Should KZN private schools be more competitive?

Firstly I’ll apologise for any kind of generalisations about to be made. It’s the concepts rather than negative associations that I wanted to focus on. Also please note this is definitely not an attempt to determine which is better, the private school or government school education. Anyone who’s been down that road knows that you can argue until you’re blue in the face and you won’t make any inroads with the guy you’re up against because at the end of the day it all comes down to personal choice.

So moving on, there are concerns raised that the private schools are nothing more than A-team only rugby setups and don’t offer government schools any meaningful strength versus strength competition beyond A-team level. The one-sided nature of the results lower than the A-team games is testimony to this view. Often a form of staggering has to be implemented by the state schools to ensure that a fair contest ensues. This process leaves the government schools having to either find suitable opponents from other schools to fill the gaps in the fixture list or sit some teams out during that particular inter-schools day.

In terms of numbers, on average the three KwaZulu-Natal government schools are slightly less than half the size of most of their main rugby rival government schools. They however enjoy the benefit of being between 80% and 100% boarding schools, which helps on the sports field. It’s also well-known that from a very long time before awarding sports scholarships and bursaries became popular amongst government institutions, the independent schools would fork out money to bring in top quality sportsmen including rugby players to boost their A-team’s performances. This practice is/was not restricted to grade 8’s either. Call it what you like: buying, poaching, recruiting, offering, etc; over the years the private schools have approached boys of local rivals that excelled on the rugby field. Glenwood and Westville have been on the receiving end of this technique most recently, having both lost one key player to Hilton College. In terms of depth, this practice should have the effect of strengthened private schools and weakening the schools that lost promising players.

To the calculations now. Working on an average of 110 boys per grade, if the private schools put out four rugby teams and two hockey teams, this accounts for 82 students, leaving a surplus of 28 students. They could maybe squeeze out an extra rugby team but they would then be scraping the barrel in terms of quality and it would not leave much room for injuries during the season. By comparison if a government school had to put 6 teams in these two sports onto the field on a Saturday, it would probably still leave 168 boys unaccounted for. 168 vs 28! That is a huge difference in quantity and therefore depth.

Often people go the route of suggesting what might be if the private schools were twice the size. A different way of looking at it is what would happen if government schools had half their numbers. Using this hypothetical in the open rugby age-group, one would assume that the 1st XV and 2nd XV would continue to compete on an equal footing, being made up primarily of under-17 and under-18 A-team players. However after that a government school 3rd XV would now be made up of players from their 3rd’s and 4th‘s, their 4th’s would then comprise 5th’s and 6th’s players, their 5th XV would be a combo of 7th’s and 8th’s players, etc. etc. Under these circumstances, two things might occur. Firstly government schools might struggle to compete against privates in the lower teams and also might struggle to put enough teams together to fill the fixture list.

Without getting into politics and race, another consideration is the demographic makeup of the two types of schools. The accurate figures aren’t known but it is reasonable to assume that private schools have a far higher percentage of students from families that typically support and grew up with rugby as part of their culture. This certainly has an impact on the number of willing players available for rugby selection to begin with. It is noticed in the relatively high rugby players to total student numbers conversion percentages that private schools have.

In conclusion, the private schools don’t look like they are doing too badly or perhaps there are other factors that are not being weighed up here. You decide.

Leave a Reply

60 Comments

  1. avatar
    #60 Gungets Tuft

    @oldschool: You left out the mighty MIGHTY U14F :mrgreen:

    ReplyReply
    4 December, 2012 at 11:21
  2. avatar
    #59 oldschool

    @Rugger fan: against college in the 80s , most schools could be labelled the whipping boys ….KC was infact 2nd to college in 87 , about 3rd in 85 and about 3rd in 81/82 …..the dominant schools through the 80s were obviously College with DHS generally 2nd and then good years from Glenwood , Hilton and MHS and westville with the odd years from KC , Nlands and Beachwood …..
    but the great thing about this new era of SBR is the schools that have shown iniatative and been pro active in developing the internal rugby programmes to recruiting talent and applying a more structured aproach to the sport are reaping the rewards …..We have sen a massive decline at Hilton for many years up untill this year ….DHS are obvoiusly exposed to various internal issues that havent helped there rugby( and all) ….Glenwood and Westville have had a great run for the last 7/8 years (however we percieve the way in which the Hood has gone about things , they have become a great rugby school ….and the Ville have taken over from where DHS left off !!)….College in my opinion are still the side to beat most years ….the College old boys can still be very proud of there current rugby programme as although others have caught up and neutralised the absolute dominance of KZN rugby …College always , from u14e to 1st team offer serious resistance in a very traditional and hard way ….their are never easy games against College …….i still feel that the giant will awaken and have a dominant patch at 1st XV level again……

    ReplyReply
    4 December, 2012 at 10:02
  3. avatar
    #58 oldschool

    @GreenBlooded: no boet not cashmere …thats sooo 80s , im the dude in the pink polo golfer with the popped collar , overly priced branded jeans and those pointy shoes ….talking loud on my iphone to my stock broker shouting buy buy buy ….with the 21 year old platinum blonde that looks like shes just exploded out the FHM top 20 ….us private schoolers are sick !!!(assuming that sick is cool )

    ReplyReply
    4 December, 2012 at 09:30
  4. avatar
    #57 Rugger fan

    @Grasshopper: Hey Grasshopper – coming in late here – this is an interesting set of stats.

    I wonder how the other KZN schools fared?
    As has often been said – MC were a really strong school in the mid80’s and early 90’s – but their form has not been back there for a while – whereas schools like Kearsnet were the whipping boys in many ways in the 80’s – and are now a force to be reckoned with in the past decade.

    I wonder if there are any stats along these lines available (execpt for some kippie having to trawl through school recrods)?

    ReplyReply
    4 December, 2012 at 08:35
  5. avatar
    #56 Ploegskaar

    @Andre T: Maybe its Balansingh?

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 16:26
  6. avatar
    #55 Andre T

    @GreenBlooded: THat same 031 205 number just called again……I don’t know if I should answer next time.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 15:00
  7. avatar
    #54 GreenBlooded

    The same comment applies to OldSchool. Another Cashmere boy if I’m not mistaken.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 14:56
  8. avatar
    #53 GreenBlooded

    @Andre T: I am trying very hard to reconcile your last post with what you mentioned above – i.e. “Us Cashmere wearing folk have got class”.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 14:42
  9. avatar
    #52 Andre T

    @oldschool: So when I’m in Durbs for Kearsney, PMB 150 and Monnas vs The Old Boys, I’ll take you out guava hunting with me. Usually when going out in pairs the nice chicks always have a ugly fat friend who doesn’t mind bad breath and small totties.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 14:34
  10. avatar
    #51 oldschool

    @Andre T: a mate of mine asked me what my handicap was …i replied …bad breath and small c#@k….. :lol:

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 14:26
  11. avatar
    #50 Andre T

    @Ploegskaar: A bit skew……but very long.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 13:49
  12. avatar
    #49 Ploegskaar

    @Andre T: Up-and-down in two strokes hardly tests your rhythm, only means you have a good short game (never a good thing) and the wife probably complains you never play the back 9. Then again I suppose just to hit the fairway every now and again at your age is an achievement….

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 13:46
  13. avatar
    #48 Andre T

    @GreenBlooded: Yeah, but you’ve got to have rhythm as well.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 13:20
  14. avatar
    #47 GreenBlooded

    @Andre T: So that probably explains why you have a wife half your age. You must be loaded boet. It can’t be your charming personality.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 13:17
  15. avatar
    #46 Andre T

    @oldschool: The other draw card I can’t use in public…….well, not anymore……I used to.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 13:12
  16. avatar
    #45 oldschool

    @Andre T: ahhh but you need to use your other draw card ….tell them you support the same school that Jacques Fourie went to !!!!that will close many deals !!

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 13:06
  17. avatar
    #44 Andre T

    @oldschool: That’s what I meant. The rich okes have the pretty women. Spent last week at Sun City and roamed the casino every night. Saw the most horrendous guys with the most beautiful women playing in the Salon Privee. Some of those guys have more wrinkles than a full grown Pug. Thought with my good looks I’d score but the chicks check you up and down and saw my Crocs and Cabanas resident card and then rather stick to The Palace Pug.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 12:34
  18. avatar
    #43 oldschool

    @Andre T: Ha Ha classic , however , you obvoiusly havent seen some of the very well kept mommies stepping out of there Range Rovers on break up day at some of the private schools ….not many ‘ugly ‘ women on the arms of the wealthy my boet …..ok maybe hes on wife 3 of 4 but whos counting !!!!

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 12:14
  19. avatar
    #42 Playa

    Just as a case in point on this matter beet…Dale used to be an 800+ boys’ school.The numbers have dwindled over the years and have now settled on about 400-450 boys.This is the region of an average boys’ private school.Boarding numbers have gone from 220 in their peak to 80 today.

    From fielding 21 teams in the 1990s to today’s 15 teams.The school naturally fields less teams now,and competitive only at A team level (1st to 3rds in open).

    A government school with the same numbers as their private counterparts will struggle more than the private school.And they will more than likely apply the private methodology of focussing on the A team sides with the unintended consequence of killing any depth.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 11:45
  20. avatar
    #41 All Black

    @beet: Have no argument that College could have done better but we will have to go back into that argument of who plays who in a calendar year. Glenwood have had a good run of late even though they have pitted themselves against top opposition. Kearsney have started playing top opposition in the last couple f years but the rest of the private schools dont subject themselves to the risk of top opposition week in a and week out. Every school has it’s periods of success and and vice versa. The true test is over a long period of time and that is what counts. I case in point is England beating the All Blacks by a big margin, which should have been more, and are suddenly talking about being world champions.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 11:44
  21. avatar
    #40 beet

    @All Black: Sorry thought you were still talking about Kearsney vs College record. Read your comment again. You mentioned “all the schools”.

    But my points do hold weight. Pvt schools struggle for consistency. Kearsney will in all likelihood find the going very tough in 2014. College has been under-performing. Their goal needs to be to get on par with the schools mentioned in my last comment. Glenwood should be included in the list of consistent achievers.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 10:23
  22. avatar
    #39 All Black

    @beet: Not sure why College comes into this? It is common knowledge that College have suffered from inconsistent coaching, a reluctance to get involved in the bursary war and the fact that boys who would normally have come to the school have been enticed elsewhere via bursaries from mainly private schools. Hopefully this will change.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 10:14
  23. avatar
    #38 Andre T

    Unfortunately my support in the KXN province for 2013 will be with Kearsney and my dark horse will be Northwood to cause a few upsets. I also like Hilton, it sounds so smooth. Although coming from a very humble background, Vrede, Monnas and Klerksdorp, I like it when the softies from the private schools beat the rugged, juggernaut teams with their flair and intelligence. It is so clear on this site………just by reading some comments…….I can clearly (as an outsider) see who supports which schools and who had a private school education and who had public education. There’s an old saying among us Cashmere wearing folks……..We might be ugly…….but we’ve got class.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 09:06
  24. avatar
    #37 beet

    @All Black: Sustained effort by the private schools remains an underachieved goal. I look back at tremendous seasons that St Andrews of G/Town and Bishops have put together within the last few years and compare that to their achievements this season. Miles apart. In terms of the consistency that we have seen from the likes of Selborne, Grey High, Waterkloof, Outeniqua, Boland Landbou in recent seasons, I can’t help but feel that College also fits into a bracket of under-performers.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 09:02
  25. avatar
    #36 All Black

    @oldschool: Kearsney will be the side to beat next year with the Du Preez brothers. They are a huge factor in that side. After that it could be more interesting between all the schools.

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 08:56
  26. avatar
    #35 oldschool

    @Grasshopper: Proves my point !! however , i would disagree with the age of the glenwood boys being 17 in that era….many boys were pushing 19 ….and the post matrics of MHS and Hilton were to my knowledge only allowed to do post if they were young for there age ….so turning 18 in their post matric year …i could be wrong ??? but when KC introduced post matric in 92 our lads had to be turning 18 in there post year ….

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 08:07
  27. avatar
    #34 oldschool

    @All Black: no , not really interesting , we got beaten flat out ….as did most other KZN schools , College were and remain in my opinion the side to beat !!

    ReplyReply
    3 December, 2012 at 07:56
  28. avatar
    #33 GreenBlooded

    @Umtata: Do you have inside info on Glenwood’s recruitment policies or are you just making assumptions based on what you read here?

    ReplyReply
    1 December, 2012 at 20:13
  29. avatar
    #32 HORSEFLY NO.1

    @Umtata:

    yes that is true. would be sad if they didnt play both DHS and WBHS. boys robbed of a true Berea derby day and a great match. even today boys at Glenwood look forward to a match vs DHS with as much zeal as you can imagine! you only need to watch what happens during the week just before match day! lovely to see!!

    ReplyReply
    1 December, 2012 at 18:05
  30. avatar
    #31 Umtata

    @HORSEFLY NO.1: If this is true Glenwood should really take a look a their recruitment policies, because I think this is the cause of these kinds of problems.

    ReplyReply
    1 December, 2012 at 15:53
  31. avatar
    #30 BOG

    @Grasshopper: Down a little- between 350-400.(And for the record, they are all over 100 yrs in existence. As it is GCB is being accused of having almost no Bloem kids. One said that there was only one kid from Bloem in a class, but that, I almost 100% sure, is bollocks.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 19:11
  32. avatar
    #29 HORSEFLY NO.1

    @GreenBlooded:
    @horsefly2016

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 17:40
  33. avatar
    #28 Grasshopper

    @Gungets, my company does online surveying and web analytics across the whole SA market, be happy to run this if someone is willing to fund it a bit…

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 17:22
  34. avatar
    #27 Gungets Tuft

    I see the arguments, but I can tell you that a better measure would be the number of active sportsmen. I am not going to guess but I do know that when Graeme Waters was on staff at Northwood about 6/7 years ago and a survey revealed just under 40% of the boys playing sport. At College it is the same thing, the day-boys are not well represented in the main. If you take 60% of the College boys that is a tad over 700 boys. Add the swocio-economic factor in where the kids of wealthier parents are generally the ones that can afford the coaching, trundling around to club sports, best nutrition and medical care, etc, etc (propable the same 708 boys that play sport at College – my guess!!), I reckon the fields are pretty level in terms of kids playing sport. The ratio of talent:numbers, well, a statistical and survey game well beyond me. Chat to the parents of the boys going to Varsity next year, there is a Masters thesis just waiting to happen.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 17:10
  35. avatar
    #26 GreenBlooded

    @Greenwood: Horsey says he saw this on twitter. Been searching for a while now and can’t find anything. Horsey – give us a link to the twitter account where you heard this.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 16:36
  36. avatar
    #25 Greenwood

    Horsie

    Horsie

    Not happy about that news

    DHS no sport with Glenwood next year

    would this by any chance have anything to do with Van Zyl ??

    and No rugby against Westville

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 16:34
  37. avatar
    #24 Grasshopper

    @Beet, also one scrum machine unless I’m wrong…..

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 16:11
  38. avatar
    #23 beet

    @Grasshopper: That point about the fields is a valid one in Glenwood’s case. It takes a lot of extra motivation and effort all round to keep the spirit up, not to mention the difficulty it causes for practicing.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 16:08
  39. avatar
    #22 HORSEFLY NO.1

    @Grasshopper:
    true…

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:51
  40. avatar
    #21 Grasshopper

    @All, another thing to add is facilities, the privates have between 5 and 10 fields to train on. Look at urban schools like Glenwood and DHS, only 3 fields max and then the boys have to travel to practice. This is not their fault, the cities have just grown around them. On a practice day at Glenwood you sometimes have 6 teams on one field, crazy! No room to practice backline moves etc. Gov schools are doing extremely well considering their lack of space. Another direct relation is the number of boarders you have to your sporting results. Grey Bloem has about 500 boarders (stand to be corrected) this shows why they are so good at all sports. The privates are 500 to 600 boys boarders only and they have the space to play touch every day. Glenwood has 200 boarders and DHS only about 120 with Westville probably 50. When you are a boarder all you do is practice and gym, I know as I was one for a short while. The privates should be able to compete easily with the gov schools down the line. If the gov schools had 500 plus boarders they would be pretty powerful…

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:44
  41. avatar
    #20 Grasshopper

    @OldSchool, here you go.

    Glenwood vs Hilton
    (1980 to 1999)
    Played: 20
    won: 9
    lost; 11
    45% win ratio

    Glenwood vs Michaelhouse
    (1980 to 1999)
    Played:20
    won: 5
    lost: 14
    Drew: 1
    25% win ratio

    Glenwood vs Kearsney
    (1980 to 1999)
    Played: 20
    Won: 11
    Lost: 9
    55% win ratio

    Remember Michaelhouse and Hilton had post matrics in the early to mid 90’s where we had 19 year olds playing 17 year olds. I finished in 96, so was at those games. All the Glenwood vs Kearsney games were always close affairs. I do remember guys like Fergus Pringle.

    Since 2000
    Glenwood vs Hilton
    Played: 8
    won: 5
    lost; 3
    63% win ratio

    Glenwood vs Michaelhouse
    Played:9
    won: 5
    lost: 3
    Drew: 1
    56% win ratio

    Glenwood vs Kearsney
    Played: 12
    Won: 7
    Lost: 4
    Drew: 1
    58% win ratio

    So yes, since 2000 Glenwood have done better, winning more than half their games but this is also down to good coaching. Let’s just say I was never hammered by a Kearsney side, that came from College usually…

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:35
  42. avatar
    #19 All Black

    @oldschool: The results between College and Kearsney over this period are interesting.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:34
  43. avatar
    #18 All Black

    Great article Beet. Something that I have been saying for some time now. It is not just here in KZN that this happening either and not just with private schools. Schools are using their sport, rugby in particular, to market and hence the pressure is on to put teams on the field that win. Private schools are concentrating on the 1st team which logically means all their A teams. I would think that they therefore need as many fee paying students as possible to allow/subsidise the bursary boys. This happens in most institutions, including the Academy. Like it or not, that is the way it works. Old boys and trusts can provide for so much and then the school has to dig into it’s pockets. I wont quote names of schools outside of KZN who are doing it as it does not really affect us, except at festivals, and I can say that some of our KZN schools will be playing such schools next year. Right or wrong, that is not the debate, the fact is that the pvt schools are finding it easier to attract the stars who do not have an affiliation to a school and even then, some boys choose to break family tradition and go pvt. Personally I had the opportunity to send my son/s to pvt school but they chose tradition. This gap becomes very evident when a pvt school wins 1 game the entire day against a govt school and it is the 1st team. Nobody can argue against that. Problem is that the larger govt schools will start, have started,to get irritated with this scenario as well as having to spend hours finding games for the lower teams. In the old days there were no other options but it is now quite acceptable, if not fun, for the boys to travel to JHB, Pretoria etc, get hosted, and have a full days sport against bigger up country schools. These rivalries are growing at a rapid rate and home and away fixtures are now becoming a distinct possibility. You have to see the reasoning behind this. Why play a school who has 15 top players but does not offer much else? Why put your school through that. This is an exaggeration but it is fast becoming a reality.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:31
  44. avatar
    #17 Pedantic

    @Gungets Tuft: Agreed we are guessing but I base my guess on personal interaction with scores of young athletes and their parents.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:21
  45. avatar
    #16 HORSEFLY NO.1

    @Pedantic:
    did you get my e-mail? sent to you about 2/3 weeks ago… also, very hard to find those though and the school that has them is very lucky.

    @Amalekite:
    yes its very disappointing and i hope it can be fixed. what is particularly saddening for me is that this very age group had up to a G side when they were u14

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:18
  46. avatar
    #15 oldschool

    @Grasshopper: your last sentence ‘without them they would be hammered’….talking from my experience of playing glenwood in 91 , 92 and 93 …i played for 3 years ….we beat glenwood in all 3 of my years …we had 2 boys on sports scholarships in the 3 years …Halstead and Arenhold…..
    we had 3 post matrics (all 17 years old)in 92 , 3 in 93…all 17 turning 18….
    this was before the days of the rugby scholarship trend …yes later in the 90s rugby scholarships were slowly being introduced ….but up to say 2006…we played with majority ‘natural ‘stock…and seemed to cope just fine against you guys and the other massive schools ….
    Your case dont hold water my boet…..

    why dont you post all the private schools vs Glenwood results pre 2005 on the site to see infact what the win loss ratio is ….say from 1985 to 2005 ….and then post from 05 till current…will be interesting to see the difference …pre buying to current…

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:15
  47. avatar
    #14 Gungets Tuft

    @Pedantic: Until all schools publish their bursaries we are all guessing. I will show you mine if you show me yours.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:11
  48. avatar
    #13 Amalekite

    @HORSEFLY NO.1: Glad to hear that your U16C side had a good season – Goes to prove that it is not just about depth, but about quality, attitude and doing things right.
    Still disappointing to see a school like DHS only being able to field 3 sides out of a possible 300 boys or so.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:09
  49. avatar
    #12 Pedantic

    @HORSEFLY NO.1: It’s a good way to do it when bursaries are limited … recruit all rounders – a good all round athlete in Grade 8 could develop into a great rugby, hockey, polo or cricket player.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:08
  50. avatar
    #11 HORSEFLY NO.1

    @Pedantic:
    what ive noticed is that government schools (dhs recently started this) will offer kids for something else but try make sure that he can really contribute elsewhere eg rugby. not really having boys in the Bside on rugby bursary but maybe an academic whos not bad in rugby

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 15:02
  51. avatar
    #10 Pedantic

    @Grasshopper: I think the government schools rely on bursaries just as much in order to be competitive.

    From what I’ve seen, they also offer many more bursaries than the privates do – you will find many B team age group players at Westville & Glenwood on bursaries which naturally result in depth – the privates simply don’t have the numbers to compete lower down.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 14:58
  52. avatar
    #9 HORSEFLY NO.1

    @Greenwood:
    saw it on twitter and yes ALL sports

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 14:57
  53. avatar
    #8 Greenwood

    Horsie – I really hope these are fake rumours – you mean ANY Sport ? if this is correct this would be the 1st time this would happen between the schools – if so watch this site hum !!!

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 14:55
  54. avatar
    #7 HORSEFLY NO.1

    hearing of some rumour which i hope is fake that DHS might not be playing Glenwood in anything next year including rugby!!

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 14:44
  55. avatar
    #6 HORSEFLY NO.1

    also i feel its a bit easier for private schools to put out rugby teams than public schools due to the fact that most of the guys are boarders and have no excuse to not play anything. sometimes in public schools its quite hard to get boys to play especially when its so easy to just leave at half past two and go home…

    @Amalekite:
    yes thats true and you would expect the pvt schools to dominate these 3 wouldnt you? the U16C(the last u16 side) beat both Hilton u16c and thrashed MHS U16C though, they lost to kearsney early in the season and played one of their best games vs Glenwood where i felt that if the game was played at a nuetral venue with a neutral ref they couldve won. so, doesnt matter how many boys you have playing compared to boys in the grade, all that matters is that the best boys play

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 14:39
  56. avatar
    #5 The Beast

    @Hopper, it must be terrible to have been a government school kid then?

    Put 250 boys in a room and pick 5 rugby teams.
    then put 110 boys in a room and pick 5 rugby teams.

    Where is the most depth?

    You have a chip on your shoulder cos you are a government schoolboy. Get over it. This is from a “MONNAS” Old Boy as well and I have no chip about it.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 14:32
  57. avatar
    #4 Grasshopper

    @Beet, good article, however a fundamental factor is missing here. The kids at private schools, those paying, are from wealthy backgrounds so would have gone to expensive rugby playing primary schools. The majority of gov school kids have never touched a rugby ball prior to high school. Yes, DHS, Glenwood, Northwood, College and Westville have their rugby feeder schools, but many of those boys are enticed to private schools by bursary. If I was offered a bursary at Glenwood and one at Kearsney, it’s a no brainer which I would take. The value of the bursaries are not comparable. I heard recently that a very good sports kid had enrolled for Glenwood in 2013 to be then offered a bursary at Kearsney. Gov schools can’t compete here so the likes of Hilton, Michaelhouse and Kearsney get the cream because of this. The gov schools then need to spread the net further afield to be competitive at A team level. Take the Doops, they were going to Westville but Kearsney intervened. Just imagine the Westville 2013 side with them. Also, more affluent familes can pay for workshops, holiday sports camps, extra coaching etc…..it does make a huge difference. Lastly, at gov schools not all the kids are built for rugby, there are those better suited to chess, surfing, cross country, debating, soccer etc. The same can be said for privates but again the majority have played rugby either for the love of it or because they had to. In my opinion, private schools rely on the bursaries to get the best ‘poorer’ kids to be competitive at A level, without them they would be hammered.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 13:42
  58. avatar
    #3 Greenwood

    Ok so sending your kid to a larney private school is a personal choice and is bank balance dependant . I went to GWD – the lightie is at Gwd but if I won the lotto, the lightie would stay at Glenwood – unless of course he begged & pleaded to go to one of the 3 privates – In my days at Gwd all the private schools were very competitive at 1st & 2nd team levels and below that the games were semi social and were enjoyed by most boys
    I dont think any of the Govt boys in the lower teams would look down on Pvt school staggered teams as lesser as long as the games were played in good spirit.
    Intesting though I see Glenwood say they are a semi -private school and I’m sure I read that Northwood say the are are semi – Government – and I seem to recall past comments posted on this site that Westville act as though they are a private school.Taking the miniscual financial Government input in relation to running costs this rings true – “semi – private” seems apt looking at fees of around R26500 pa for Govt schools and @1200 kids income is around R30 Mill less the burseries etc and that why I say schools are run like businesses

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 13:22
  59. avatar
    #2 Amalekite

    I think that it a lot of it boils down to the attitude of the school towards rugby.
    3 or 4 years ago, the likes of Hilton, Michaelhouse and Kearsney would only pick up a rugby ball a week before their first game as this was their tradition of old, with the exception of their first team.
    Most of the time these schools were on a hiding to nothing against the likes of College, Glenwood and Westville.
    Over the past year or two, these same private schools have changed their ways and have adopted a far more professional approach in line with the big 3. This has resulted in far more evenly contested games throughout the age groups.
    Depth does come into it, especially in the lower teams, However, depth should not be measured in terms of number of pupils in a school, but rather in terms of the number of rugby players. A good example of this is that the 3 private schools mentioned above, have got more teams in certain age groups than a huge school like DHS. I stand to be corrected, but I think that DHS only had 3 teams in the U16 age group this year.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 11:45
  60. avatar
    #1 GreenBlooded

    “Often a form of staggering has to be implemented by the state schools to ensure that a fair contest ensues.”

    I think this is a classic case of normal distribution in statistical theory (Google is your friend). A smaller sample (Privates + other schools of similar size) should have the same spread of talent than a bigger sample (The big 4). This clearly explains the need for staggers. In theory, the A teams in the smaller sample should be weaker but in reality, it is offset (ogive of the bell curve) at A team level by the boys on scholarship etc. This explains why staggers are neccessary. It has nothing to do with private of government – simply the relative size of the sample bases.

    ReplyReply
    30 November, 2012 at 11:36