Rugby ranking model based on number of schoolboys

Queenian has ranked the based on how they stack when comparing their performance factor (P/Factor) which is where they should rank (S/be Rank) given the the number of boys at the schools minus their actual ranking positions as per the BHP Top 50 for 27 April 2015.

# BHP Team BHP Avg Boys Cat S/be Rank P/Factor
1 22 Marlow 3.41 >300 1 75 53
2 8 Boland Landbou 3.9 300/400 2 60 52
3 13 Oakdale 3.8 300/400 2 60 47
4 2 Bishops 4.48 400/500 3 40 38
5 41 Kingswood 2.7 >300 1 75 34
6 5 Paarl Gim 4.38 500/600 4 32 27
7 15 Michaelhouse 3.7 400/500 3 40 25
8 7 Nelspruit 4.09 600/800 5 25 18
9 14 HTS Drostdy 3.8 500/600 4 32 18
10 9 Outeniqua 3.86 600/800 5 25 16
11 16 Dale College 3.7 500/600 4 32 16
12 3 HJS Paarl 4.48 800/1000 6 15 12
13 20 Noord-Kaap 3.5 500/600 4 32 12
14 4 Monument 4.39 800/1000 6 15 11
15 21 Diamantveld 3.44 500/600 4 32 11
16 29 Worcester Gim 3.16 400/500 3 40 11
17 50 Hilton 300/400 2 60 10
18 1 Paul Roos 4.6 1000+ 7 10 9
19 10 EG Jansen 3.83 800/1000 6 15 5
20 27 Queens College 3.24 500/600 4 32 5
21 6 Grey College 4.31 1000+ 7 10 4
22 11 SACS 3.81 800/1000 6 15 4
23 12 Selborne 3.81 800/1000 6 15 3
24 37 St Andrews 2.88 400/500 3 40 3
25 24 Cherries 3.31 1000+ 5 25 1
26 17 Jeppe 3.63 800/1000 6 15 -2
27 34 Voortrekker (Bethlehem) 2.95 500/600 4 32 -2
28 42 Potchefstroom Gimnasium 2.69 400/500 3 40 -2
29 28 Waterkloof 3.18 600/800 5 25 -3
30 19 Rondebosch 3.52 800/1000 6 15 -4
31 31 Bellville 3.11 600/800 5 25 -6
32 46 Heidelberg Volkskool 2.6 400/500 3 40 -6
33 18 Affies 3.54 1000+ 7 10 -8
34 23 Glenwood 3.36 800/1000 6 15 -8
35 40 Durbanville 2.8 500/600 4 32 -8
36 25 HTS Middelburg 3.27 800/1000 6 15 -10
37 26 Grey PE 3.25 800/1000 6 15 -11
38 36 Rustenburg 2.91 600/800 5 25 -11
39 43 Sentraal 2.67 500/600 4 32 -11
40 39 Middelburg 2.8 600/800 5 25 -14
41 47 Alberton 2.6 500/600 4 32 -15
42 32 DHS 3.08 800/1000 6 15 -17
43 33 Maritzburg College 3.07 800/1000 6 15 -18
44 30 KES 3.13 1000+ 7 10 -20
45 35 Eldoraigne 2.92 800/1000 6 15 -20
46 45 Stellenberg 2.66 600/800 5 25 -20
47 38 Westville BHS 2.87 800/1000 6 15 -23
48 48 AHS Kroonstad (Rooiskool) 2.58 600/800 5 25 -23
49 44 Wynberg BHS 2.67 800/1000 6 15 -29
50 49 Oos-Moot 2.56 ?

68 Comments

  1. It’s significantly more relevant to compare the rankings to the number of rugby players, rather then the number of pupils – e.g. Marlow may only have 300 boys, but 280 play rugby, while RandPark has 800 boys but only 160 play rugby and Sandringham has 600 boys but none play rugby.

    It’s also much easier to determine the number of rugby players at each school via the number of teams that it puts out. Obtaining the number of pupils is very difficult as:
    a) its a moving feast, as you’ve listed 600/800 for Waterkloof, but this was 1,200 a few years ago;
    b) the numbers are inaccurate, as Bishops/Bosch/Wynberg/SACS all have some 750 to 800 boys, but the list above has the former at 400/500 and the latter three at 800/1000? Big difference that…and not correct.

    ReplyReply
  2. OK????!!!!. Hierdie een is ook n F&k op.As die getalle reg is.Miskien minder punte vir kleiner skole of n average van die twee rangkings om dit meer ewekansig te maak.

