A brand new ranking the player under-16 and under-18 trials method and format for 2016 was agreed on at the KZN High School Rugby AGM. The Tier-1 structure looks like it has been finalised. There are still some discussions and possible changes to the Tier-2 and Country Districts school pools to come.
PROPOSED TRIAL SYSTEM 2016
The trials will be divided into a Tier-1 group, a Tier-2 group and a Country District group.
- The rationale behind the proposed system is to create a strength vs strength system at all stages of the trial process.
- Players will be ranked in each set of the trials. (All provincial selectors will therefore be required to attend every zonal trial in order ensure there is consistency in the ranking system).
- Players will go through to the main trial as a ranked player and not from a specific zone. Teams for the main and final trials will be selected according to a player’s ranking.
TIER-1 Group:
- Each school will nominate players who will attend trials in their respective pool. (Schools can nominate as many players as they like)
- Players will be ranked and the top players in each position from the two pools will proceed to the main trial.
- The selection committee will comprise of the provincial selectors and one selector from each school.
- The Provinical and Zonal selectors will be divided into forwards and backs.
The Tier-1 group will be divided into two pools. The pools will hold separate trials.
POOL 1
1 DHS
2 Glenwood
3 Northwood
4 Westville
POOL 2
1 Hilton
2 Kearsney
3 Maritzburg College
4 Michaelhouse
5 St Charles
TIER-2 Group:
- Each school will nominate players who will attend trials in their respective pool.
- Players will be ranked and the top players in each position from each pool will proceed to the main trial.
- The selection committee will comprise of the Provincial selectors and three selectors nominated from each pool.
- The Provinical and zonal selectors will be divided into forwards and backs.
- The Tier-2 group will be divided into three pools. The pools will hold separate trials.
| POOL 1 | |
| 1 | Ashton |
| 2 | Clifton |
| 3 | Crawford La Lucia |
| 4 | Crawford North Coast |
| 5 | Durban Development |
| 6 | Durban North College |
| 7 | George Campbell |
| 8 | Port Natal |
| POOL 2 | |
| 1 | Alex |
| 2 | Carter |
| 3 | Curro Hillcrest |
| 4 | Gelofte |
| 5 | Hillcrest |
| 6 | Kloof |
| 7 | Linpark |
| 8 | Pinetown |
| 9 | PMB Development |
| 10 | Thomas More |
| 11 | Voortrekker |
| 12 | Weston |
| POOL 3 | |
| 1 | Amanzimtoti |
| 2 | Brettonwood |
| 3 | Durban Academy |
| 4 | Grosvenor |
| 5 | Kingsway |
| 6 | Kuswag |
| 7 | New Forest |
| 8 | Queensburgh |
| 9 | St Henrys |
| 10 | Werda |
COUNTRY DISTRICTS (CD) Group:
- Each school will nominate players who will attend trials in their respective pool.
- Players will be ranked and the top players in each position from each pool will proceed to the main trial.
- The selection committee will comprise of the Provincial selectors and three selectors nominated from each pool.
The Provinical and Zonal selectors will be divided into forwards and backs. - The CD group will be divided into three pools. The pools will hold separate trials.
| POOL 1 ZULULAND | |
| 1 | Ashton |
| 2 | Empangeni |
| 3 | Eshowe |
| 4 | Felixton |
| 5 | Grantleigh |
| 6 | John Ross |
| 7 | Mandini |
| 8 | Pongola |
| 9 | Richards Bay |
| 10 | Wembley |
| 11 | Zululand Development |
| POOL 2 SOUTH | |
| 1 | Creston |
| 2 | Ixopo |
| 3 | Kokstad |
| 4 | Port Shepstone |
| 5 | S/Natal Development |
| 6 | Scottburgh |
| 7 | South City |
| 8 | St Patricks |
| 9 | Suid Natal |
| POOL 3 NORTHERN NATAL | |
| 1 | Amajuba |
| 2 | Dundee |
| 3 | Ferrum |
| 4 | N/Natal Development |
| 5 | Newcastle |
| 6 | Pionier |
| 7 | Pongola |
| 8 | Sarel Cilliers |
| 9 | St Dominics |
| 10 | Vryheid |
| 11 | Vryheid Landbou |
| POOL 4 MIDLANDS | |
| 1 | Estcourt |
| 2 | Greytown |
| 3 | Howick |
| 4 | Ladysmith |
| 5 | Treverton |
| 6 | Wartburg |
| 7 | Weston |
@beet: Fully support a fair system where righteousness triumphs. Problem is that a new system will do NOTHING if “right” people are not in place. System mentioned above is similar to the Lions schools selection system, but nepotism still prevails. There is talk of a new selection system for the Lions where power is more evenly distributed during trials. I am not holding my breath and nor should the KZN hopefuls w.r.t. their new “system”.
@Grasshopper: players from Phoenix’s province.
@BrotherBear: At the same time, I applaud those who don’t give up on trying to improve the situation for the sake of what’s right and the kids who will follow and be subjected to the same unfairness if things are not addressed.
@beet: who you referring to here?
@Beet: Makes one sick to the stomach. In the Lions the level of nepotism goes beyond belief. Positive spin is it feels so good when the underdogs make the “groot honde” cringe even when they just in the vicinity. Boys need to know the world is not fair and learn to persevere. Those that have it easy become comfortable, fat and lazy – they lose the hunger. So in my mind always better off to have to work hard to earn your just reward.
@beet: Such is the world..one day
@Phoenix: The best is when certain of your frontrow players with “connections” who would have struggled to crack the nod in underachieving KZN, make it all the way to SA Schools level.
