on them, they'd be nothing without the league boys from South Auckland.
Sometimes it depends on how good a player is too on how tough the school can be on them. St Kents need Siale more than he needs them for example. The schools know that they get their most dynamic talent from league and they can easily scare that talent away. I think schools get more prestige from having boys rep league but there's definitely an old boys influence in the Grammar schools and private schools.
And that’s why st Peter’s haven’t been competitive for the last 5 years
So, in part, because the NSWRL take the 16 teams and tell them "you've only got 8 regular season games" (and I guess there's $0 money flowing to the players?) even a school that - as far as I've always read - takes rugby league very seriously can't risk $25K Scholarships from union? TBPFH, neither would I!
From what you're saying, we'd better hope Super Rugby U20s Admin don't wise up to the disparity in player payments. But that would require New Zealand Rugby to get all strategic and sensible and we're talking about an organisation that IMHP still hasn't gotten it's head around what professionalism is (ie the NPC, however much we love it and yep, it's the best provincial rugby competition in The World, doesn't make much if any contribution to paying the bills in a professional world so it really should be a Curtain Raiser for Super Rugby, since that what it's basically become) so we're probably safe for a fair while, yet.
Not true. They made the final two years ago with two guys in our wider first grade squad
mt.wellington
Contributor
I've posted on this before but in years gone by the Warriors have always been happy to allow players to participate in 1st XV programs as their systm was always far superior to anything domestic league could possibly offer in terms of professionalism and development. They were also never going to get in the way of juniors who have scholarships at some of these prestigious schools. The pupils were there on sport scholarships and as far as juniors go education is, and always will be, the first priority.
The advent of professional contracts for juniors now through Harold Matthew teams throws a spanner in the works of sorts. Any signed player under 17 was expected to play for school first then top side open grade league second. There will no doubt be push back from schools offering sport scholarships for players to make themselves available to 1st XV teams above all else but you would think they would be powerless to stop a kid playing professionally bar the use of closed door peer pressure tactics. The NZR would expect kids to turn out for rep duties for say the NZ Secondary Schools team, Junior All Blacks or even provincial rep teams. Rugby League while a direct competitor should be no different.
Very interesting topic with a lot of dynamics. Will be asking around when the opportunity arises...
The advent of professional contracts for juniors now through Harold Matthew teams throws a spanner in the works of sorts. Any signed player under 17 was expected to play for school first then top side open grade league second. There will no doubt be push back from schools offering sport scholarships for players to make themselves available to 1st XV teams above all else but you would think they would be powerless to stop a kid playing professionally bar the use of closed door peer pressure tactics. The NZR would expect kids to turn out for rep duties for say the NZ Secondary Schools team, Junior All Blacks or even provincial rep teams. Rugby League while a direct competitor should be no different.
Very interesting topic with a lot of dynamics. Will be asking around when the opportunity arises...
In the wider squad yes.
mt.wellington
Contributor
You can have scholarships at public schools. Most centre around sponsorship to kids from the islands. Think Eliesa Katoa at Tamaki College...
As far as I know, signing a league contract rules you out of making the NZ schoolboys rugby team and obviously Jr ABs. I was also told it would rule boys out some rep things the Blues and other Super rugby teams run but I didn't get the details and I don't follow schoolboy rugby that closely.
It's the clash between the 1st 15 pre season and the Matts and\or the local SJ Shield that's the problem. It's not the Warriors that are the problem, it's some schools. It's not overt from the schools either like they're taking a hard stance against playing league, it's just quiet ultimatums.
Last edited:
Yeah a public school scholarship covers all the general expenses that a private school scholarship does. The school fees for the grammars and Catholic schools run into the thousands then you add in uniforms, schooling and sports expenses. In theory the scholarships should only go to the families that need it and of course it means rugby comes first which normally isn't a problem during the season.
For sure, Pasikala the SG ball fullback was on one with Liston college last year I believe. But they’re nowhere close to the value of the scholarships private schools are throwing around.
If it came to it I’m sure the club would set them with Kelston like they did with Jacob Laban. But I don’t think the club could compete with the value of a St Kent’s scholarship at that age, which is where the decision to play league or first XV becomes difficult.
- Status
