World Footy News

Independent News and Views from the International Aussie Rules Community

Welcome to World Footy News Friday, November 22 2024 @ 11:32 am ACDT

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Wednesday, July 07 2010 @ 01:43 pm ACST
Contributed by: Brett Northey
Views: 6,128

General News

Early scores coming in from today's 2010 NAB AFL Under 16 Championships. We'll update as we get more information.

NSW/ACT 15.8 (98) defeated Northern Territory 9.9 (63)

1/4    Tasmania   World XVIII
1st      5.3 (33)        1.0 (6)
half    8.12 (60)        2.0 (12)
3/4    12.17 (89)       2.0 (12)
final   15.18 (108)      3.1 (19)

World XVIII goalkickers - Sean O'Kennedy (Ireland), Peter Ajang (Kenya), Prince Nematswerani (South Africa)

1/4    Queensland   South Pacific
1st      4.3 (27)          1.1 (7)
half      5.9 (39)          1.3 (9)
3/4      7.9 (51)          5.4 (34)
final     7.15 (57)        6.6 (42)

South Pacific goalkickers - Kafoa Tuaefe (Tonga), TBC

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2 | 22 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

This site requires you to be logged in to post a comment. If you have an account already (or need to create one), please login here.

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Wednesday, July 07 2010 @ 06:22 pm ACST

Given this is the first time international teams have competed, and in most countries people come to the game as adults so junior development has yet to really take off in most places, I'm pretty pleased with the results that are coming so far. There was always a risk of 200-0 results, even allowing for the age advantage of the international players, but obviously they are putting up a good fight. This is the beginning of the journey, not the end.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Michael Christiansen
on Wednesday, July 07 2010 @ 07:52 pm ACST

Absolutely - - if this beginning can grow like the South African side has in the senior IC - - then, within 8 years the standard could be pretty good......certainly the 'structures' around all this will be bedded down.

of AFL.com.au:

Tasmania 5.3 8.12 12.17 15.18 (108)
World XVIII 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.1 (19)

GOALS
Tasmania: Cody Weedon 5, Brennon Kendall 2, Kyle Clark, Joby Reynolds, Jimmy Craik, Jesse Lonergan, Samuel O’Byrne, Sam Siggins, Jarrod Hibberd, Bryden Goninon
World XVIII: Peter Ajang, Prince Nematswerani, Sean O’Kennedy

BEST
Tasmania: Jarrod Hibberd, Jesse Lonergan, Matthew Ling, Cody Weedon, Samuel O’Byrne, Bryce Walsh, Chae Evans
World: Joseph Lo Buluk, Kane Clark, Sean O’Kennedy, Mathias Biron, Alex McPhee, Jono Elliott, Lucas Devincenzi

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Michael Christiansen
on Wednesday, July 07 2010 @ 09:53 pm ACST

Good scoreline for the Pacific squad, only 15 pts off QLD, given QLD did NSW/ACT by 70 on the weekend.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Wednesday, July 07 2010 @ 10:31 pm ACST

Great scoreline. You never know if the opposition took their foot off, but I doubt they would, as these Australian sides are playing for spots in the Div 2 U16s Grand Final later in the year - I assume percentage could be an issue.

Imagine in 5 years if the recent NZ programs keep growing and if all the islands get regular juniors going.

I'd love to see more juniors coming out of Europe too.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Wednesday, July 07 2010 @ 10:45 pm ACST

Queensland still had 6 scoring shots to 4 in the last 1/4, looks more like inaccuracy than taking foot off pedal to me. Also the Pacific boys just might be starting to gel and getting their defensive game in order.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Wednesday, July 07 2010 @ 11:13 pm ACST

Unless fatigue becomes a factor, you'd expect the Pacific guys to have more improvement in them over the course of the series than the Australian sides. Wouldn't it be a great fillip for the credibility of international footy if they scored a win in the last round.

I think the international players range from 15 to 19, but certainly not all 18 and 19, so perhaps for the South Pacific side we'll see a harder limit of 18 next year, and 17 the year after. Of course improvement isn't guaranteed - all those recent programs have to keep going and grow.

Of course the next step beyond that would be a team in the Under 18s, perhaps open to world players up to the age of 20? I'm just speculating though.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: krabby_me
on Wednesday, July 07 2010 @ 09:26 pm ACST

Hopefully these players get an article in their local newspaper. That is great publicity for the game.
When these guys get back home they may be able to tempt 4-5 mates to play as well. 4-5 mates who wouldnt have played otherwise, and 4-5 mates with families who will also be introduced to football and will also be able to 'spread the word'.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Wednesday, July 07 2010 @ 10:28 pm ACST

The South Pacific effort against Queensland has to be seen as very respectable. If we look at the 'form' so far I'm looking forward to the South Pacific v Northern Territory match. Could we see an upset here?
And when you think about this competition it has to be the closest to what might be called a "world championship" that has been contested in Aussie Rules. ie. Aussies have played against Non-Aussies as well as non-Aussies against Non-Aussies in the same competition and probably the best of the Under 16's in the world have taken part.
I'm playing around with the Ranking system and applying it to these matches as well as the matches played in the Oceania Champs last year and with a little manipulation of "Starting Points" it doesn't look to bad. I'll show you what I've done when the Champs are finished.

I was wondering if any other nations have had Under 16's matches that could be possibly added to the ranking. I believe Denmark and GB played some (or one) junior match(s) a couple of years ago. Like wise USA and Canada but I just might be imagining that. Seems like I saw something about some junior matches when I was trawling thru all the records for the World Ranking.
We could be not that far off a genuine World Ranking with the Under 16's. Lets face it Soccer, Rugby, Cricket and many other sports have Scotland, Ireland, Wales etc. competing as seperate countries. So why not South Australia, Vic Metro and Queensland and NSW/ACT competing as seperate entities in the case of Under 16's Aussie rules.
What do others think of this?
Cam.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: tinka13
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 12:56 am ACST

Cam, in 2003 the New Zealand Junior Falcons Under 16's side (as they were called then) played 3 games against ACT (1) and (2) and Nauru in Canberra and won all games by a fairly big margin. The NZ Under 20's also played 3 games against the Queensland's Under 19's in 2003, but lost each game by small margins. In the years before I went to NZ their Under 21's played over 6 games against TAC teams in Victoria and won a game against Sandringham in 2000/2001. So the Kiwi's have a fairly good record against aussie based sides. Lack of funds has stalled their development until now, as the Hawthorn FC is now supporting them at a junior level. If you want the official rerults, I can send them to you if you want?

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Michael Christiansen
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 09:36 am ACST

fyi -

the listed best for World18 :
Joseph Lo Buluk, WA (Sudan)
Kane Clark, NSW (Lebanon)
Sean O’Kennedy, MId West Magpies (Ireland)
Mathias Biron, (Denmark)
Alex McPhee, Portland (USA)
Jono Elliott, Etobicoke (Canada)
Lucas Devincenzi (Argentina)

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 12:15 pm ACST

Tinka13, Thanks for the information about New Zealand's Junior "international' matches. If you have the date the matches were played, official scores and any other relevant info about those matches you can email it to flinderscycles@internode.on.net

The Under 16's info is what I'm looking at now to compile an "World Ranking" but all the other age levels could come in handy at a later date if I can collect enough historical data to start a Ranking scheme for those as well.

Looks like I might have to go back as far as 2003 now with the Under 16's competions to do this fairly. I'm looking for matches that can reasonably be called "internationals" ie nation v nation, or nation v region(eg. NSW, Victoria, South Pacific etc.) but not club, so v. Sandringham can't count.

When I am able to publish the Ranking I will also publish the matches used in the data to arrive at the Ranks of the various countries/regions/states.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 01:02 pm ACST

But Cam the international sides in this tournament are not playing under the same rules as the Aussie sides, they are effectively Under 18s as at January 1st compared with Under 16s. So you couldn't reasonably include them in any statistics, it's not apples with apples. Plus the World side had some recent immigrants to Australia, so the rules on them would change too. So if you want to do it as an interesting exercise for yourself then cool but I can't see that it could really have any validity (sorry if that sounds harsh). The criteria will change from year to year, so until that settles down I can't really see how the data can be combined - you may as well throw in Under 19s and Under 12s and expat-based matches etc, they would be just as a valid.

BTW, apologies for not publishing more info on your World Rankings recently, I just haven't had a chance. But I haven't forgotten about it.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Michael Christiansen
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 02:26 pm ACST

Have you seen this story in the DT FL unites long-lost cousins .

WHEN the Sudan war separated two sisters it was thought their families would never see them alive again. In the mayhem of conflict one sister headed to Uganda and the other to Kenya, trying to save themselves and their families from the gunfire that engulfed their village. But almost a decade later the sons of these brave women have met for the first time and reunited the family in the most extraordinary location - an AFL camp in Sydney. ........

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Michael Christiansen
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 02:27 pm ACST

that should've been "AFL".....

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 03:47 pm ACST

WOW!!!!

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 05:23 pm ACST

OK, I'll bite. Wow what?

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 07:13 pm ACST

Sorry, WOW! the story about the reuniting of the lost cousins!

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 03:43 pm ACST

G'day Brett.
Yeah! I know that the International sides are allowed some Under 18's, if they are nearly all Under 18's and few under 16's then yes, I tend to agree with you, so an actual break down of under 16's and Under 18's could lead us to accept that the "playing field"is reasonably level. All the teams playing have accepted the conditions as such. Remember there were some 'reasonable' exceptions in the IC's which all concerned accepted as not tilting the field too much that any one team was playing all their Quarters uphill and against the wind. Even tho India might have thought they were against NZ and lead in their boots as well.
As you say they may tighten the age rules next year as the teams improve as we all hope they do, and when the South Pacific team starts knocking off more of the Aussie teams they might very well decide to split into SW Pacific and SE Pacific. Our ranking system can handle that. The two new teams would split their Ranking points in half or even 60 : 40 if it is decided that SW is stronger than SE.
Where two teams merge the system can handle that as well, by taking on the ranking points of the stronger nation plus a small margin, if need be.

The important thing I reckon is that all the teams and matches are played under the same conditions in this particular competition. Close to level!!!!! Then we can't include an all Under 19's comp in the same ranking scheme. Next year if the Under 16's has tightened conditions all well and good as long as all agree to the tighened conditions.

IF we wait around for all to be made absolutely truely perfect we could be waiting many many more years before we can actually have a ranking scheme at all. I reckon we use as many of these games (reasonable exceptions) so that a ranking scheme can be got off the ground as soon as.
All the countries are, I believe, keen to see where they stand on the world stage, and it will encourage more 'Internationals/Tests" when the finances can stand it.
At this Under 16's level there aren't too many matches played so far and they are close to being genuine Internationals by the look of it.

I'll continue to explore it and see how it shapes up and if it doesn't break all the rules we've set ourselves it might also be a goer.
RE the World Ranking Scheme no worries as there hasn't been much happening over the last couple of months anyway. Must say I'm looking forward to the USAvCanada clash and the Euros coming up.
Cam

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 07:57 pm ACST

Getting back to the point about the international sides having older players is valid if we want the system to be perfect. And if the advantage they have in the older players was to be so great that the other teams were to lose consistantly against them. we certainly couldn't use those matches. Next year a tightening of the age rules should prevent that from happening, keeping the field relatively "level'. Also remember that the results slowly lose their importance as more games are played. I would bet that the rules governing eligibility of players playing internationals has changed in nearly all sports thru history.
Hell! We heard countless times from Les Murray on SBS how Tim Cahill or was it Lucas Neil(one of those round ball players anyway) wasn't allowed to play for Aussie because he had played junior games for Fiji or Samoa until FIFA changed the rules. So a tightening of the rules in future games/comps like this Under 16's shouldn't rule it out of being accepted. I would have problems in one-off Tests where an under 19's was pitted against an Under 16's.

Its my understanding that the World XVlll player's who live here status was that they had to have been here less than 5 years. That does tend to rule out that they have grown up playing the game from an early age. I think we'll see eligibilty rules change quite a bit in these formative years of International Aussie Rules mainly because there are none at the moment and the AFL has done little to formulate any, because up until recently there has been no need for any.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Michael Christiansen
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 09:49 pm ACST

projecting forward to a possible Australia vs rest of the world,.......and it might be womens before mens, just noticed on the ARFLI site that they are trying to arrange an Ireland vs Italy womens match in Milan in October (why WOULDN'T you want to!!!) and hoping for a womens league next year.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Thursday, July 08 2010 @ 10:20 pm ACST

If you're after the ages of the players, we had a story a little while back with the squads and ages.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't see what a ranking tells us if it's compromised significantly. If the South Pacific move up the rankings ahead of say Northern Territory, does it tell us SP is better than NT? No, it tells us that the group of older players from SP are better than the younger players from NT. Yeah the rules will always change, but the difference is far too significant at the moment. We're not going to agree here.

Another problem will be that, at least this year, there's no overlap between Div 1 and Div 2, so the system can't rank the bottom Div 1 sides above the top Div 2 sides, which clearly they are. Insufficient or poor data will give bad results.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Updates from Under 16s Division 2 Round 2

Authored by: Cam Homes
on Friday, July 09 2010 @ 11:02 am ACST

Howdy Brett, Found the ages of the respective teams. South Pacific have 11 out of 28 over sixteen, all these being 17 by the look of it. World XVlll is the side where the majority are over sixteen. 17 to 11. 10 are seventeen 6 are eighteen and 1 nineteen. Even so World XVlll don't look like coming close to causing a boil-over. I reckon I can accept that this particular competition is 'level' enough to count. We have to start somewhere If we want the sport ranked, might as well start with this. I have cheated a bit with 'Starting Points'. Div 1 started with 50 points Div 2 have started with 40 points and the Oceania Champs teams started with 30 points. I'm waiting for the 16's to finish to see how the points spread looks with these starting points. It doesn't look too bad at this stage.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN