Given all the issues surrounding Craven Week and Grant Khomo selections that have surfaced in the last few days and which are basically a recurrence of the unsolved problems heard about every year, perhaps it’s time for high school rugby bodies around South Africa to address the manner in which they select players by coming up with a fresh new approach.
The Durban Rugby Sub Union (DRSU) is responsible for amongst other things youth (u14-u18) club rugby in their region. Below is their method followed for selecting teams to participate at last year’s prestigious Inter-provincial Tournament (IPT) for teams from different provinces. It has worked really well for them.
· CV’s for coaches and managers are called for at the end of May
· Coaches and managers for each age group will be appointed by mid to end June
· Each age group has a Head Coach, Assistant coach and Manager
· These coaches watch the games in their age group up until trials
· A week before trials, the coaching team nominates 30 players that they would like invited to trials – this list is not disclosed to clubs
· Each club can also nominate players from their club to go to trials
· The coaches list and the clubs lists are combined and players are invited to trials
· Trials are normally held at Varsity College
· Players are NOT allowed to wear any club colours at all – including socks
· Each player is allocated a number, which is written in indelible ink on both arms and both legs
· There are 5 independent selectors, with no affiliation and/or knowledge of any junior club rugby players (normally Sharks Academy lecturers or equivalent)
· They are generally specialists in positions (Front row, Locks & Loose Forwards, SH & FH, Wings and FB, Centres)
· There is a convenor (a senior DRSU person) who is in contact with the ref by radio
· All (including the person doing the chukkas) are cordoned off on the deck overlooking the field and may not talk to anybody (except the EXCO of the DRSU)
· Each selector is given a position specific sheet for each chukka. Here they record each players number, a rating out of 10 and comments.
· They may ask the convenor to make on-field changes
· At the end of the chukka, the sheets are handed back to the co-ordinator and the scores recorded.
· Once all chukkas have been completed (each player MUST play at least 2 chukkas), each players ratings are averaged (the total of their scores / number of chukkas played)
· Each position is then discussed with the selectors and DRSU coaches, with the players having the highest ratings selected. There is some latitude when it comes to the reserve positions, given that the DRSU coaches have watched the players over a number of games
· Teams are announced on the Website on the Monday or Tuesday (trials are normally Saturday and Sunday)
Finally, the identities of the selectors was only known to the Chairman up until their arrival at the trials venue on the day of trials – thus there was no chance of anyone punting for their player. The DSRU had absolutely no complaints last year about selection – something which in very uncommon when it comes to selections.
Independent selectors are definitely the way to go.
@CyndiAtRugby:@Gungets Tuft: We should put the flippin whole KZN under quarantine. Remember your first game at Craven week is against the Elite of the elite. You can’t give our boitjies the bug. We still need to be fit for the final. We’ll be watching you 8)
@CyndiAtRugby: It already has, 4 from Craven Week and 6 from Academy week are off.
It’s flu season, expect the worst.
@Gungets Tuft: If the boys are not back to full health they shouldn’t be playing. I have heard that some have been booked off for 10 days which could be due to the impact of the medication on their heart and kidneys if combined with sport.
I’m also not mad about playing against a team that may be carrying the ‘bug’ as the Kearsney boys could get sick too.
Can you imagine if this spreads to all the Craven week and Academy week boys too?
@therealrbugger: The flu epidemic is no rumour. Just dropped my son off, he is partly recovered from the bug that flattened them on the weekend, and the school is a war zone. My sources say 86 out of 300 in the BE have been sent home, all sick KZN boys are being sent home to make room in the sick bay for out-of-province boys, the SAN is full and there are still walking wounded. Right now we do not have single 1st Fifteen boy standing. Given the high proportion of borders in the rugby teams I would say we do not have a team that is complete.
The main problem with going ahead with fixtures is the boys put themselves at risk by playing. Kids of this age want to turn up, evidence was at least 2 guys starting play on Saturday past when they should not have run on. Eeisch, tough one to call, trust that the school will make the right one.
@westers: lets just hope college doesn’t pull out of the fixture.
@therealrbugger: Doubt this will happen. But if it does Westville are scheduled to play George Campbell this weekend. Would be better to arrange new opposition for GC and let Kearseny and Westville play the games that got rained out.
There are rumours going around that there is a flu epidemic at MC and will let kearsney know by thursday whether the fixture will go ahead or not.
This will be a real bummer if they do not play
@GreenBlooded: Sorry, got cut off.
Reason for Goodsen at 6, his style of play, I might be wrong and a bit ignorant here, but to me, he plays towards the ball, like a flank..?
Also, what happens next year – Coetzee vs Goodsen? Who is a better player?
@GreenBlooded: Hahahahahaha, no man, I
@RBugger: @RBugger:
That wasn’t to be taken literally…. 
Hope he doesn’t know who I am, he would probably rip my head off with his left had. 
I would never expect a reation like that from any top player. I think those guys have enormous respect for one another. Surpirsed at your comments about Goodson being a 6 – he has never played there since I’ve been watching him as an U14. 4 College coaches can’t be wrong.
Do you know what will happen with the fixtures this weekend – what with the double test match at KPS? The Kearsney / College game will be one to miss – but even a hard core SBR supported cannot be expected to give up his season tickets to watch it. Any chance of the matches being played earlier in the morning?
@GreenBlooded: Had a quiet word with Schramm before DHS and informed him of your comment, IE – make sure you get your rest.
Funnily enough, he just smiled and informed me that Goodsen is a quality player and should have been in one of the squads… I was expecting a typical schoolboy answer along the lines of, I will eat him. He also reckons the College flanks are really good too.
Will hopefully be a great game – form what I saw on the weekend, this KC team is now ticking big time
@Horsefly NO 1: The Schramm Goodesen matchup will be interesting to watch. I have said it before, I personally believe Schramm is the best no 8 in KZN and I honestly can say, if he continues in his current vain of form, could push for higher honours at CW.
It is not just his size and athletic ability, it is his all round reading of the game and his link play – reminds me of a young Skinstad!
Goodsen, from what I have seen, is your typical 6… A hard nut who is tough, tough, tough! Is he an 8, I am not sure.
I do feel he will have his time and must just keep working hard
@Green Hopper: @Green Hopper: Sorry that was meant for Horsefly.
I will bet money that Bader Pretorius will be in the mix next year. He is too good to be left out. Just as well he moved to MHS , considering the cold shoulder PRG got from the selectors.
@Grasshopper: This being my point, Last year I made comment on this player, and that he probably was not to be in the 1st team, , last year I think the coaches were unwilling to bend or to submit or possibly admit the mistakes of selection , social media, sites like this , commented on it regularly about the status of the GW 1st team and the 2nd team . It’s good to see the fresh approach this year in performance and putting best player forward
Good point in how the 2nd team performed last year in beating Affies, and if having a chance against Grey would have shown their mettle , Last year’s 1st team was abysmal both on and off the field, Tom, imported players, coaches being stood down form Sharks, Coaches not being at games, imported players just not performing ,
Things seem to have realigned and getting back
@Pedantic: I agree with you about Schramm. He’s a class act this year.
I’m not too sure Staples could leapfrog Goodson. The Kearsney lads seem to under-rate Goodson.
He is a very good player in my opinion and knows how to lead his team well. I also know that he leads by example. I think he is better than Schramm and hopefully he proves that when the two schools play.
As for #10s, yeah the best are all U17 this year with Webster,Tedder,Koekemoer,Jonas and Anderson coming to mind. Pity Webster is in matric.
Keep in mind that next year there will be another generation of talent coming through – the KZN GK flyhalf Bader Pretorius looks very impressive and could quite possibly challenge for the #10 next season.
The same could be said of Staples … he could leapfrog Goodsen for the #8. I have watched Goodsen several times but honestly Schramm looks in a class of his own at the moment – IMO he could be KZN schoolboy player of the year.
@Tarpeys: If what you are saying is correct (and I don’t know if it is) it proves the point that trials are a waste of time and the selectors/coaches have predetermined who they will take.
@RBugger: Goodson has been the No 8 and captain of the College team that went unbeaten for more than 2 seasons. Don’t recall ever seeing him on the flank. He ticks all the boxes as a No 8. And he’s not small either…….
Hey – I don’t have any connection to the lad at all. I just love watching him play – he gives it horns – 200% for 70 minutes. Have a good and objective look at him next weekend and let me know. Tell young Schramm to get a good night’s sleep – that’s the best advice I can dispense on the issue.
The CW side picked is the correct side. I know that the selection panel is honest and they are strong, experienced rugby men who have kzn’s rugby interest at heart over and above their schools. I heard that a centre that people keep mentioning as being hard done by is actually a difficult boy to manage in a team environment and can be a distructive figure . I think the players character was also taken into consideration when the decision was made. Ask anyone who saw his antics at Academy Week last year and besides Coetzee gives a reliable kicking option which could be vital when combinations have to worked out for day 2.
Besides the bulls are powerful this year, they again have an academy week side that could unfortunately beat our Cw boys. Sean and Barend have their work cut out if they are going manage to sneak a win here. I’m 100% behind our boys no matter what.
A good looking team – RB
Agreed – have one or two changes, but can not fault the line-up
@Greenblooded: Jeez, so many options at Flyhalf for next year.
Maybe play Jonas at 12 in a Giteau type role, always good having a 12 who can play the 13 into holes.
Goodsen, wow, Burger and Du Plessis – one thing he lacks here, the size… I would rather say Hooper and or Marcell Coetzee
Will be an epic matchup then and I look forward to it. If Goodsen is as good as you say, he must not worry, he will get his chance next year.
Schramm was left out of the GK team as a centre in 2011 and he was devastated by it! I know his brother very well and he just told him to not worry and keep his head down. In fact, his ommision from the GK team of 2011 did wonders for his rugby, it pushed him forward and I am sure the same will happen for Goodsen – But GreenBlooded, I think this boy is a flank and not 8..?
@RBugger: Yes – that is Jonas. Unfortunately he is quite injury prone and often comes off clutching his leg. He cut gaping holes in the College defence last week. Tedder is rock solid and provides the goal kicking role. Big problem next year – all the great 10’s are in Gr 11 this year – Tedder, Jonas, Koekemoer, Andersen although the latter has been moved to 12/13 it would appear. I still think the best I’ve seen him is at 10. Koekemoer also been playing between 10/12/13 this year.
Goodson – you can judge for yourself next weekend. Reminds me of a combination of Schalk Burger and Morne du Plessis. Hard as nails, sky-high workrate and makes things happen.
Captain – Mazibuko or one of the Doops if Reece-Edwards is not around.
Reece-Mchardy is very good but Reece-Edwards has been deadly as of late – and I really mean that, he has been spot on and could force a SA Schools spot if he keeps going.
Also, If Mchardy had to start, who would captain the side?
If Jonas is the slightly small mixed race boy from Glenwood, then yes, I also rate him. Very exciting player!
But I must say, I do like Teddar, very solid and tactically astute – reminds me of Honnible, he is determined and fierce on defense.
Goodsen, you really do like the boy – Can’t wait for him and Schramm to play against each other. So what happens next year, with Goodsen and Coetzee?
@RBugger: Pretty spot on I’d say. I would pencil in Goodson next to Schramm and Jonas next to Tedder. I think Jonas is very under-rated and perhaps a little injury prone but he is lethal on attack. Maybe also McHardy at 9 would be an option.
My Team:
1) Majola
2) Van Vuuren
3) Tredoux
4) D Du Preez
5) JL Du Preez
6)Coetzee
7) Mazibuko
8) Schramm
9) Reece-Edwards (c)
10) Teddar
11) Ngcobo
12) Nela
13) Vermaak
14)Ngwenya
15) Joubert
This to me would be the strongest team that KZN could put on the field. I know they will not play both Du Preez brothers at lock, but I really wish they would for CW.
Also, if they play Vermaak at outside centre, it gives the KZN backline some real pace, allowing Joubert to come in at centre.
Any thoughts on this team?
@GreenBlooded: You are probably right, they would defeat many of the 2nd Tier 1st xv sides. But I would like to think that DHS and Northwood would give them one hell of a hard time…
I personally have no problem with how many Glenwood Boys get picked or go to trials, if I feel the best players have been picked, then so be it.
The CW side is the best that can be picked. Yes, one or two missed out, Goodsen and Ellse come to mind. But are they that good that they would make a big difference to the CW squad?? My answer is no, personally I feel Schramm will be the starting 8, whether or not Coetzee or Goodsen were in the squad.
At centre, I have a funny feeling they may play Nela and then give Joubert or Vermaak a run at outside centre – again, would Ellse be that much better?
Perhaps we can get a pre CW team picked by bloggers?
@Amalekite: My point had always been that it is not “Glenwood” or “Sean Erasmus” as everyone likes to believe. Do people really think that one man has so much clout that he can call the shots over the head coach and the other selectors? I don’t think so. I am sure there are people who know what is potting here. Let them put it out there and then we can discuss it. All we have is speculation and cannon fodder for all those with an anti-Glenwood agenda. If there are shortcomings with the selection process, I very much doubt one school or one man is driving it.
@RBugger: I will claim responsibility for that!! I think I said at the time that I thought Glenwood 2nds would beat quite a few schools 1st sides. Still reckon they would – definitely all of the Tier 2 schools and probably DHS and Northwood too. Just my opinion – don’t be haters…….
@GreenBlooded: I know about as much as you, but it’s nice to see that you are finally starting to understand why we are asking questions. It just does not add up. However, Beet does have a theory which seems to be the only answer that would make any sense. I am sure that you have already read it.
IMHO the Sharks need to butt out of SBR in KZN. If they want to get involved, then they need to spread their resources equally which is unlikely. The way things are going down just gets peoples backs up, and places the “favourites” in a bad light.
@Grasshopper: Valid Point
@RBugger: Agreed, that is why I said 2nd tier school 1st teams, but Glenwood have used a squad of 30 for all the festivals etc, most schools do these days. Kenny Van Niekerk and Percy Ngadi have rotated at prop, same with Tredoux and Potgieter, Vidima and Harmsworth, Teichmann and Van der Heever, where the coaches play horses for courses depending on the opposition……my point is with Glenwood this year the backs are standout and at 1st team are far better than the 2nd team but the forwards are a group of 16 that are evenly matched.
There is no way a school 2nd xv will beat the 1xv, no way… It is a big step up in level!
Just because a 2nd xv looks deadly against another schools 2nd xv, does not mean they will compete at first team level!
There may be one or two players on the fringes of 1st xv level but to say a 2nd xv will beat the 1st xv is just crazy.
I watched the Glenwood seconds against KC and although they were good, there was a noticable difference in the pace and intensity of the 1st xv game
@Grasshopper: Well, it’s all conjecture because the theory will never be teested. I tis quite possible that the 2nds might beat the firsts, even be a better team, but better man on man, I don’t believe your coaching staff is that poor.
@Grasshopper: Sorry man my mistake, must have been Greenblooded
@Amalekite: Mate – I have no idea why. What I suggest is that there are definitely those who do know why. They should rather state it outright and put us all in the know so that this speculation and suspicion can end. All I know is that Glenwood is not overly represented on the selection panel, unlike some schools in the GK setup, and that the head coach who normally calls the shots is not from Glenwood. If you know – please enlighten the rest of us.
@Grasshopper: College 2nds also beat Affies last year and are unbeaten this year. Some schools concentrate only on their 1st team and hence you will get 15 stars and the lower teams are not good. Hence the difference in win ratios.
@Grasshopper: On the subject of Rupert Kay. I thought that he played very well in the final KZN trials. I thought that he was unlucky not to at least make the Academy side. I have also seen him play during the season and I thought that he was really decent, better than 2nd team material.
Is there perhaps a preference for Afrikaans players at Glenwood versus English speaking boys? I am not suggesting it, but simply asking the question as I do not know how they operate.
@RBugger: I never said our 2nd’s would beat most 1st sides, that was another Glenwood blogger. I think our 2nd’s would beat most 2nd tier 1st teams eg Clifton, Pinetown, Port Natal, Kloof, Voortrekker, St Charles, Richards Bay, Gelofte etc, but only be competitive with DHS & Northwood 1st’s, they are sure to lose to the top 6 schools 1st sides….
@GreenBlo@GreenBlooded: All we are saying ( Grasshopper included ) is why is it ONLY Glenwood who gets to send 36 players to trials? The 2nds of some of the other schools are just as good.
@meadows: Anyway my point is that sometimes the hands of good people in our SBR system are tied. I think people who know these coaches have great respect for them and the work they do.
Situations can sometimes be like office politics. For an outsider looking in matter seems silly and simple to resolve but for those living through it daily it’s real, complicated and definitely not easy to deal with
@GrassHopper: But that is my point, we are grasping on a victory here and there – year on year, we do not do well against the likes of Affies and Paarl Gim.
Like you say, it is getting better in terms of scorelines etc – this could have something to do with the fact that all boys now go to gym and perhaps are gaining physcological strength as well as physical strength.
One thing that does excite me about this year, is that KZN can have out and out gas on the outside, with Sparks and Joubert on the wings, should they be chosen.
With regards to your seconds beating most 1st xv teams, you must remember that it is a big step up to 1xv level, a BIG BIG step up.
I am not sure that is such a fair comment
@Gungets Tuft: Last year the 2nd team was definitely better than the 1st team, but it was difficult for the coach to drop his underperforming stars. However, this year it seems they are willing to drop players. Look at Rupert Kay, started out as captain and played KZN Academy last year, now playing 2nd’s……when your 2nd’s and 3rd’s are getting better winning ratio’s than your 1st’s then it’s time to re-evaluate……
@Green Hopper: You need to read my post again. If you think that it is realistic that your 2nd side is better, man on man, than the 1st side then there are serious internal problems. I cannot believe there are more than 4 or 5 that can make that category.
Might the GW 2nds be in the top 5 on KZN, sure, but we will never know so it is not worth discussing, it is generally only said by a parent (or the boy) of a player in the second side. JMO
@Green Hopper: Interested to know how you define a powerhouse and why you don’t see Westville as being the same as College and Glenwood?
@RBugger: Good points, but KZN schools 20 years ago would usually be given 60 points plus against the likes of Paarl Gim etc. However, since it got more professional schools like College, Westville, Glenwood and Kearsney have been very competitive and actually beating these schools. Glenwood have beaten Affies twice (home and away), Boland Landbou (twice), Paul Roos (twice), Waterkloof, Monnas, Grey Bloem, Paarl Boys, Framesby, Outeniqua (I think twice) so we getting closer. Westville beat EG Jansen I think last year……….so we do have a chance. Our loss to the Lions last year was because our best team played in the 1st game and the stupid rules say every boy must play, surely the coach should play his best team no matter what….
@NW_Knight: I understand that it isn’t an attack on Glenwood. I am simply disagreeing with your statement that if you are not good enough for your school’s first team that you are not good enough to play for the provincial 2nd team. The best 2 flyhalfs in the province may be from the same school. If you exclude the 2nd team player you will end up with the third best in the provincial 2nds. That’s all I’m saying. Let’s agree on the principle regardless of which school is involved.
@Amalekite: Same answer. It is not about if Glenwood 2nds are better than whoever. It is the broad statement that a 2nd team player from a school is not good enough for a provincial 2nd team. That is all I am saying.
@BOG: lol! grey college definitely does keep spitting out killer rugby players…….must be something to be proud of
I feel everyone is giving the KZN selection panel a bit of a hard time really. With all said and done, bar one or two players, the squad is spot on.
The fact that KZN does not do that well at CW, is simply because we are not as strong as the likes of Bulls and WP etc
How often would Kearsney, Glenwood or Westville beat Affies or Paarl Gim?
No matter what KZN team is chosen, they will always find it difficult to compete at CW – it has nothing to do with selection!
Even if we got the selection process spot on so that every supporter and parent was happy with the KZN squad, the reality is KZN would still struggle at CW!
Every once in a while you will get a very strong English school boy side who can compete – in 1998 Selborne College had a fantastic team who beat Affies and in that year, Border were very strong at CW.
But in the main, we struggle against the Afrikaans schools and this is transferred to CW. I hope the boys can hold there own this year and give the Bulls a good game. We have good size in the loosies and rapid pace on the wings and at fullback, so let’s see what happens.
@beet: I was unaware of the Bondedag issue but I suspect that if it clashed with the Hilton – MHS the school fixture timing would have been set in advance and from the schools perspectives would have taken precedence given the importance of the derby in both schools calenders. Its not the first time that schools have not released players for this fixture – the same thing happened in 2008 although in that year the MHS and Glenwood contingents that comprised the bulk of the side did play – I think that Westville were playing College and their boys did not travel to JHB.
I agree though that the annual pre CW fixture against the Pumas is not ideal prep for CW – in fact this used to serve as a final “trial” in the past with the final squad only being announced after that game – they also used to have a week long camp ahead of CW – not sure if that still happens.
To my mind the ideal prep would be to play some of the U20 sides (Rovers, Collegians etc) during that training camp which would be a good proxy for the step up in size, pace and quality when they come up against the likes of the Bulls at CW.
I’m not sure that different preparation would have helped in the second game last year – there seemed to be a massive size difference and we were completely outmuscled up front which is more a question of inadequate depth exposed by having to start the entire squad by the second game.
As you know the draw is critical at CW – win your game on the first day and you are through to one of the two main games on the second day. Lose badly and you end up on the B field by day 3.
Also, schools have squads of 30 these days and pretty much any of those 30 could play 1st team and do with rotation etc, therefore certainly most of Glenwood’s and other big schools 2nd teams should go to trials. The Glenwood 2nd’s are unbeaten in KZN in about 3 years, this would indicate their strength. Drawing with College 2nd’s on their biggest day of the year away from home is pretty good. Those College boys would have been really pumped to finally topple the Glenwood 2nd’s. Last year Glenwood’s 2nd’s beat Affies 2nd’s…..just shows their strength. I feel the injustice is when other good schools 2nd team players are not given their chance too…..
i agree with your sentiment, Schools like GC , Port Natal, North Wood, DHS and the such are suffering and we have only really two power house schools remaining PMB and GW, Westville, ( who sits between Government and Private somehow) and KC MHS and Hilton are beyond the reaches of Most , the schools like Crawford and Clifton , just don’t seem to have the programme or the ethos for this and will always muck about with the game on a tier 2 level of involvement and participation but that’s about it level,
@Gungets Tuft: I am not stretching the realist even a bit , at last year’s Nite Series Glenwood took a 2 /3/4th Combined team to this and played against 1st Team Northwood being One, and Port Natal. Later in the year GW 2nd played the Port Natal 1st Team and beat them.
Discussion, and intensive discussion was conducted last year around the ability of the GW 2nd team, and the parity they had with the 1st team , read the archives it’s there,
Look at the Teams this year the 2nd team would most certain beat Northwood 1sts, DHS Port Natal , and others , so when the question is asked is the Player able to represent Natal , the answer would be a resounding Yes. Just because , and specifically here at GW , a 2nd play should be excluded because he isn’t in a 1st Team , such as the above I have noted , he should have the opportunity.
@GreenBlooded: It’s also noticeably that FS derby games between Sentraal, Jim Fouche, Fichardtspark etc do not enjoy anywhere near the same level of interest as our KZN games.
I spoke to a 2011 GOB at College last week. He was excited over a win his u20 team had achieved over Rovers the night before. This kind of result is virtually impossible to achieve at open club level without giving Rovers opponents a 50-100 point head start. The u20 club system works because it’s run on a very socialist type spread the talent around type draft system.
My opinion again. People running or influencing the u18 process need to think ahead. What do they want for our KZN school rugby? They need to start making decisions to protect what is good – take control of their own destiny. Don’t let outsiders to the system or individuals dictate the way forward.
and no North, South, East and West teams!!
@Greenblooded: No argument with that, except that the brief was to only send the top players capable of playing for the province – if you aren’t playing for your 1st team, you shouldn’t be capable of playing for the Craven Week A team. Don’t read this as an attack on Glenwood – it’s not.
What I’m saying is that there is a flaw in the system. The problem arises with the South, North, East and West teams for the 1st round of trials. If we stuck with each region selecting 15, there would be no problem with any school (and there are boys from a number of schools in those teams). So, if you are not good enough to make your regional team, then you cannot play Craven Week. Surely that will negate all the complaints.
@GreenBlooded: You cannot compare the strength of the Glenwood 2nds versus the rest of KZN to that of the Grey Cherrries vs the rest of Free State. As previously stated they drew with College 2nds and sneaked a win against Kearsney 2nds. Let’s try and keep it real, otherwise we would have had 36 players from College and another 36 from Kearsney attending trials.
@meadows: When names get mentioned and the association of integrity comes into it, it’s unfair on the coaches without knowing all the circumstances. The logic I use comes from opinion based on perceived issues and is in no way meant to be taken as fact. But here is an example of where other pressures can put selectors who command a lot of respect under pressure.
Last year KZN schools didn’t look good when their Day 2 team came up against the Lions. We all had our moans about the performance and the contributing factors. What slipped under the radar was that the KZN School’s preparations were severely disrupted by the actions of Hilton and Michaelhouse (again not the boys/parents/old boys etc but obviously decision-makers at the school). The CW Day 2 team was not afforded enough pre-CW game time to build meaningful cohesion as a result of the 2 private schools own choices. In 2011, the communication was there that KZN Schools were to play against the Pumas and go to Bondedag ahead of CW 2012. HC and MHS decided to arrange their derby on the Bondedag date and refused to release players for KZN duty as well. With 7 of the KZN players from the 2 schools, the fixtures were cancelled. So we have an instance where 2 officials on the panel from the respective schoosl were seemingly acting against the best interests of the team they had help choose. Things are not always straight forward. I for one would never say these coaches would intentionally act to jeopardise KZN chances.
@NW_Knight: I don’t agree. Let’s leave the KZN schools out of it and use the example of the Free State Schools. I don’t think anyone would question Grey College sending their entire 1st and 2nd XV to trails if 2 teams were to be selected. Neither do I think that there would be any complaints is 80% of those 30 players made the teams. If Glenwood feel that some of their 2nd XV players are stronger than the 1st XV players of another school then I see no problem with sending them to trials. It really is that simple.
@Gungets: Couldn’t agree more, except that I wasn’t honing in on 1 position – merely using it to make a point. The point was that I know schools were told to only send their top players capable of playing for the province. Everybody competes for selection in the U18 “A” team. those that are left, are selected for the Academy team.
So to send boys from anything below 1st team to trials kind of defeats the object.
@NW_Knight: They do pick 2 sides for CW, so it is possible that one big school has 3 top flanks.
a schools selecters
I am not defending the number that a single school can send to trials but zeroing in on one position is not the right approach. Sending 36 players to trials implies that you believe that all your 2nd team players, are better than any other schools first choice, or that a schools selecters are not doing their jobs. Even if we go with Green Hoppers feeling that the Glenwood 2nds could have beaten their 1sts, it is stretching it a bit to believe that the 2nds players are better, man for man, than the firsts. At most there are 4 or 5 doubtfuls.
Also – remember the quotas. It might be that school A has 2 PDIs at flank who hold their school positions on merit, but schools B and C have Coetsee and Brussouw who cannot be left out. It brings a 3rd choice PDI centre into play from school A. Not saying this is happening but the scenario exists. Personally, I don’t believe quota’s are necessary at U18 level any more as I see plenty of “PDI’s” that justify their positions on merit with no questions asked.
But – there is always the possibility that schools are using representation at Provincial trials as a marketing tool and push like hell for numbers at trials. Have a look at school websites for the culprits, there will be articles telling browsers that they had X number go to trials. I wonder if we will ever see a school note that “only 30% of our trialists made the final selection” … adds a whole new slant to it, yes???
I think the question shouldn’t be “why were 18 Glenwood boys selected”, but rather “Why were 18 Glenwood boys at trials”. At the North Durban trials, a question was asked of a school who had submitted the names of 3 flanks “Which are the best 2, as if you are not good enough to play 1st team you can’t be good enough to play for your province?”
i think that says it all!
@beet: Beet , your report has lots of merit in it , over the last two years GW have had particularly good depth in the open age group, whether this should filter through to 18 selected players I am not sure.
Do we think that 2013 opens are better in ability than 2012, I don’t think so , but still there weren’t the number selected last year. What we can say and it was debated last year , by many of your bloggers, and this is very important , the 2nd Team could have beaten the 1st team, there is no doubt in my mind about this , with a few changes in addition the GW 2nd team of last year would certainly have performed better than the 1st team,
As I said this was debated, we say it at the GW trails, we had unprecedented midyear trials with all the drama of last year , so logically if we take this to its conclusion , the 2nd team is already stronger than most 1st tier teams in KZN, remember I am basing this on last year
Combine this with the number of import each year , and we all know how I feel about this issue, obviously strengthens the lower sides , hence again setting up the strength and scenario I have pointed out above.
The question is how to fix it , well I have a few ideas, and if I could I would love to have been part of that solution , I believe its fairly easy and can be achieved with 1 year
Having been involved with DRSU , selections and having seen and experienced the issues at schools , if one had to be truly honest the DRSU system is the most honest
However whilst having the policy and structure in place one needs to be sure that it is implemented. I can say with 100% certainty that’s the DRSU haven’t implemented this as per the letter of the law, or that the Coached attend all games, like they are supposed to.
In addition DRSU in selecting Coach’s, who submit the CV, don’t always pick the best performing coach.
I agree with sentiment, here that in selecting, and this is my humble opinion, you have to look at players that fit into a team, not always the best individuals combined make the best team. Also as a selector, you might want to see a player in a different position, and you want to see him in a trail against whom is the present incumbent might be. In addition boys whom might not have a good trials days, could be because he didn’t gel with the teams he was in , so a review or perspective of him over a season help in the selection process.
I agree , one has to consider is 18 boys from Glenwood not some what of a bias selection, surely there are boys out there whom are better, maybe not 18 but certainly I would have thought a ratio of maybe 9 would be a true reflection , there is no doubt that the team is good, but would it be fair to say that there aren’t others out there?
I do think that you will always have politics in the game, remembering that the coaches are about their personal advancement as well, one would just think they would pick boys that could be a better selected team , for me I believe that there should be external caches and selectors in some sort of collaboration
@phat55: Chops is right. Not humans, but super humans, in my humble opinion of course. And he is confusing Vrede as being representative of the FS.
@Tjoppa: LOL @ “not populated by humans”
13 out of the 15 in the free state/cheetahs team is from Grey College.doubt anyone down there cares though because Grey College wins most of their games
@beet: the CW selection process is not perfect and every year there will be the odd player who misses out for some reason or the other – Marcel Coetzee has been mentioned by some – his problem I suspect was that coming from a small school like Port Natal he was under the radar in 2008 when players like Brynard Stander (Westville), who had played CW in 2007, and Francios Kleynhans (Glenwood,) who had been outstanding at GK week the year before, had the inside track. Mark Richards (MHS) missed out in 2007 as did Kyle Cooper who was a loose forward back then.
The smaller school dilemna is nothing new but notwithstanding that the odd player like Clyde Rathbone (Kingsway) has been able to stand out.
Regarding the number of Glenwood players there does seem to be an over representation but that said I cannot the likes of Ryno Combrinck or Barend Steyn, to name two of the non Glenwood selectors, being pressured to include players that they were not happy with.
Each year the mix of the side changes a bit and it generally seems to reflect the performance of the schools – last year MHS had 6 players in and this year they have none which is probably right based on their results and the two matches i have managed to see.
Finally I do not think that trials, however structured, can be the most important part of the selection process. They can help to finesse the final make up and possibly allow for the odd exceptional talent to come through or possibly for a favoured player’s limitations to be exposed outside of his comfort zone. In 2008 Pat Lambie was injured and couldn’t play at trials but as the SA schools incumbent fullback was the first name on the teamsheet as captain in a side coached by Tony Richter (Hilton) and Barend Steyn (Kearsney).
