One of the first questions that came up when the new SARU age-band rules were implemented was what effect will it have on the smaller schools in KwaZulu-Natal. The ruling which comes into effect this year prohibits all under-16 players from playing in under-19 (open age-group) games, something that was allowed up until the end of the 2012 season. Many of the KZN Tier-2 schools do not field an under-16 age group. Players go directly from under-15 to the open age-group. Due to the shortage of player numbers, without under-16 players, many Tier-2 schools simply would not be able to field open teams. Since the new SARU rule is without exception in respect of under-16’s playing in under-19 matches, Tier-2 schools in the province were left with little choice. The answer to the question asked months ago is this: at a recent meeting Tier-2 schools decided to make the open age-group under-18 only. This paves the way for under-16’s to continue playing at the higher level, which is acceptable in terms of the new SARU rules. It however also means that the school rugby careers of several legitimate under-19 boys has been cut short. These boys, although bona fide school students will not be able to represent their respective schools this year because they are now officially a year too old to play in Tier-2. Some schools were dependent on these players. One school is reported to have now lost the availability of five under-19 players, something that is bound to have a negative impact on their results this season.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell, is subtitled “the story of success.” It is a book that purports to explain why some people succeed far more than others. It suggests that a success like Bill Gates is more attributable to external factors than anything within the man. Even his birth date turns out to play a role of profound importance in the success of Bill Gates and Microsoft Corporation.
Chapter 2 seeks to answer the curious question why athletes on elite Canadian teams were all born in the same few months of their birth year. In a system in which achievement is based on individual merit, one would assume the hardest work would translate to the best achievement. The fact this criterion on was wholly overmastered by timing of birth was studied and showed that hidden advantage, namely being older and stronger than persons born later in the year of eligibility brought continuous, cascading, even snowballing advantage, which ultimately produced Canada’s most elite players. If everyone born, in, say, 1981 was eligible to begin play only in a single year, then naturally the older boys, being larger and better coordinated, would dominate. Hockey player selection in Canada is shown to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, namely a situation where a false definition in the beginning invokes a new behavior which makes the original false conception come true.
Incredible book , verifying what has been discussed in this forum regarding ages , the month you are born in and the impact of that on your abilities in sport etc .
@Queenian: I saw Brandwag,s training sesesion yesterday afternoon and after seen Queens train last week, unless Queens has some mystery forwards hiding some were they will be out weighed by 10 kg,s a boy those Brandwag boy are super big and pretty fast as well what they eat or take i am not sure but it is nearly un real. Queens can expect a rough ride on the 21st March when they face Brandwag.
Its now that you see what a big loss Fortuin at lock for Queens will be.
Ludz: You being very quite whats happening.
@Playa: Let the 21st March arive so we can get the season going
@Gungets Tuft: LOL!
I hear you. Fair point.
@Gungets, ah the good old days…..
@Playa: I think you need to remember that your case was also in 1997. Remember the much quoted stats from the Springbok team of ’95 where they were smaller, man for man, than the 2012 SA Schools team.
It is all very well saying the kids these days are “soft” but forget how size, speed and physicality has literally jumped from the days that we were at school. Remember – the days when you rode a 3-speed bicycle to school (not Mom’s taxi), swam in the icy October water (not heated pools), got tackled onto the rock-hard pitch in the middle of Goldstones, played 1st team hockey on grass, used the “tickey box” to phone home if you missed the bus (or just walked because your old man thought it would teach you a lesson). Supplements were a second helping of Pro-Nutro (or maltabella if you were at GCB :-)), and you ate 1/2 an orange for energy at half time (1/4 if it was Northlands – cheap bar-stewards).
We can safely stop drawing parallels to before about 2000, definitely before 1995 (which means about 2 people here can talk. Me, I still think things changed for the worse after the Rinderpest, Star thinks it was after the Xhosa Cattle Killing …
KCMAN was on the money when he said kids these days have gone soft
There was a group at Dale that went unbeaten in their Under 14 and 15 years in ’95 and ’96. In that team were the likes of Nicholas Eyre, Gareth Krause, Adam Robertson, Donovan Proudfoot to name a few.In ’97, their Under 16 year, they all went to the 1st XV (there were no under 16s at Dale then). Besides Nic Eyre being squashed by the Queens back 3 (the largest back three I have ever seen in schoolboy rugby) into the stands and dislocating his shoulder – and this happened in 98 when he was 17. In ’99, they lost only one game by one point to Pretoria Boys High and were ranked 4th in the country.
Then again, in every case, there are outliers.
This ruling, as understandable as it is…may just be setting the tone for that Super Schoolboy League bloggers have been talking about.Where only big schools compete against each other….sad thing is, there may only be like 10-15 of those schools around.
Let the 2nd-3rd tiers play in their own league.