    ReplyReply
  3. This is really totally meaningless . Why not compare schools with the weathiest parents , the most or least rugby fields or any other insignificant data as well ? Why does a school who have more rugby players now been marginalised just because other schools have less children ? Why this obsessions to bring everything and everybody to same base levels ? What are you trying to achieve ? Although it is admirable that a school with less players are performing great and are punching above their weight so to speak it still means nothing . A school with a bigger playing group do not have now have to be put on some golf handicap system . Senseless !!

    ReplyReply
  4. Gents this is not something cast in stone it is just and indicator on rugby performance against boy numbers.

    And yes numbers might not be spot on if anybody has the correct numbers please give them and I will correct it. I got most of these approx. numbers from a post from 2 years back although all the schools were not on there also I realize some schools have girls as well. So please any error’s post the number and I will correct.

    It is difficult when trying to say how many boys play rugby at a school as numbers given always seem to be pretty much a thumb suck.

    ReplyReply
  5. @Tandem: This is purely to show that a school like Kingswood for example which has a ranking of 41 but only has 221 boys is actually not doing to badly.

    This is not another form of ranking as is not here to replace any form of ranking, it soley just shows a school with a positive P/Factor is doing okay and one with a negative P/Factor is doing worse than you would expect.

    And nothing else it is not saying Grey Bloem with a + 5 is a worse rugby playing school than Marlow with a +53.

    ReplyReply
  6. @Playa: Take Grey PE hope nobody take offence to me using them as an example they currently ranked at number 26 and have a P/Factor of -11. What that’s says is 26-11 = 15 so that is were you would expect them to be at least on the ranking and I am sure if you asked the Grey coach he would agree he should be at 15 or above.

    And I am sure that’s a fair reflection.

    ReplyReply
  7. @MikeSt: @Kbypa: Please if you have the correct numbers please share them. Diamantveld are on record as having 402 boys let me know if that,s incorrect.

    ReplyReply
  8. @Playa: Standard Grade version says Dale with 580 odd boys should at least be in the top 32 they currently at 16 so they have a P/Factor of + 16.

    Basically says they punching above the grade or doing pretty well.

    Agree/Dis-agree ?

    :mrgreen:

    ReplyReply
  9. If you look at everybody’s favourite team like or hate “Glenwood” this says they have a P/Factor of -8 this year which I would say is spot on they not having the best year so maybe this is not 100% but has merit.

    ReplyReply
  10. At a first glance I would say what a bunch of crap. :oops:

    But looking closer I see the point here quite well thought out maybe once you have the boys number 100% it will be a good indicator on school’s performance for the year.

    ReplyReply
  11. @Queenian: Sorry know disrespect meant good to see people come up with different angles at looking at things.

    Just saw all the bad comments first so excuse the ” a bunch of crap ” thing maybe they should look at it in more detail and first glance looked like crap but good to see your point makes you think at least. :lol:

    ReplyReply
  12. Dis alles goed en wel, maar beteken eintlik niks. Die 3 landbou skole lê nou kamstig bo, maar het seker op ‘n goeie dag 10-20 % kans om Grey te wen wat 21ste is net omdat hulle baie seuns het. Ek kyk liewer na krag teen krag en sien my span top 20 en dalk, net dalk in ‘n goeie jaar top 10.

    ReplyReply
  13. @Oakdale supporter: Ek dink wat dit beteken is dat die 3 landbou skole doen goed. Ek dink die mense kyk nie aan wat hierdie lys beteken nie.

    Dit het niks om doen met die spanne booi sal Grey klop nie.

    Ek dink Queenian het dit redilik uit gedink.

    ReplyReply
  14. @Oakdale supporter: This has nothing to do with Oakdale being No 3 saying they will beat Grey what it says is Oakdale is number 3 on performance against its own factors.

    So simply put they having a good year and with there resource are doing well.

    Agree/Dis-agree ??

    ReplyReply
  15. @Vleis: Maybe you can get the correct figures for me the last numbers for these schools was Ronderbosch 813/SACS 862/Wynberg 798 and Bishops 497

    Might be wrong?

    ReplyReply
  16. Even better would be no of rugby playing boarders, now that would shake things up. Westville as an example have about 30 boarders only and 20 of those play rugby. Glenwood actually have 1,200 boys of which only 400 play rugby…Grey Bloem probably have close to 400 boarders, Glenwood have 200….

    ReplyReply
  17. @Queenian: Well done, if you get the exact numbers this will be an eye opener! In fact it is already! To get even closer to the truth you might need to use the number of teams.

