What a sorry state of affairs...

Post by **greeneyed** » January 24, 2006, 6:24 pm

www.nrl.com.au

Kangaroos name squad for training camp

The Australian Rugby League has announced a 44-man Kangaroos squad for a two-day camp at Bondi this weekend.

The camp, which will be the first under new national coach Ricky Stuart, marks the beginning of the Kangaroos' bid to win back the Tri Nations crown later this year.

Wests Tigers players were not considered due to World Club Challenge Commitments.

Also excused due to prior commitments were: Andrew Johns (Newcastle), Ben Kennedy (Manly), Brent Tate (Brisbane), Craig Gower (Penrith), Danny Buderus (Newcastle), Darren Lockyer (Brisbane), Petero Civoniceva (Brisbane) and Shaun Berrigan (Brisbane).

Kangaroos Squad (by club):

Bulldogs: Andrew Ryan, Mark O'Meley, Willie Mason, Willie Tonga

Cronulla: Ben Ross, Brett Kimmorley

Manly: Brent Kite, Steve Menzies

Melbourne: Billy Slater, Cameron Smith, Greg Inglis, Matt King, Michael Crocker

Newcastle: Clint Newton, Steve Simpson

New Zealand Warriors: Steve Price

North Queensland: Carl Webb, Johnathan Thurston, Luke O'Donnell, Matt Bowen

Parramatta: Eric Grothe, Nathan Hindmarsh, Tim Smith, Timana Tahu

Penrith: Rhys Wesser, Trent Waterhouse, Luke Lewis

St George Illawarra: Ashston Sims, Ben Creagh, Ben Hornby, Dean Young, Jason Ryles, Luke Bailey, Mark Gasnier, Matt Cooper, Trent Barrett

South Sydney: John Sutton

Sydney Roosters: Anthony Tupou, Ashley Harrison, Braith Anasta, Craig Fitzgibbon, Craig Wing, Ryan Cross, Anthony Minichiello.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

What an incredibly sorry state of affairs. Twelve teams will be participating. The Broncos and Tigers players were not considered/have prior commitments so they won't be going.

The only single club in the whole of the NRL not to get ONE player included in the top 44 Australian players is guess who???

Yes, you have it. And honestly, it is hard to complain.

Even SOUTH SYDNEY has a player selected, for God's sake.

Things have to change at our club drastically, otherwise we will be on a worse downward spiral than the Rabbitohs.

Inactive · Post by **Inactive** » January 24, 2006, 6:28 pm

I think you are referring to our fine club GE ... we've come a long way since Elliott and co took over

Ray Dar · Post by **Ray Dar** » January 24, 2006, 6:30 pm

Disgraceful

IBG · Post by **IBG** » January 24, 2006, 6:54 pm

I agree. The fact Carney wasn't there is an outrage! OUTRAGE I SAY!!

Post by **greeneyed** » January 24, 2006, 7:03 pm

IBG, I was saying it is hard to argue with the decision not to have any Raiders in the squad.

I think we need to look at others in the organisation which has led to this incredibly poor outcome.

The ONLY club without a player in a squad of FORTY FOUR!!!!!!!!!

IBG · Post by **IBG** » January 24, 2006, 7:11 pm

I know GE, I was just taking the piss.

Ray Dar · Post by **Ray Dar** » January 24, 2006, 7:12 pm

Surely Clinton desrved to be named.
IMO Phil Graham should be include in a squad of that size

Prodigiousman · Post by **Prodigiousman** » January 24, 2006, 9:46 pm

the only kid who will come into contention for a squad of that size is Michael Weyman.

No other Raiders player would have been considered - Schifcofske included simply because of his age not his form. The fact is he's behind a lot of fullbacks in the pecking order at the rep selection table.

Honestly had Weyman played most of the previous season he would in all likelihood have made this squad but nobody else was a hope.

To have expected different would not have been very realistic in my view.

edwahu · Post by **edwahu** » January 24, 2006, 9:51 pm

Of course we should expect differently from a club like ours. Thats why its such a sorry state of affairs. Hoepfully this time next year we can have at least 4 or 5 in this squad.

Prodigiousman · Post by **Prodigiousman** » January 24, 2006, 9:58 pm

so it is the club's fault for not having rep class players...

in that case was it purely the club's brilliance when we had a dozen off them at a time in our glory years?

Of course not. yes development had a part to play but so did an awful lot of luck regarding the gene pool being stirred up in the Raiders catchment areas during the late 60s and early 70s...

anyhoo...

Nick · Post by **Nick** » January 24, 2006, 10:24 pm

agreed on this one prod
i think maybe Miller aswell could of been a chance, particually when props he played over last season were named

edwahu · Post by **edwahu** » January 24, 2006, 10:37 pm

Prodigiousman wrote:so it is the club's fault for not having rep class players...

in that case was it purely the club's brilliance when we had a dozen off them at a time in our glory years?

Of course not. yes development had a part to play but so did an awful lot of luck regarding the gene pool being stirred up in the Raiders catchment areas during the late 60s and early 70s...

anyhoo...

The issue is that even if we identified a simmilar crop of talent on our back doorstep now there is no way it would be acquired and managed well enough to get simmilar results.

There is no way in hell we are the worst resourced club in the league, so something must be wrong for us to be doing the worst job of developing rep players.

I mean if its not the clubs fault they dont have rep players then whose is it? The players? If they suck they suck. Its the clubs job to fix that either by finding a way to get more out of those players or by getting better players.

Im looking forward to this season, because i think its the best crop talent wise we have had since those glory years and i do think there is 5 or 6 rep players in there but its hard to argue that this squad isnt a indictment on our player development over the last few years.

Post by **greeneyed** » January 25, 2006, 5:10 am

edwahu wrote:
Prodigiousman wrote:so it is the club's fault for not having rep class players...

in that case was it purely the club's brilliance when we had a dozen off them at a time in our glory years?

Of course not. yes development had a part to play but so did an awful lot of luck regarding the gene pool being stirred up in the Raiders catchment areas during the late 60s and early 70s...

anyhoo...

The issue is that even if we identified a simmilar crop of talent on our back doorstep now there is no way it would be acquired and managed well enough to get simmilar results.

There is no way in hell we are the worst resourced club in the league, so something must be wrong for us to be doing the worst job of developing rep players.

I mean if its not the clubs fault they dont have rep players then whose is it? The players? If they suck they suck. Its the clubs job to fix that either by finding a way to get more out of those players or by getting better players.

Im looking forward to this season, because i think its the best crop talent wise we have had since those glory years and i do think there is 5 or 6 rep players in there but its hard to argue that this squad isnt a indictment on our player development over the last few years.

Precisely. EVEN SOUTHS HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE IN THIS SQUAD, BUT NOT THE RAIDERS. WE ARE THE ONLY CLUB WITHOUT ONE SINGLE CHANCE OF MAKING THE AUSTRALIAN TEAM. The ignominy of it all.

mike83au · Post by **mike83au** » January 25, 2006, 7:19 am

greeneyed wrote:Precisely. EVEN SOUTHS HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE IN THIS SQUAD, BUT NOT THE RAIDERS. WE ARE THE ONLY CLUB WITHOUT ONE SINGLE CHANCE OF MAKING THE AUSTRALIAN TEAM. The ignominy of it all.

Well, let's face it.... as it stands, South Sydney are better than us - after all, they did finish above us on the ladder in '05. John Sutton is earmarked as a player of the future and people in high places are hoping that he gain some valuable experience from the 2 day camp.

I just can't understand the disappointment when our players aren't recognised for on field performance anymore. If we weren't getting any reps when we were going decent, we certainly aren't getting any when we finish 14th.

Imo, Schif and Zillman are probably the only ones who would have been considered from our club - and they have better players in their positions throughout the comp. There are only so many fullbacks and and young inexperienced players you can have in a 44 man squad.

Prodigiousman · Post by **Prodigiousman** » January 25, 2006, 8:17 am

not a single chance.... well when Michael Weyman gets picked in the Country team this season I think you might be surprised how quickly his reputation as a future representative players evolves.

It isn't as bold a prediction as saying the Raiders will win the comp but I'll stand by this one.

Michael Weyman to play for Country Origin in 2006.

Dolph · Post by **Dolph** » January 25, 2006, 11:44 am

I'm sorry but when a Kangaroo squad of 44 is picked and even a New Zealand side snags a rep spot it reflects no glares at the misguided path our club has taken.

If it were the final 17 I would not be all that flustered as we have no players to fit that bill, but when they are picking the best 44 minus the reigning premier and the biggest provider of rep players in the past decade it is a particularly sad day for our proud club.

In essence if we take into account Johns, Buderus etc, we dont rank inside the top 60 picks in the ARL's opinion.

Like I said its tragic.

Dolph · Post by **Dolph** » January 25, 2006, 11:46 am

Prodigiousman wrote:not a single chance.... well when Michael Weyman gets picked in the Country team this season I think you might be surprised how quickly his reputation as a future representative players evolves.

It isn't as bold a prediction as saying the Raiders will win the comp but I'll stand by this one.

Michael Weyman to play for Country Origin in 2006.

Fair call provided he stays on the park Prod man.

We all know the massive potential the horse has but plenty of blokes retire with potential untapped, lets hope Mick is not one of those.

paulquinn49 · Post by **paulquinn49** » January 25, 2006, 1:16 pm

Honestly, how our whole squad didnt make it ill never know.

Post by **greeneyed** » January 25, 2006, 5:02 pm

Quinny, no one is (or I'm certainly not) arguing for this player or that from our squad making it. I am just saying it is a very sad indicator as to how low our club has sunk.

Canberra Milk · Post by **Canberra Milk** » January 26, 2006, 8:02 am

Who cares, we don't need to prove anything!

I want mummy

Zip Zip · Post by **Zip Zip** » January 31, 2006, 12:11 am

Wow... According to the ARL we dont have one single player in the the top 60 players in the league. That is sad...