I attended what you call a second tier school (maybe even third) and moved from under 15 straight into under 19. Nothing much happened to me. I don’t believe there is much wrong there as long as the second tier schools play among themselves.
The only under 16 players ever to grace the field as an under 19 players at Paarl Gim was Kobus Burger who went on to represent WP at CW as an under 16 players and played SA Schools the same year. He was strong and quick and could handle himself. Today this would not be allowed.
@Queenian:
Hahahahaha! I thought we had relegated the Fish to a Wednesday game and they were too ashamed to put that up on their website.
The Snobs at City Lords are no easy feat. It’s like the Rec only greener and softer.One can very easily mistake that field for a bed, and end up wanting to lie down.Thats when the KC boys will pounce on you.I’m fortunate enough to have never lost there…but boy I came close many times.We won 20-18 in 2000, but KC were the better team by far on the day.We just happened to score more points than them.
@Queenian: I remember 79 in Queenstow Grey just won 12-10 i think and must say maybe with a bit of luck i remember we also always wished for refs from Hangklip as they hated you guys with a passion.
@QC86: Grey PE last year have themselves to blame the scrum halfs show boating once over the line cost them the try.
@BoishaaiPa: Ye we learnt well from them must admit the only year i ever had a problem with a ref in Bloem was 82 when the ref called the game between Queens and Grey 10 mins early because of the CC final Grey won 16-13 and were under big pressure at the time
@BoishaaiPa: ask Grey PE LAST YEAR,it was both
@QC86: Flip i see everybody is worried about Under19 boys playing 1st team i remember in the late 70,s a boy played two years for Swifts because he was so old to this day he still brags about playing for Queens 1st in Std 7 but forgets to tell you he was 19 he left school at 20 just passing Std 8 as he,s father refused to let him leave till he had passed Std 7
@Queenian: Is it all about the “rec” or the “ref”?…Sounds like Bloem!..
@QC86: I see the Dale vs Selborne was just a typo so Playa can relax i think he thinks his school was dropping out the main stream and taking up game against JJ Serfontein
@QC86: I am based in Port Elizabeth.
@Queenian: that red face was meant for me ,not you
@kcman: You live in Grahamstown
@Queenian: I will probably be at the Rec again in 2014 watching my son, 30yrs after we got thrashed. Maybe he can turn the tables for me and get a win against the Queenians in the next 2 yrs. You will battle to beat us at City Lords this year as we tend to do very well at home but we do not travel as well.
@kcman: Ye agree with you there a lot of teams from outside the Border EC area Queens have played in the last couple of years or big teams would have found it a lot more difficult at the Rec.
Just take the 3 games Queens lost at Kursney last year PRG/Kir/Glenwood and that they had a few injuries would have been another kettle of fish if they were played at the rec.
@rugbyfan: Let me know
@QC86: You correct sorry meant the period 77/85
@rugbyfan: I am not sure but I think they have won the Hirsch Shield for something like 8 yrs running.
I can tell you that many a good rugby side going to the Rec today will still battle against the QC 1ST XV.
@kcman: Ye Queens were good in those years they really messed my record up Under14A/15A/16A/1st/1st lost evryone to Queens like a nightmare that haunts me.
I see Queens is still up there with the athletics must be one of the top 3 or 5 in the country still by far the best in the Border and EC
@Queenian: Queens lost 5 games in 86
@Queenian: Hey rubbish i might not be going bud i might be in Brazil will let you know.
@Queenian: In my 5 yrs at KC, I do know that the First XV and 2nd XV matches were always closely contested matches and we were unlucky to lose in 1980, 1981, 1982 and 1983. In 1984 when I was in the First XV, Queens had one the finest sides in their history and I know they gave everybody a hiding that year.
In those same yrs we won the home cricket matches and Queens won the Qtn games. I think Queens won the Hirsch Shield every year those days as well. They were the powerhouse of EC school sport by a long way.
@All Black: Read “Outliers” by Malcolm Gladwell – he has a couple of chapters on this subject, all relating to US sports I seem to remember.
He goes on to say that these kids born in the first 3 months of the year have a lifelong advantage. This is due to them being bigger and stronger at primary school, getting all the best coaching and the better opportunities to perform. It stands to reason that a kid that plays in the U10A – U13A gets the best of everything.
A late developer in the U10F and then U13D gets coached by the Art teacher who would rather have a symetrical scrum .. :-) … it takes something really special for him to recover from that – generally a parent who either coaches himself or pays for a private coach … or someone like Skonk Nicholson who had a knack of seeing something in a boy that might be playing centre for the 6ths and turns him into a 1st team flank.
@kcman: I will be there as well i will get your number closer to the time and come say hallo i have convinced Rugbyfan to come with we need to show the Grey Bloem Boys what lifes about
@kcman: Ye i think the period 78/86 even Grey Bloem battled against Queens if my history stats are right in that 8 year period Queens only lost 3 games in total in the Border and EP area they lost to Dale in 81 Grey PE 85 and Winterberg in 83.
@Queenian: I will most definitely be at the Graeme Rugby day, never miss it.
@BoishaaiPa: Was i at no 2 million earning a giant R 50 for all sport played.
@Queenian: I do recall us being “next up” after our 4ths got murdered in 82, we were expecting the same but only lost by about 20 points.
@BoishaaiPa: Mayweather has know chance against me i know he will bring a knife to a gun fight
@kcman: Year after me i see you going to be at the Graeme day.
Some Facts..Queenian.there is still hope for you!..Seems the theory might correlate to more physical teamsports….
Rank Name Sport Total Earnings Month Born
1 Floyd Mayweather, Jr. Boxing $85 million Feb
2 Manny Pacquiao Boxing $62 million Dec
3 Tiger Woods Golf $59.4 million Dec
4 Lebron James Basketball $53 million Dec
5 Roger Federer Tennis $52.7 million Aug
6 Kobe Bryant Basketball $52.3 million Aug
7 Phil Mickelson Golf $47.8 million Jun
8 David Beckham Football $46 million May
9 Cristiano Ronaldo Football $42.5 million Feb
10 Peyton Manning American football $42.4 million Mar
11 Lionel Messi Football $39 million Jun
12 Haloti Ngata American football $37.3 million Jan
13 Larry Fitzgerald American football $36.8 million Aug
14 Ndamukong Suh American football $36 million Jan
15 Charles Johnson American football $34.4 million Jul
16 Rafael Nadal Tennis $33.2 million Jun
17 Mario Williams American football $33.2 million Jan
18 Alex Rodriguez Baseball $33 million Jul
19 Fernando Alonso Auto racing $32 million Jul
20 Valentino Rossi Motorcycle racing $30 million Feb
@kcman: It is great to see the QC vs Kingswood game back on i think things will be alot more even now. This year QC have a young team and will battle against Kingswood in the City of Saints
@Queenian: I left in 1984.
@star: The teams will be affected by summer sports commitments just like last year. Westville have been very open about their team though. The Stayers gave a good idea of where guys fit in and it’s up to the u17s to like Martin and Anderson to show their worth now. Will be interesting to see what College has lined up in terms of new faces.
@ Beet- Maybe we should list the Proteas/Bokke and determine which percentile they are in. Did Smith not just have a birthday? Also what happened with your cricket side against Hilton last Saturday. 38 all out is simply not good enough
Do you also have the team sheets for the Westville V MC practise match this Friday night.
@ Cyndi- Your son and mine both. There is a famous quote from Henry Ford that refers to a plane needing to fly against the wind to achieve lift off. Maybe our ” babies” are in that category. But seriously we are very aware of the age gap as many of his friends are already 16 and it defintely shows.
@kcman: What year did you leave
@BoishaaiPa: I was in the 4th(82) if i remember we beat Kingswood like 80 nil or something. Amasingly in all my years at Queens playing for B and C teams and 7 and 4 and 13 team in matric only played 1 game due to a stuffed ankle. Only lost 3 games in all that time and that was to Grey Bloem.
@Queenian: @BoishaaiPa: Queens was known as the last frontier to us Kingswood boys in the 80’s, we never wanted to play there on the Rec.
Cricket was far different but we knew who the boss was when we arrived for rugby, something like most sides feel when they venture to Grey College for their annual rugby fixture.
@BoishaaiPa: Ye played against OC as well there is only one word for them they were complete thugs remember there first aid box was a toolbox and there were still some spanners in it.
The Rose still existes but have not been there for nearly 20 years being living in Uitenhage for the last 15 years.
I perused further studies which disprove the Ice Hockey calculations of Barnsley using the same NHL. This was interesting. A guy named Gladwell used the Medicine Hat Tigers, a Canadian semi-professional hockey team, where the majority of the players are born in the first three months of the year to prove his theory of the ages. And the conclusion:
Perhaps the clearest answer can be offered by Gladwell’s Medicine Hat team. It’s been four years since they lost in the Memorial Cup final, the top prize in the top junior hockey league in the world. The players are now at an age and experience level where most should have graduated from prospect status. But of the 23 Canadians on the team (there was a Slovak and an American), 17 have never suited up for an NHL team. And of the six who have stepped on NHL ice (one for nine minutes as an emergency goalie), not one has made a significant impact in the league. There’s not an All-Star in the bunch. The benefits of the relative-age effect took them as far as they could go: the top of the juniors. Even with the all the extra early coaching and ice time, their comparative lack of skill kept them from achieving the highest of success in the sport. To be fair, one of the players, Tyler Ennis, is only 22 years-old and a highly touted winger for the Buffalo Sabres. There’s still time for him to blossom into a star.
Of course, he was born in October.
@kcman: You probably played against Queenian at the Rec in 82..no way he could make 1st team with that handicap!
@kcman: Know what you mean Queens had no under 16 from 76 till a few years ago it was always fun watching them play Grey Bloem Under 16A in those days as they played Queens 4th team most years they would win with ease but the odd year Queens 4th would be full of Grade 12 who were good but who were never going to be 1st or 2nd team material and sometimes had packs the same size as the firsts which was difficult for Grey ask Rugbyfan he was in one of those Under16A Grey teams that came un stuck against Queens.
@Queenian: Swifts were the “gentlemans” club in Uitenhage..Did you get to play Old Collegians?…The Rose was a popular watering hole for the locals..in those years I was a student and only on a rare occasion when on holiday did I venture into the Rose…but then always with a well known local at my side!
@Queenian: You had no hope based on those stats….Hahahahaha!!!
@BoishaaiPa: We were lucky we never played those guys you mentioned.
I can tell you that playing on the Rec against Queens in 1982 was no fun as a 15 year old turning 16 for the Thirds.
Did it kill me? No!!!!
It taught me what being tough and fronting up is about.
We need to stop babying our kids, half the injuries etc today is cos kids are a bunch of whussies who think big gymed up muscles make them tough.
@kcman: Flip i was born on the 31 Dec no wonder i only got to 4th team odds were against me.
My youngster started school a year too early meaning he was in class with boys a year older than him. When we sat and thought out his high school path we realised that he would spend 2 years in the U13 age group and always be in class with boys playing an age group above him. Another downside is that he would have had only had his matric year as an ‘open’ player. To say nothing of the fact that his emotional and academic maturity was far behind his peers. We took the bold decision to make him repeat Grade 7 to get into synch with his age group at high school. Considering how he is doing now it turns out in retrospect that this was the best decision we ever made for him.
@BoishaaiPa: Hey that reminds me playing for Crusanders 3 team against Swifts in Uitenhage in the 86 the one Swifts player asked me hey boet when were you born i said 64 he said foxx i was already married then. You had to be a talented tackler against them when you tackled one of those dudes you had to get away from him in about 1 second flat other wise you got a fist in your mouth. Anyway by the second half they were so unfit you just ran around them. At least the drinks at the Rose and Shamrock afterwards were good.
@CyndiAtRugby: I would not mind doing that research except I know they changed the age-groups somewhere along the line.
When I was at school rugby age-groups ran from 01 Jul – 30 Jun, so if you were born in July back then it would be the equivalent of being born in January now. It worked the same way for going to school back then. If you were 6 by 01 July, you went to class 1. So half the class was still 5 years old when school started.
The exact date of when the calendar year started being used in school rugby is therefore important for the study to be successful
@kcman: Yip..not like in our days hey!…We did noy play u/16 either and I had to play as 16 year old (fortunatly my birthday is in March so I am one of the lucky ones!) against the seccies from Otto Du Plessis (I Think their players were all over 21 in any case)…Cilliers, Bergsig, Daniel Pienaar, Despatch, PE Tech etc etc…I remember playing a game against Otto were I went for a toss coin and the opposing captain had his son in his arms!…
@beet: @Pedantic: Any idea whether this is why some British schools field ‘half age teams’. I.e. they will have U16 and U16 1/2?
Shame my poor child is right at the end of the year.
It would be interesting to see when the birthday were for various top rugby players.
@Pedantic: Eeek! I see this study was conducted in the 1983-84 Ice Hockey season which makes it a bit outdated.
@Pedantic: Thanks. I think that is worth blogging. Very interesting that the advantage derived at a young age has such a significant impact after school as well
The kids are just plain soft nowadays, simple and true.
@kcman: You sound like those ads during varsity cup breaks!..
I get it that weight limits wont work either. I just think if the player is physically up to it he should be allowed to play…
So that is why I had no talent.
@beet: @AllBlack
A rough extract from Tim Goodenough’s book “Raising Talent” – a brilliant book for any junior coach to read:
Roger Barnsley did a study on all elite ice hockey players in Canada:
40% born between January & March
30% born between April & June
20% born between July & September
10% born between October & December
He concluded that athletes identified with talent early on were given extra training, selected for regional/ provincial teams and ultimately exposed to better coaching.
So effectively these kids get a few extra hours of quality training each week and develop a mindset that they are superior athletes.
Being born late in the year is a big setback for young athletes in all codes.
@beet: There have been extensive studies on this phenomena. A kid who is born in the 1st 3 months of the year has been proven to have a marked advantage over a kid born near the end of the year. The stats that I was given were staggering. Something like 90% of all top sportsmen are born early in the year. It starts at U10 level and then gets progressively worse. The better coaching for the better teams as juniors is a huge influence. There are of course the exceptions to the rule but as mentioned, the stats are staggering.
Kingswood College has 220 boys. We field 11 rugby teams and 10 hockey teams for the boys. Many of the boys play hockey and rugby. This ruling will seriously affect our open rugby division with depth. It will mean that our 3th and 4th rugby teams will battle to be competitive.
On the Bridging Year front, not one boy is recruited to come and play rugby, they arrive at Kingswood for reasons chosen by themselves, ie. improving matric marks etc. Back in the 90’s we might have openly recruited boys but this is no longer the case. All our recruiting is done at Grade 8 and Grade 9. We might not have the biggest school or be the greatest rugby school around but we do offer our boys the finest facilities and if they want to achieve, they will.
@beet: 100%,thats whats holding Selborne back,old coaches are just going throw the motions and stubbornley refuse to move over,they have done good work in the past,but we all get old,
Off topic, congrats to HTS Drostdy for turning 110 years old today!
I think its important to look at rugby culture in a region and also the rugby orientation of a school.
A lot of the time we refer to the Old Boys etc being the driving force behind the schools but at the end of the day at every school its the headmasters and teachers that work there everyday, sometimes for 10 years or longer, who play the vital role in shaping the schools fortunes. Even in a school that is not rugby orientated, a motivated coach can do wonders.
@rugbyfan: Agreed. Similarly Boland Landbou only has about 360 pupils but has 16 teams on the pitch every Saturday. Maybe not offering alternative hippy sports like hockey helps
other side of the coin. Paarl Gym dont have the amount of boys compared to the other big rugby schools in SA. Obvious they wont have the depth comparing but one thing they have been great is to identify their young talent and leaders and pushing them a year earlier to the first team. Last year they push plenty, did great and will reap the rewards this year. What is the thoughts in the smaller schools. If you have a brilliant u15/16 player , why would you keep him back? He may struggle in the first year but he sure will be the star player after that.
@beet: I heard a comment the other day from a parent from a school which is say second tier who said there school does not have enough kids to have Under16 age group which is rubbish look at a school like Marlow it only has 256 kids in the whole school and they have a under 16 age group and last year had a under 16a team that must have ranked in the top 5 in the country with ease so i would suggest that all school be forced to run this age group.
@Westers:
I know that in 2010 and 2012 DHS and Westville U14s played each other quite a few times in filler fixtures. Our U14E side last year must have played you 3 times in the least most of which were mid-week games to accomodate for WBHS who would be playing against a Kearsney of Northwood for example on that weekend
@Grasshopper, or don’t get games.
In 2011 Westville and Glenwood had quite a few filler fixtures against each other when playing the Tier 2 schools. Last year, none that i know of. Maybe the tit-for-tat was being played out last year unbeknown to us.
Glenwood and Westville need to patch their differences URGENTLY for the sake of the boys and get back to playing the great game.
@Grasshopper:
True. But when I plaayed we barely got beaten and I got gatvol after 3-4 years. Didn’t even play in matric.
At that time Glenwood was just another win. A fantastic occasion but just another victory.
@Horsie, it only gets boring and repetitive when you lose every week
Loss of interest also plays a huge part in quitting rugby. Its so exciting and new at grade 8 level for most but might be quite boring and repetetive in Grade 10
@beet: I have never coached rugby but have done a lot of coaching in water sports and the differences were very stark. In lifesaving the cut-off age is October, so a kid born on 1st October (eeisch, I think .. might have been 1 September .. no matter) in U10 has a massive advantage over a kid born in July the following year. They are more easily coached from the ability to grasp the idea’s, they are 10% stronger, 10% more able to think on their feet rather than just follow instructions where the situation might need independent thought. From U16 to U18 it is no less a step. A kid might be 16+1 day, against a kid who is 18- 1 day. That is as near as dammit to 2 years. That’s no gap, that’s possibly the Grand Canyon. Some younger kids can make the jump, many can’t, and it is where you see the rationale behind the rulings. There are obvious exceptions, like the Doops from Kearsney, kids like Matt Jackson (Westville – ex-DPHS), all really big kids and mature beyond their years.
No one rule going to fit all but I think the age-group rule is a good one as a base. Rather be strict on that than try to change the scrum rules to compensate.
@beet, I think you are right that numbers start to drop, even in the Tier 1 schools. I know of quite a few boys at Westville who dropped rugby at lower levels of U16 because they struggle to get game time each week.
It would be better for the Tier 2 schools to combine fixtures (not teams) with another Tier 2 school on weekends where they play the Tier 1 schools. Port Natal do this very succesfully with Voortrekker when they play Westville each year.
@Gungets Tuft: Those are very interesting observations about the ages. Outsiders like myself are so programmed into believing that each age-group equals a year, yet within a particular age-group, the kids themselves can easily be separated in age by 8-9 months, which is a lot.
I actually wonder if sports studies exist on the difference 9 months makes. I imagine that between u14 and u15, is where the variations will be greatest.
@Westers: I’ll try get feedback from someone with Tier-2 history experience but I suspect it’s along the lines of rugby not being compulsory, which allows those not interested to drop out.
I think if you monitor Tier 1 schools closely you see a similar pattern. The likes of College, Westville and Glenwood can field many u14 teams but don’t necessarily see that doubling effect in their open age-group.
@beet, Does this mean the tier two schools are going to get special clearance to let all their U16 boys play U18.
I still don’t understand why if they have an U14 and U15 age group they can’t still have an U16 age group. Why do they combine U16 with their U18’s. I thought this was a bit odd when Westville played George Campbell last year.
Last year Westville U16’s played GC open teams. This year they will not be able to because they may contain U18’s.
@PaarlBok: I agree – my kid’s birthdays are 2 days apart (we blame it on the timeshare) in May. My daughter we had to hold back sue to Kader Asmal passing his dof law about starting age. My son we deliberately held back and we are glad we did. Kids in his class 6-8 months younger than his struggle in all areas, not the least when they hit puberty and the younger oke is still having knack-jumps in Grade 10
Age also brings awareness, you will see older athletes (size notwithstanding) that are faster, more balanced than the okes 8 months younger – even in Gr 10.
@Westers: An u16 player needs special clearance to play u18 but cannot play u19 under any circumstances.
In all age groups from u10 to u16, boys can play 1 age-group up eg u14 can play u15.
But at last school level a boy can play 2 age-groups up. u17 can play u19 and an u16 can play u18.
@beet, The regulations are very difficult to follow but I understood that an U16 player can not play two years up – therefore no U16 can play U18.
Have I mis-understood this regulation? It’s possible.
@Playa: no,but you have to draw the line somewhere,and there is a league for them to play in , and has the added benefit of excluding post matrics,win win all round,
@QC86: I hear and understand the argument for 16 year olds playing in open sides.Is there such a big difference between a 19 year old and an 18 year old though?
@PaarlBok: thats great ,but you must understand now that come grade12 he will play club rugby,i would do the same as you,no issue
@Gungets Tuft: Remember that, a year at 6 ot 7 makes a massive differense for school readiness. If my kids birthday is 30 November I’ll rather send him one year later to make sure he fits in. Post Matrix is something totally different and something I understand fully.
@Grasshopper: you said that alot better than me thanx,thats what i meant
@BoishaaiPa: i dont think it is a weight issue,boys of roughly the same age will have roughly the same skelital strength or bone strength,and to me that is the important issue ,but injuries still happen,but thats the nature of the game,a scrummie will always be 20kgs less than a prop,if not more,so do you have a minimum weight per position?
@Boishaaipa, it’s got less to do with weight and more to do muscle mass and maturity. There are plenty of plump Under16 props out there weighing 100kg but not many with under 20% bodyfat. I weigh the same as Schalk Burger but he will run right over me and I will get injured. A 100kg 1st team 18 year old prop is far stronger than a 15 year old 100kg prop. The former would maul the latter. I get your point though, but weight categories would spoil the uniqueness of the sport. We might as well change it to rugby league then where everyone is of a similar size. For me it’s got to do with age and physical maturity levels
As a father of an U16 rugby playing son , i commend the ruling .Watching the boys progress from U14 , in grade 8 to U16 in grade 10 , the progression in size, speed , physicality is huge . That same step up from U16 to opens is also huge . The young boys frame , muscle size and strength changes dramatically in one year . To put it into perspective . Take an U14 boy and put him into the U16 age group . Same applies for an u16 player , playing opens . Great ruling based on the safety of our boys !
The norm have always been that boys turn 18 in their matric year i.e. they were 6 years old when going to school turning 7 in their Grade 1 year. There will alwys be exceptions that will be a couple of months older and have always been like that. What is the difference between a 17 year old winger of 60Kg and a 16 year old of 70Kgs?…The 60Kg player is allowed to play with the big boys, while the 70Kg player is not?..How does that work? Or a 17 year old 95Kg prop vs a 16 year old 100kg prop?..Age is irrelevant when it comes to this. They should rather have a minimum weight for playing u/19 rugby…
@QC86: There will be no hiding under my watch…not at the Graveyard at least!
@Playa: you are seeing the light about that ODU AREN’T YOU,i have the same dates as you,DALE hiding on the 18th of MAY and then again on the 3rd of August
@Queenian: The website’s been pretty slack, I tell you.I am unhappy about it. Seems to be a lot of egos involved in it.I have suggested countless times that it be done properly, no one seems to be bothered.Too many old school folk on that ODU committee.Really poor show.
@QC86: Im not sure why they have that. The Dale fixture list says we play Selborne at reunion on 18 May and the return game in EL on 3 August.I hope it’s an omission on the website.I havent heard anything about one of the games being cancelled.