    I don’t know the exact numbers for Eldoraigne, my guess is between 750 and 800. Teams should be 10!

    @ Kosie, kan jy dalk help asb!

    ReplyReply
  18. Hilton, Kearsney and Michaelhouse all have around 550/600 boys, of which 80% play rugby. Michaelhouse and Hilton are all boarders so that is why they can compete with the bigger gov schools as they actually have a similar number of boys playing rugby…

    ReplyReply
  19. @Queenian: No, I 100% agree that the 3 Agricultural Schools are performing well with the resources to their availability, but then, we knew that all along. At least now the other schools will realize that too. :lol: :lol:

    ReplyReply
  20. Im sure that Queenian did this for some light hearted fun, so no reason to get angry about. Factor in the number of boys who play hockey, soccer, netball, have pimples, are pufters— Possibilities are endless :mrgreen:

    ReplyReply
  21. @Queenian: As it stands today
    : Rondebosch – 817; SACS – 794; Wynberg – 860; Bishops – 761. Both Bellville (501) and Durbanville (438) have quite a few less than your numbers.

    ReplyReply
  22. @Grasshopper: Michaelhouse have 560 boys .

    Against Kearsney they fielded 17 teams. If you add another 25 boys to that number ( to cater for injuries etc ), then you have 280 boys playing rugby. Which is exactly 50% of the boys at the school playing rugby. I presume that Hilton is pretty much the same.

    ReplyReply
  23. @BOG: You hit it on the head there mate.

    But I think there is reason to it look at these 5 examples.

    1. Glenwood ranked 23rd P/Factor -8 means they should be around 15 to be having a decent season.
    2. Dale ranked 16th P/Factor +16 means they having a good season so far.
    3. Grey PE ranked 26th P/Factor -11 means they should at least be at 15.
    4. Michaelhouse ranked 15 P/Factor + 15 having a good season so far.
    5. Affies ranked 18th P/Factor -8 I am sure they believe they should be in the top 10.

    If you look at this there is merit in it.

    ReplyReply
  24. @BOG: And GCB ranked 6th with a P/Factor of +4 I am sure they would under normal circumstance expect a P/Factor of between +8 to + 10 so an average year so far.

    ReplyReply
  25. @Queenian: I hope the “P” does not stand for “pufter”. Secondly. I only require common sense to tell me that they are having an average year- formula is not required. It actually occurred to me, that if you factor in enough “negatives”, you could actually end up better than first on the ranking- almost like a + 3 handicap for good amateur golfers. :lol:

    ReplyReply
  26. @Babbelas: Eldoraigne have no more than 250 boys that play rugby. That number is the enflated number that appear out of the woodwork for the Classic Clash but on any given Saturday around 10 to 12 teams take part which puts the playing figure at 150 to 195. The actual figure for boys is just under 800.

    Other activities have mushroomed in the last couple of years and hockey has been the major beneficiary in this regard.

    ReplyReply
  27. @BOG: Ye I think GCB needs to play off a handicap also I think people always get the GCB numbers wrong it around the 1500 mark if you take into account 1100 at GCB and a further 400 at there lock up facility down Queenstown way. :lol: :mrgreen: :lol:

    ReplyReply
  28. Westville has 1,300 boys….certainly one of the biggest boys only schools in the country, maybe only Pretoria Boys is bigger. Glenwood can put out 25 teams so 400 max, or only 33% of the school…

    ReplyReply
  29. It is irrelevant how many boys are in the school or are playing rugby. What is relevant is how many are on Rugby Bursaries as rankings are based on 1 team in the school.

    Make this a negative contributing factor and lets see how many of the “top” rugby schools feature in the top 20. I bet none…….

    ReplyReply
  30. @Queenian: Perhaps the results of all B age group teams and 2nd and 3rd teams would be a good measure of the actual rugby prowess of the school relevant to numbers.

    Most A-teams of top schools are stacked with “imports” as well, so numbers really don’t play a role in these teams as they have been cherry-picked from outside the general school populous. These kids will eventually turn-out for the first team too–so maybe numbers are not that relevant

    ReplyReply
  31. @kosie:Not so sure that Hockey did benefit. My son play 1 st team Hockey and when 1 of the Gr 12 players got injured they had to draft in an u 16 player to fill the gap. However Hockey is doing well especially when we play in the Tuks series against the other Afrikaans schools but we are still way behind the English Schools.

    All in all if you take in to account that we do not have an astro (yet) and with no boys getting bursaries for Hockey we are not doing to bad!