@Grasshopper: They obviously have a say as its their jobs on the line.
@Buffel: But we are the most “transformed” province but at what cost.
We had boys whose fathers are keurders in the group and we even have a boy who did not play one single trail game and made the GK team, out of position. I know u will never get it right but common this is wrong on so many levels.
@Buffel: Yep, we should actually pick a squad in March or April who meet regularly to train moves etc. Call it a ‘stayers’ squad in the year prior. Obviously other boys through great play in the season can get called in too. But we need to get the boys to gel earlier than June/July a few weeks before Craven Week. The coach should probably be independent too, so not linked to any school. Potentially all the coaches in KZN should pick their best 15, not including their own boys then from there those with the most votes go through. Eg Malcolm Marx from KES a few years back probably would have been the Jeppe, Parktown, St Johns, St Stithians etc coaches first pick at flank/hooker. That way if fair..
Doesn’t Sean Erasmus and Hein Kriek choose the WP side?
@Phoenix: Agree that it is Wrong – At the DRSU /Duikers trials, none of the players are allowed to play in their club socks so that the independent selectors will have no bias .
In the Cape you have a lot more to choose from as the talent pool is huge.
Even more reason not to wear school socks. Select the boys on rugby merit, not the school they come from.
@Buffel @Grashopper-U may be the most disagreeable province and your senior provincial structures in disarray,but make for some interesting reading.
One thing that gets my attention is u all seem to know what s going on in schoolboy rugby,who the selectors are and generally informed.
Down in the WP it seems that everything is hush hush and kept a secret.No access to names or anything unless u r” connected”.
At least that is what it seems.
How about our trials;U must play in your school socks and not any other,if u do u get warned.Does this “method” not scream bias?So if you are from a prominent school you will have a greater chance or am I just getting it wrong?
@Grasshopper: I agree but something has to be done with the current scenario. We are perennial under achievers when we get to Craven Week and a shake up is needed. Glad to see that they are moving in the right direction.
@Buffel: I agree with that to some extent, but ‘form’ needs to be monitored over a longer period. A great kid could just have a bad trial or only really plays well when there is ‘gees’ and passion in a derby or playing for a jersey. Some great players go missing at trials too. Maybe they should ask coaches form schools outside the province who play KZN teams who they felt were tough opponents. Obviously this won’t hold huge sway but ensure they get feedback from neutral observers. My favourite one is the All Blacks who are flabbergasted at the guys left out of the Boks, like Whiteley.
@GreenBlooded: That is the model that they should use. You get an official number pre-trial and that will be your number for the duration. So at the zonal trials you are just a number and you get selected on performance, not history or school. My son had to go to trials every year, regardless of the fact that he had played DRSU the previous year or made the KZN Craven week team .
So if you are at Eshowe high school or Glenwood, you have an equal chance.
Sorry, just using Eshowe as an example- no disrespect intended, just making it an even playing field. How many diamonds in the rough have gone onto bigger and better things who attended the less fancied schools.
@Buffel:
Agree. As you know we used independent selectors for the DRSU / Duikers teams the last few years and it worked very well.
@beet: I get that . But for transparency, let Sharks Rugby supply the selectors . Once selected, the sides are presented to the coaching staff well in advance of the provincial weeks so that they can work with them and mould them. No interference from school headmasters etc.
@Buffel: At the AGM, one school representative raised a point that closer to trials, headmasters place increased pressure on their school coaches to plug their own school players. No one disagreed with this point. If anything all present seemed to accept it as the known trend. It’s very difficult for any school official to wear a neutral cap under those circumstances.
I’ve come to understand that an initiative of the school run system is to provide opportunities for school employees (teachers and full-time coaches) as opposed to outsiders, so with that in mind, it would go against their goal to go ahead and introduce independent selectors no matter how advantageous this may be, particularly for the boys who are on the fringes. Given this promote school employees objective, I believe that aiming at a balanced out among schools selection committee is a must. Then the input of a headmaster can at best only influence one selector at most. I believe this would be a step in the right direction.
@Gungets Tuft: I’m not sure about who the selectors will be. I reason was put forward to justify why the outgoing steering committee (Exec) should pick the selectors but it makes more sense to vote for a new Exec and then allow the new Exec to decide who the selectors and coaches should be.
As things stand, in the all important u18 group the selectors position previously held by Ryno Combrinck of MHS is up for grabs (or has been filled???)
Selectors
Barend Steyn Kearsney
Gerald Pyoos George Campbell
Tony Pinheiro Glenwood
Tony Ritcher Hilton
A Nother ???
Plus
Rudi Dames Glenwood CW Coach
Roland Norris Westville AW Coach
Antonie Prinsloo Kearsney CD Coach
So one can see that Kearsney and Glenwood still have a lot of say at trials. They will each have 3 selectors at their respective zonal trials (2 provincial + 1 zonal).
Hopefully this imbalance is addressed.
8 provincial selectors from 8 different schools would be best in my opinion.
Since Tier-1 has just 9 schools, perhaps they should let each of the 9 have 1 provincial selector and then scrap the zonal selectors. Just for Tier-1 though. Not sure about the rest.
“The selection committee will comprise of the provincial selectors and one selector from each school.” Perfect, I think.
Who are the provincial selectors?
I like it :-)
It looks great on paper but to have a selector from each school . They will still push the interest of their respective players. I think all selectors should be independent then you will get a true reflection and no finger pointing can take place.
It is a step in the right direction.