@Playa: Whats up with the Dale Website went in there just now they still show the 2011 rugby team and nothing else not a good advert for your great school
there is a currie cup comp for u19s,if you turn 19 in a year you move on,that will stop alot of imports,if you start school late do the maths and live with it,no grey area here in my mind
@badboy: Yes they were really good everybody in the EC is saying 2014 will be Grey PE year but i think Marlow might just steal there thunder.
@Playa: Why acording to Selborne,s fixture list for this year do they have only one Dale game?
@beet: The post matric issue has never been a real problem amongst EC schools.For a time, Dale and Kingswood were notorious for using post matrics.Even when Dale stopped, KC continued (and actually used a lot of Old Dalians as post matrics). I guess it is a product of having to compete with 2 other boys’ schools (St Andrews and Graeme) for numbers, with Grey PE just 150km away. In KC’s defence, I cannot say that in the past the PMs they have used made a helluva difference in the quality f their sides. They were not better/worse off.Maybe gave the other boys a mental boost that’s all.
I know a lot of guys who did post matric at KC in the 90s/early 2000s, and they were mostly there to improve their matric results. And so happened to play rugby while there as well.
But, no, I am not in favour of PMs being used by schools…ok, I am on the fence on this one. It depends on the school, and the reasons thereof.But also, I have absolutely no issues with a boy who is a year younger than his class and doing post matric in the year he turns 18.
@Queenian: I saw Marlow Under 16A last year they were really big and strong and 2013/14 are going to be big years for them i 2014 they will beat most people.
@beet: Anyway Kingswood start there year against Marlow who have the basis of a very good team so lets see if they can get past the Merino Farmers first.
@beet: I suppose this was never a issue to Queens say 30 years ago as the post matrics did not have as big an affect and Queens had 450 boarders alone then and the other schools could not compete. That was one of the reason Queens stopped playing them and started playing Marlow again.
The other thing we must watch in 2014 is Marlow they will be super hot they will have a Super15 pack and quick backs.
Sorry not Woodridge Kingswood
@beet: Ye Kingswood have always used Post Matric which has helped them alot i still dont think it is right. I do think what they trying to do is all there old rivals back and by doing this they needed some depth to be competive. They have historically used alot of Dale boys and some Queens boys for this. I do know that they have got 8 Dale boys from 2012 i think 2 Under 13,s 3 Under 14,s 1 Under 15 and 1 Grade 11 and one post Matric which i think has alot about the Young Ranger chap who left Dale to teach at Woodridge. There game against Queens this year will be close, Queens have a young side and will battle in the City of Kings.
Then again all St Andrews have done is just poach Queens boys at a lot younger age group so i am not sure which is worse.
@Queenian: What is the feeling on the ground about Kingswood’s post-matric which they call a bridging year? Kingswood is a tiny school numerically. In a manner they are leveling the playing fields a little. Queens play them this year.
@rugbyfan: Now speaking about poaching my son played against a private school the other day in Under13A cricket by the following Wed two of the boys had been offered full scholarships to attend that school which is shocking at least both turned it down.
@Grasshopper: George Campbell had 4 regular u19s in their team last year, none of them came close to weighing 100kgs.
I agree that the post-matric was totally wrong and I’m glad it has been made away with. The PMs were the equivalent of contracted players, who specifically did PM to advance their sports causes. Often they arrived from other schools which made matters worse. At Govt schools back then, boys would repeat matric for the same reasons which also was not good. However these days no one stays in school for longer than they absolutely have to. The worst thing that can happen to a player who is serious about rugby, is having to be u19 in matric. Not only can he not play CW, but he loses out a vital year of u19 training and conditioning at a rugby institute. Probably 99% of players who are u20 their first year out of school don’t make it in rugby. The Sharks are going to have to bend over backwards to make sure Cameron Wright stays on track because he is immensely talented and you wont find a single experienced rugby institute coach who agrees with the decision to repeat a year at school if it can be avoided.
@rugbyfan: Agree with you post matrics are a big no no!
I have know issue if a Under19 boy plays as long as he is not a post matric that i totally disagree with. Once a kid finishes school he must go out into the wild world and join the men.
I know that Tier-1 teams Kearsney, Michaelhouse and Glenwood each has at least one u16 player that they would have liked to consider for 1st XV duty but now cannot. Previously this was allowed. However in the past the decision was never taken lightly. Firstly it required a level – 2 IRB coach (credential might be slightly wrong) to give the boy clearance. Then there has to be consent from the parent or guardian as well. But there have been many instances of u16s playing against u19s. It’s obviously not advisable. Usually its only the big or gifted u16s that get promoted ahead of time anyway. Without being disrespectful to Tier-2, games are generally slower and the players are smaller. Add to this that any given team was always a combination of u16s,u17s,u18s and one or two u19s and there is an evening out process. Even within an age-group on its own like u15, with the fluctuations in size, strength and speed between players, an element of risk exists.