    ReplyReply
  32. @Queenian: I think that 750 to 800/850 is a decent estimate for the ‘big 4’ southern suburb Cape schools, as my quick search revealed the following:

    – Bishops: about 740 per their website.
    – SACS: about 780 per wiki, or if you multiply the ’13 matrics (145) by 5, you get 725.
    – Bosch: about 790, as if you multiply the ’14 matrics (158) by 5, you get 790.
    – Wynberg: 850 per wiki or 817 per IBSC.

    ReplyReply
  33. @Babbelas: A couple of other anomalies in the sport is U/17 girls playing in U/19 Netbal teams instead of matriculants. I recall an U/16 hockey girl playing 1 st team. The fact that she was in the SA U/17 squad probably helped.

    ReplyReply
  34. @Dave41: Glenwood give out 50 bursaries/scholarships to grade 8 per annum, not all for rugby. Probably 15 for rugby. I heard Westville give out around 80, 30 of which are for swimming. Again, bursaries are not always 100%, some are only 25% but some could be 125%, no one really knows for sure…

    ReplyReply
  35. I have even heard of schools offering free tours, tuck shop money, free kit, free flights home, guaranteed selection & even a hire car for boys over 18 to incentivize parents/kids

    ReplyReply
  36. @Queenian: I wasn’t able to get exact figures, but from what I could find out, they are up to about 400 boys with a big intake of grade eights this year. They currently have eight (sometimes nine) rugby teams, so roughly about 150 boys playing rugby. Very large grade eight intake this year, apparently, and numbers are rising, it seems. They currently have eight teams. There are roughly 450-500 boys at Noord-Kaap, and they also have eight teams.

    ReplyReply
  37. @Dave41: yep, and at grade 8 level it’s perfectly fine. Natural time for parents to move kids after primary school. It’s been happening for decades just not visible to all. In my standard 6 year in 1992 we had 20 boys on bursaries of some sort….

    ReplyReply
  38. I think you will need Sin, Cos or Tan for this calculations. it is absolutely meaningless. The best rugbyschoolteam is number 1 followed by the 2nd best schoolteam and so on and so on. The purpose of a ranking in schools rugby should be to determine who is actually the best rugbyteam and not rugbyschool. What will be the purpose of the new ranking? School 1 with a 1000 boys loses against school 2 with 300 boys. School 1 will then be ranked lower because of this. In the ranking system that i want to follow i want to see the strongest rugbyteam ranked 1st. Load of rubbish!!

    ReplyReply
  39. hi

    geluk aan al die spanne wat die naweek gespeel het, wil net 2 dinge se

    Monument EG Jansen gaan n groot een wees

    Jansen het Nie 800 seuns nie meer 475 seuns op skool

    Ek sou graag nog 300 seun by wou he om van te kies

    ReplyReply
  40. People, wake up. We can speak about this issue until kingdom come, fact is, there is schools who are serious about their school, and we know, that unless you are a so called “hockey school” or “cricket school” or whatever the school specialize in, even academics, then RUGBY is what “sells” the school, nothing else. An if there are schools who “buy”, “convince” or give “bursaries”, then good for them, they know what they want and is serious to promote the school. I support such schools 100%, as they promote to any boys future. There will be many now here who say that there is so much competition that few make it, so true, but think on the other side, although every boy playing rugby want to become a Springbok, or even an international player for any other country, many will at least be able to have doors opened for them by playing rugby at the “right school”. This means few will get bursaries to study, and this will ensure them a future, even outside the rugby environment. Schools or parents keep on shouting “foul play”, is surely narrow minded.

    ReplyReply
  41. To further try an explain my reasoning as per my first post. Any parent who want their kids to excel in academics, arrange for extra classes and lot of other things to ensure they get to university, and even possibly with a bursary. Same apply to kids who have a better sport talent than academic ability. Parents will let the kid work hard, attend training sessions, and place them in the school that will be better for their future. This is done with the hope that the kid might get to university or any other institution with a bursary to ensure him a good future. So stop complaining. I salute schools that put their money where there mouth is!!!!

    ReplyReply
  42. Pietie

    your’e right – a good rugby school is a drawcard to a high school

    as far as Durban metro goes look at Westvile & Glenwood as examples
    kids queuing up to enroll

    ReplyReply
  43. Number of students will be irrelevant. Schools select their players they looking for when they apply to the school. Paarl Gym have less boys than most but compete. But make up for selecting quality players and have quality coaching staff. Grey is a different story I think for decades if you play rugby in the Free State and have any ambition to play CW you select to apply to Grey or its a struggle. Well that’s my opinion.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply