The KwaZulu-Natal Rugby Union High School structure for 2013
| EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Chairman | Noel Ingle | George Campbell |
| Secretary | Dean Moodley | Kearsney |
| Members | ||
| Member / Vice Chairman | Gerald Pyoos | Clifton |
| Member | Pius Mnikathi | |
| Member | Kevin Smith | Kearsney |
| Member | Ryno Combrinck | Michaelhouse |
| Member | Garth Giles | The Sharks (KZNRU) |
| Member | Quentin Reynolds | The Sharks (KZNRU) |
| TEAM OFFICIALS: | ||
| CRAVEN WEEK |
||
| Coach | Barend Steyn | Kearsney |
| Assistant Coach | Sean Erasmus | Glenwood |
| Manager | Dean Moodley | Kearsney |
| Physio | Brent Grimsley | Kearsney |
| ACADEMY WEEK | ||
| Coach | Rudi Dames | Glenwood |
| Assistant Coach | Antonie Prinsloo | George Campbell |
| Manager | Nhlanhla Bulose | Northwood |
| Physio | TBA | |
| KZN COUNTRY DISTRICTS | ||
| Coach | Deon Gericke | St Charles |
| Assistant Coach | Ryan Kyle | Creston College |
| Manager | Mandla Mtshali | |
| Medic | Andre Pelser | |
| GRANT KHOMO | ||
| Coach | Grant Bell | Westville |
| Assistant Coach | Piet Snyman | Maritzburg College |
| Manager | Sibs Ncamane | |
| Physio | Jaco Ras | |
| SEVENS | ||
| Coach | Ryno Combrink | Michaelhouse |
| Coach | Francois Lubbe | Kearsney |
| SELECTORS: | ||
| SELECTORS – UNDER 18 | ||
| Convenor | Garth Giles | The Sharks (KZNRU) |
| Coach/Selector | Barend Steyn | Kearsney |
| Coach/Selector | Rudi Dames | Glenwood |
| Coach/Selector | Deon Gericke | St Charles |
| Selector | Quintin Reynolds | The Sharks (KZNRU) |
| Selector | Gerald Pyoos | Clifton |
| Selector | Ryno Combrinck | Michaelhouse |
| Selector | Tony Richter | Hilton |
| SELECTORS – UNDER 16 | ||
| Convenor | Bruce Collocott | Maritzburg College |
| Coach/Selector | Grant Bell | Westville |
| Coach/Selector | Piet Snyman | Maritzburg College |
| Selector | R. Norris | Westville |
| Selector | Steve La Marque | Glenwood |
| Selector | P. Venter | Hilton |
[…] terms of Craven Week, the selectors and executive committee has been published on this website:http://schoolboyrugby.co.za/blog/?p=3869 It points to the fact that Sean is not a selector nor is he the head coach. He has opinions that […]
@Star: Ya, the 7’s team did well, they had many bigger boys and one would have thought they would struggle against the smaller, more nimble players from the other provinces.
We do need to get behind the side who will represent at CW – regardless of whether or not we are unhappy about the number of boys getting chosen from our past schools.
It is about time the Sharks stick their hand’s up at CW and really need to perform this year. The exciting aspect of this years team, is that they have some physical specimans in the pack, the loose forwards in particular will hold their own against any of the unions – if we can just find a front row who can compete with the likes of the Bulls and WP in terms of fronting up, hitting rucks etc the Sharks will do well.
Let’s just hope the right players make it through today’s trials
@ Meadows- All Black is right in that there was not one MC boy in the 2012 team which did raise eyebrows bearing in mind they had just won the provincial tournament. However of the 5 MHS boys 3 were CW incumbents ( Moon,Mvelase and Anderson) and the school was having a strong season. GW had strong players like Swart,Vermaak ,Makasi and Mkhabela while Els from Westville and Schramm from Kearsney added great value. Swart and Moon had also played the year before. There was really nothing wrong with the team from an objective point of view and they were knocked out of the finals by a technicality. I think we should all now get behind our boys ( CW,Academy and GK) and hope that the selectors have got the big picture right. After all it is all about the pudding and the eating thereof
@beet: There are often other issues with 7’s and the composition of the team that goes to the provincial tournament.
– some of the schools dont take 7’s seriously
– other summer sports have claims on players by the time of the inter provincial tournament
– some boys in their matric year choose to focus on their final exams by that time.
In 2007 and 2008 MHS won the interschools 7’s by a country mile – not unexpectedly with 5 Craven Week backs in each side – but in both years for some of the reasons noted above only one or two of those players were availble for the KZN 7’s team. In 07 for example Pat Lambie and the Cronje twins had cricket commitments.
@RBugger: MC won the provincial 7’s tournament. How many reps did they have in the side? Makes interesting reading.
@beet : Beet, the 7’s side did very well last year – they drew with the valke and did not go through to the finals only because the valke scored first.
Surely you can’t be saying that the selection process for the 7’s was wrong?
@beet: I agree that the process is flawed on several levels and that is is particularly difficult, if not impossible, for a player from a second or third tier school to get noticed never mind selected however talented.
A few trials games playing with pick up combinations are hardly an ideal basis for selection. if you play behind a weak pack or have a poor 9 or 10 etc you will have a difficult time as an outside back for eg proving anything at a trials game.
I dont know about the 7’s side – email me and let me know.
@McCulleys Workshop: I emailed you
@McCulleys Workshop: ah that must be Potgieter, wondered where he was. Big lad at 120kg plus, was in the 1st team squad at Kearsney and I think coming back from injury, could be wrong. He should be in the 1st to add bulk to the front row….
@Grasshopper: Grassy, I thought your 2nd team No 3 this last weekend was big and strong, very good round the park. Why is he not in the 1st side?
Ok people, we all agree too many Glenwood players in the squads, it’s an over beaten drum now. Lets see what the final squads are and comment then, I’ll put a bet that 20 of the Glenwood players won’t make a side. I’m guessing 5 or 6 in each squad of 22…..
@GreenBlooded: Klaargepraat, they are not quality, obviously the bulk of the 1st team are, but the world beating 2nd’s were not spectacular this last weekend, although the weather didn’t allow for much of a display of talent. I thought the GW no 3 and 5 were unlucky to not be in the first side. Buy there by merit over and above other 2nd team players, I think not. The Hilton 2nds lock was also good on the day and big.
@meadows: I think it would be foolish to disrespect the coaches that serve as part of the selection panel in terms of the wealth of experience they bring to the table as well as their ability to spot talent and attention must be given to the strict selection criteria that sometimes ties their hands in terms of rewarding all the best players around BUT when you say a motive of trials is for players to play themselves into contention, then the process must genuinely afford those contenders both opportunities being 1)
to compete and
2)to be selected
With regards to another point raised by you, without going into detail the composition of the last year’s KZN Sevens team serves as a reminder that the selection system has to always be kept in check.
@beet: @star:
There will always be controversy in the selection process. There are inevitably marginal calls as well as the added complication of trying to comply with the quota requirements which has often resulted in a deserving player missing out when the squad is finalised. In one year I can recall a front row player being included who was completely out of his depth and was fortunate not to suffer serious injury.
I believe that the selectors largely are solid rugby men who do the best job that they can in what is undoubtedly a less than perfect system. Most of them have been involved for some time and if the makeup of the teams is analysed it does vary considerably from year to year.
When Tony Richter and Barend Steyn coached the 2007 and 2008 sides neither Hilton nor Kearsney had any representation with those teams dominated by MHS and Westville in 07 and MHS and Glenwood in 08. Prior to that in 2005 and 2006 Ryno Combrinck from MHS was the CW coach and the 2006 side had one MHS player. The 2005 side had three – one of whom, Pat Cilliers, is now a Springbok and another, Mike Rhodes, is a Super Rugby player. Garth Giles is a Hilton old boy and Hilton have had very few Craven Week reps in recent times.
The trials to my mind are primarily an opportunity for players to either play themselves into or out of contention. The bulk of the squad is identified well ahead of trials and trials present an opportunity to finesse, consider combinations, expose some players shortcomings and on the odd occasion spot an exceptional talent from left field. Pat Lambie, by way of example, was injured and could not play at trials in 2008 but as the incumbent SA Schools fullback was probably the first name on the team sheet that year.
@RBugger: Yep Jaco Coetzee is a great player, he has it all skill, speed and power, not small either at 187/95kg for a 16 year old. He might grow a bit too in the next year. Agreed Schramm would probably pip him this year due to extra size and experience. On the prop front Kenny Van Niekerk is also putting his hand up with great loose play, however again only 17 and has a year in the 1st team to build size and experience (183/104kg). Tredoux too in the same bracket, not just Craven Week material yet (180/110kg). These 3 with Percy Mngadi, Kevin du Randt, Khanyile, Ruben Fouche, Curtis Jonas and Morne Joubert will provide the spine of Glenwood for 2014. Not sure if Spam Ncgobo and Ntokozo Vidima re grade 11 or 12. Again on the prop front Hollenstein from MHS should be there and Jackson, but hey ho……
@RBugger: The 3 prop positions are definitely up for grabs and we are in a position to pick taller props this year than in the last few years.
Personally I think that between Holenstein and Chidoma (Northwood confirmed that he was left out of the trials list by mistake), one or both of them should get selected at loosehead. It might be preferable to pick 2 tightheads tho and here it’s an open race. I think candidates from Westville, Kearsney, College perhaps even Northwood all stand a chance.
@star: It just illustrates a weakness in the selection system. If someone could have been at KERF in an official capacity he could have made a note to ensure Jackson gets included at trials ahead of a 3rd team player.
I wanted to suggest that with South Durban and PMB only having 1 Tier 1 team each, the Highways and Midlands should hold trials first and a group nearly players that do not make it, should be offered a 2nd opportunity at South Durban (Highways) and PMB (Midlands) a week later but it occurred to me that there are only 15 or so places available in South Durban of which Glenwood occupies 14 spots. I would like to know then who calls the shots to include the other 18 Glenwood players in other trial teams. It looks like 6 of those 18 players are PDPs so that reduces it to 12.
I expect Glenwood to have more reps because of them being the dominant team in their region and because they are in a position to help with the quota stats. But as you mentioned we now have a situation with more 2nd team Glenwood players than 1st team players from Hilton or Michaelhouse, Kearsney and Westville for that matter
@Grasshopper – I have seen the Glenwood 8 play and am impressed with him, both size and skill etc. However and I hope this does not come across bias, Schramm for Kearsney is my first choice at 8 – a few reasons, he stands 192cm and weighs in at 102kg – he is very athletic, fantastic ball skills and a real asset in the lineout. I feel Coetzee will be a real force next year. Having said that, if the Sharks had to play the Doops at 4 and 5, you could possibly play Coetzee at 6 – The Glenwood 7 is fantastic! It would be a dynamic loose trio with him, Coetzee and then Schramm at 8.
In terms of front row, I have not seen anyone who can be considered brilliant, I saw Hollenstein against Kearsney and heard he was a monster – he may be in size, but he did not do much against Moloi in the scrum and was not that notable around the field.
Glenwood hooker looks good, big and physical! But I just do not see the props who will put fear into the opposition?
Anyone out there know of any great school boy props in Natal?
@Grasshopper: Auditor?!?!?!?!?! {shudder} .. eeisch, never get clean after that. My definition of an auditor – the oke that strides out onto the battlefield after the war has been lost and bayonets the wounded.
@ Grassy- Jackson cannot be considered as he has not been invited to the final trials.Is that not an opportunity wasted?. I think you had him in your KERF dream team and was one of the reasons why the game against Framesby turned in our favor. Hilton has 50% less reps than your 2nd team but almost beat your Ist team away from home. This has nothing to do with being a non supporter of GW but just asking the obvious questions.(ala Guptagate
) And if Westville parents were also pushing boundaries at the trials then surely they must be dealt with as well. On a different note I think it was Greenblooded that said that the first GW class consisted of 26 boys. I wonder if there was a photo supported by the names of the boys.
@RBugger: Agreed, but Paarl Gim is in another league altogether, I reckon they could probably represent WP and do well. We do need to get a big competitive pack so yes bring in the Doops at lock if needs be to add bulk and pace, 1,96/108kg and 1.94/110kg does this. I think a big hooker like Glenwood’s Van Vuuren (185/98kg) helps too. Schramm or Coetzee at 8 also adds some size. Do we have any big props, well I rated Jackson from Westville, a real monster and quite mobile. He could be used for the first 60 to ‘soften’ up the opposition but it seems Westville prefer smaller more mobile props. Just having those 5 would give us some power up front…
It really does not matter how many boys go to trials, it is about getting the best squad together to go to CW. The Sharks have been terrible at CW over the years, the only shining light was there victory over the Cheetahs, who were also poor. The truth is, Glenwood are a decent side but by no means great – they got a good hiding from Paarl Gim and Garsfontein, representing WP and the Bulls respectively. Kearsney are in the same boat, they have a few great players – Schramm at 8, the Doops at 5/6/7, Reece Edwards at 9 and Tedder at 10, but they also got a hiding from Paarl Gim. I feel the biggest weak-ness comes in the tight 5, so much so, that I would even consider playing both Doops at lock – I feel this would greatly add to the teams physicality and even mobilty.
@Pedantic: Interesting note the split of which schools last years U16’s came from. If there was bias, one would have to assume the selectors were from Westville, College, GW, Hilton and DHS. Oh wait – sorry just realised that, with the exception of DHS, they were all selectors (the panel hasn’t changed from last year).
Just saying
@Scrum Doctor: Just imagine the sort of bias that happened back in the day before the professional era. Let’s just say Glenwood didn’t have as many as they should have in Natal Schools team back in the day because older more established schools got the majority, not saying who but you can work it out. It’s called swings and roundabouts, Glenwood are going through a phase when more kids are being picked. Anyway, the proof is in the provincial pudding so the conversion of these kids into professional players. All the schools are producing more than they did in the past, Westville, College and Glenwood well represented in the Sharks teams…
@Scrum Doctor: I guess you’re not keen on the idea of us including the selectors cell. no’s and home addresses in the table above then
I heard from a big-time scout back in March that his Union had already completed 70% of their acquisitions for 2013 by then. Probably 100% by now. I don’t think any of the big RU’s wait for CW anymore.
But who is the most guilty school of wrong-doing?
Jokes!
How to fix the perceived problems of unfairness going forward is more important.
Being a selector is a thankless task – someone always has a reason why you overlooked a player or sected the wrong player but I guess that is part of life . Historically certain schools seem to get preference but that is only an opionion . What really concerned me was the active lobbying going on from certain fathers who are active in club rugby circles at Westville the other day – I thought the selectors area was out of bounds to non selectors ! I guess the results will be available for all to see but it is clear that some players from certain schools are more equal than others. Lets hope they select the best possible team and also select on performance and not reputation ! Fortunately a Craven Week cap is not absolutely vital to a professional career but it certainly helps !!
@star: You see it’s really a Glenwood thing for non Glenwood supporters, no matter how open and transparent the system the non Glenwood supporters kick up a fuss. What they should do is exclude all Glenwood players completely and let them make their own way via the provincial academies in senior rugby. That will keep everybody happy and hopefully quiet. Barend Steyn is the coach surely he gets the kids he wants…….
To me this will be an exercise in horse trading and posturing. It should be about uncovering raw talent and seeing how boys play and respond to different combinations and structures. I think a guy like Buthelezi from Westville who was a GK last year and is now starting for the Ists should be there ahead of 17 2nd and 3rd team players from GW. How can these boys be first choice at CW when they are not at their own school. Sure there might be one or 2 that could be brought through but a whole team . Not too sure about that. And surely Rudi and Sean know what they have to offer as they are the coaches at GW.Nothing really to uncover there. Selectors who are also coaches defintely are more influential at the start and close of business and certainly more than a figurehead that is parachuted in at the last minute.
@Grasshopper: That’s a great idea.
Another option is to ask all tier one school coaches to select a team without their own players, so you have 10 team sheets submitted and then from there the best in each position is selected based on majority and the opinion of 10 coaches who see the games every week. That way it’s democratic and non biased, probably get it audited by an auditor so it can be trusted.
Dhs and college if possible?
@beet: or a mix a la GreenBlooded?
@ruggaman: What school?
@beet: Beet how do I get a jersey next to my name?
@Pedantic: Very good observation.
Later development of players aside, to continue on my controversial theme, a former government school coach who was part of a successful coaching team, told me a few years back that the private schools controlled the u18 selection process. His opinion. Said I must not quote him tho.
Look at which teams have done well at their respective weeks historically. U16’s have done well but U18’s have failed.
@Pedantic: Seems I was wrong. Thanks for putting that up. What was the Glenwood v westville score last year?
@GreenBlooded: True story here. People have talked about the College u16 fullback, you have probably seen him play a few times over the years. He comes from pedigree stock as well. So I know that the Bulls know who this kid is. Have know about him for some time. Have watched him play. I’ve overheard a prominent Sharks official who I expected to be a little more hands on given the line of work he is in, ask former MC parent at a club rugby game about the boy in a trying to ascertain basic info kind of way.
The benefit of going to school games is not limited to 1 game. A dedicated official like the Bulls have arrives early, watches several games incl. u15, u16 and 2nd XV to acquire intel on what the talent is like.
It definitely won’t be an easy task but festivals and tournaments like the one at George Campbell do help.
This season alone I have been able to watch Collegex3, Westvillex4 Glenwoodx8 Kearsneyx6 Hiltonx2 Michaelhousex2 Northwoodx2 DHSx1 George Campbellx1 . Even St Charles. This excludes the Damelin Nite Series and the Sharks Rugby Day. (brag brag brag or no life, no life, no life whichever way you wanna see it
)
A full time experienced coach doing this for a few years could get thru a lot of games and have a good idea ahead of trials IMHO. His entire focus at trials could shift to looking at CD and Tier 2 to fill gaps.
@Grasshopper: Glenwood had a very weighted representation for a few years but looks like they have also been drawing a short straw for the last couple years. Only 3 names on that list are Glenwood ones. 2 college, 2 westville all at u16 level. Surely those are the 3 schools that should have strongest rep? Nobody from dhs at all but selectors from Clifton and St Charles? How much tier 1 rugby do they watch week in and week out?
@ruggaman:
2012 U16 Team:
MC 6
GW 8
Westville 6
DHS 1
HIL 1
Interesting the lack of players from the privates in contrast to the U18 team of 2012.
@beet: Not pointing fingers, but an U18 Selector from Clifton?
Does he get around enough to know what is happening at U18 level, I am guessing he has responsibilities at Clifton sport and they are quite active. Would he get to any matches in Balgowan, Hilton or PMB?
Open to correction …
@beet: Agreed, as long as it stops the whole finger pointing at Glenwood, jeez it happens every year just because the assistant coach is Sean who has coached the KZN Under19’s in the past so affliated with the Sharks. I mean come on guys the decision makers there are from Kearsney and why would they be biased to Glenwood. Someone neutral but well know would be great, how about David Campese if the union could afford him?
@beet: Hundred cement!! That would be ideal although this guy would still be restricted to watching 1 match a week. There is also the possibility of recording each 1st team match an letting the guy watch the games that way.
@beet: agree with that 150%. The union and in particular junior teams I.e u19/u21 would gain so much by simply having someone appointed to go and watch the games, interact with players and coaches and basically show face. May promote individualistic rugby however so maybe better for him not to be too recognisable for the boys. Could wear a balaclava
@beet: Beet for the head selectors job
With regards to the selectors, I still believe that the convenor should be a younger experienced coach who is not affiliated to any KZN School. His job spec should be to go to high school games during the season and watch the boys in action. This would put him in an excellent position to make overriding calls on who to include in the teams.
Unfortunately the current convenor Garth is tied up with the Sharks. He has weekday responsibilities and on weekends he is more often than not away with the Vodacom Cup team. I go to a lot of games and I never see him around nor does anyone I talk to. So he invariably comes into the selection process cold. No fault of Garth’s, he is a very likeable Sharks man thru and thru having played for the team and dedicated much of his time towards coaching within the pro structures.
I compare this situation to numerous other scouts, agents, recruiters most of who do not work for the Sharks and are from outside KZN and who know our top players very well, simple because they have invested the time to watch them during the season.
None of these structures and processes are set in stone and from time to time hopefully they are reviewed to ensure that they are keeping pace with modern day requirements of the SBR game.
@GreenBlooded: Not saying that there isn’t fair representation across the board but to be fair where it really matters is u18 and like beet says it would be a lot more fair for one from each of these schools maybe to swap with one of the guys from the smaller schools who are much less likely to get the player quality for selection at u18 level?
Even in saying that it isn’t as if the u16 team last year was loaded with westville and college boys despite them being arguably the top 2 teams.
The u16 selectors seem to get it right far more often than the U18 fellows judging by results.
@GreenBlooded: It probably would be better if they tried to balance things out a bit more though. Move one Westville and MC selector from u16 to u18 and replace them with 2 from other schools on the u18 panel.
@ruggaman: I take it you don’t have an issue with the over-representation of these same 2 schools in the U16 setup then?
Not one westville or college official in the u18 selection process? Surely representation from 2 of the 3 strongest schools over the last 10 years is necessary in giving fair opportunities? Can think of a few players from those schools in particular that missed out on craven week selection last year. Hope this year is different as 1 win from 3 doesn’t exactly make one believe in the way the team is chosen as we surely had the players in the province last year to beat both the lions and EP.
Anyone have any insight on whether or not the selection panel gets reviewed as per results in any way?
OK so for the record: Glenwood have only ONE selector on the panel for U18 (and it isn’t Seam Erasmus). Those 32 Glenwood boys that made it must have been quality!!! Glenwood also have ONE selector on the U16 panel as opposed to 2 from Westville and 2 from College. Klaar gepraat!!
@NW_Knight: @star: @star: @TJ: Thanks, thanks, thanks, thanks, thanks
@Beet: Bulose is from NW
Best I STFU about representation from Maritzburg College for GK then.
@ Beet- R. Norris is from Westville.
R Norris- Westville
P Venter- Hilton
If anyone can please help fill in the gaps with regards to the missing schools of several officials on the list above, it would be much appreciated.