Efforts to improve safety are welcomed and appreciated, its just sad when the cost is exclusion of certain players, some of who only just missed the cut-off date of 01 January by a few days or weeks.
@ZnCoach: Remember that in 200/2001 the government also made a ruling that you were not allowed to start school unless you were turning 7 in that calendar year. I had to hold my daughter back a year – she turned 7 in May of the year she was forced to start. The next year was the same so you have a bunch of boys who will turn 18 in their matric year this year because of a government ruling.
@Queenian: Don’t get me wrong. My whole questioning is that is it any more dangerous having a 16 year old play against other 16 year olds, versus him playing with Under 19s? For example, there was a story here of a17 year old who died on the field after being tackled by another 17 year old.
What I am saying is that it is easier to control age bands, than to tackle the real problems where injuries are concerned, which are fatigue (these boys play too much sport nowadays), match fitness and conditioning, nutrition, rugby education, doping etc.
Yes, as a father, I would rather have my 16 year old son playing against other 16 year olds.But I don’t think he is any safer than he would be if he played against 18 year olds. I could be wrong, because this is not an educated opinion.
@Queenian: @Playa: I remember a boy playing for Grey 16B in my time getting badly hurt playing against Queens 6th team.
So they might have a point i also think that there was a kid in the WC got hurt in about 2005 playing for his first team and was only under16 if i remember correct he could never play again although this could also happen to a Under18 boy.
So who knows but i think its good.
I do know that a boy from one of the smalls schools in the Eastern Cape who was under 16 playing for his first team was badly hurt last year playing one of the big schools 2nd team far as i know he only was able to walk again a few weeks ago so maybe they have a point.
@Queenian: Yep! That’s a tough situation. Now that the law is in place, they cannot take that risk as the school will be liable. They have to abide.
@Playa: This will make it very interesting for smaller schools maybe they will just ignore it but would not want to be in there shoes if a Under16 boy plays 1st and gets badly hurt
There really isnt a difference between an 18 and 19 year old. Jeez, some 16 year olds are so bulked up, they look 18 themselves. This is not a fair ruling by any means.
And dare I ask…is there any empirical evidence of 16 year olds suffering major injuries while playing in an Under 19 game? What is the basis of this?
This stands to stifle the little rugby left in smaller schools. It will also unintentional exacerbate the growing problem of poaching.
P.S. I am not implying that there needs to be injuries in order for law changes to be made.Prevention is always better than cure.But my view is that this is a classic case of trying to fix something that is not broken.
Goodness me- is there really such a difference between an 18yr and a 19 yr old boy. Come on Grasshopper, are you one of those surfers who surf with a life jacket on?
@Paarlbok I agree with you on that, many parents are having there kids start school at 7 instead of 5 or 6 as was the case 10-20 years ago, why must a boy be discriminated against simply because he is u19? I agree that in any law/rule that is made people will try exploit it but that’s the minority.
We also must be aware that a lot of kids are older in high school now simply because of not being able to go to schools at the correct age.
I feel for the Tier2 schools but a rule needed to be made in order to protect the players welfare and safety, especially the way boys are training etc.
All u19s isnt just post matrics. Many parents will hold their kids back when their birthday is late in the year (Nov/Dec) when they rather try and play safe to put them in school. I’ll never understand the post matrix method but I surely can understand the 7 year olds in grade1 for parents. What about this kids now when they get to matrix. Dont think its fair to them.
@Beet, so it was OK for George Campbell to field about 6 under 19’s last year playing against some 16 and 17 year olds? I was one of those schoolboy players who was 17 in matric turning 18 in the first year out of school who had to play against post matrics, it was just not fair really. Those 18/19 year olds were far bigger. Anyway, let’s agree to disagree. I also think it’s right that Under16’s (so 15 year olds) are protected against playing boys 3 or 4 years their senior as this is where injury can occur. It’s like a schoolboy playing against an Under21…..
@Grasshopper: I disagree Hopper. School rugby is intended for schoolboys. Proper club rugby is for post-school players.
The ruling made by SARU was to prevent u16s playing u19 games and the small schools had to respond to this in order to keep rugby alive. They were forced into this decision. No one complained about u19s.
The very fact that CW is now under-18 has gone a long way to removing the “post-matric” type rugby player from hanging around. U19 players make up a small minority and u19s in small schools generally are not ambitious recruits or those that stayed back a year just for the sake of rugby. They are bona fide students, who are victims of SARU’s ruling.
All schools rugby should be Under18 with Under19’s playing club. Craven Week is Under18 so why should schools be able to bolster their sides with Under19’s. I get the whole started school late, missed a year, failed a year, but physically that extra year makes a huge difference…..good ruling.