@Woltrui: Wollie moet Tuffy gladnie ernstig opneem nie!! Die donner sou nog n lekker klomp spices afgelewer het by WK maar heelaas!!
Wag nog steeds vir die man en sy chronies!!
Kom nou Tuffy!!!!!
@Woltrui: Well, the invite stands, any time you are in PMB. If I can’t make it, during the week or something, I am sure I can organise someone. We have some serious historians on staff, plus a very dedicated Old Boys Association staff. If nothing else a tour of the museum is an hour very well spent. Beet has my details, he can put you on touch, there is nothing like boasting in person.
@Grasshopper: Just to further emphasise my point about the selectors are not doing their job properly, out of 44 boys in two team, 36 come from 3 schools. Why have trials? They might as well pick the 36 and then draw 8 other names out of a hat because they probably wont get much game time anyway.
@beet: You are putting into words what many are thinking. Well said.
@Grasshopper: We do not want to see no Glenwood players in the side. We want to see fairness. And as you rightly point out the issue is 18 players from Glenwood in the two sides is what gets the hackles up. How else can one explain it other than coach/selection favouritism?
I am not suggesting that there should be a lot more Westville players in the squads. My real point is the selectors are too lazy / have other agendas / etc and do not get around to look at all the schools and potential. Surely there are players in the smaller schools who are not getting recognition. Marcell Coetzee is an example – surely he couldn’t improve so much in such a short space of time to become a Bok but couldn’t make CW.
@Tjoppa: Is daai pienk trui jou eerste span trui, Tjoppa? Sexy.
@Gungets Tuft: Appreciate the invitation Mr Tufts. My kids out of school
@BOG: Because Free State is not populated by humans?
@Woltrui: Give me a shout next year when you guys play on Goldstones, I will give you the tour.
We are very lucky, we want for little in the way of facilities. Perhaps a second Astro, but if pushed, and at a cost, we have the use of the AB Jackson Astro which belongs to the city. It is the one you see briefly, on the opposite side of the campus to Goldstones and the school astro. I guess it would be a little whiney to ask for another.
Plans for another indoor centre for cricket nets are well under way, anyone got a splodge of wonga to drop on us, feel free to let me know
@Gungets Tuft: Helicam: Amazing!! Beautiful school!
@Roger: I saw it yesterday and thought that sounds exactly what I wrote a few years back. Surely they could have contacted the school to submit an official one from the school historian……..anyway…….what is done is done…….
@Grasshopper: sue Hopper sue – I know a good lawyer
@Gungets Tuft: I can see Greenblooded there……hahah! No seriously you can probably count the spectators there to get an idea of how many, looks about 8000 or so…….great aerial view…..
@Pedantic: Being sober is a swine
@beet: Totally agree with you. That is why I was hoping the Glenwood coaching staff either remove themselves from the KZN Schools set-up or move up the ranks and start coaching the Sharks making room for a new coaching group with fresh ideas and methods. I don’t care if the results drop a bit but I just get the uneasy feeling from this current group, far too connected with Straueli etc. Now don’t get me wrong I feel everyone has the right to religious beliefs but again it seems the coaching set up are installing a very fanatical charismatic sort of christianity in the group, going to church together etc. This was never the case in the 90’s…..much prefer a school teacher as the coach and keeping things less fanatical………just my opinion so other bloggers please don’t jump on me. I just want Glenwood to be seen as a good school with no underhanded tactics…
In areas populated by by fallible human beings driven by favouritism and prejudice, a system with checks and balances is absolutely essential. Which, in effect means the whole of SA, excluding the Free State.
@Gungets Tuft: Have to boast a little – helicam view of the Goldstones match on Saturday
http://www.rchelicam.co.za/preview/MCReunion2013/MCReunion2013.html
@Roger: I wrote it in November 2011 for the site and they just used it again now, lazy buggers. They should have checked before making public……Glenwood do not want to be associated with over aged cheats….
@Gungets Tuft: You have been posting way too much stuff that makes sense … come now, it’s time to post something more controversial
You hit the nail on the head … the dynamic of the team can lift a 90% player to 120% – seen it time and time again!
@beet: I haven’t watched Kearsney or Westville, so not going to comment too much, except to say that if they picked a CW side from the two teams that did battle on Goldstones on Saturday, and if they all played with that passion, that pace and flair, then KZN would have a team that would be hard to beat.
We have the players, the key is to stoke the fire. Do that, add some of the obvious stars, and let ’em rip. It’s the complete puzzle that makes sense, not a box full of promising pieces.
So, comment on the coaching and the approach to the matches, how quickly and well they will be able to build gees, when the rivalries are so big.
Regardless of the selection method, there are always going to be a few unlucky players who miss out.
This even happens with the DRSU method, the difference is, the selectors are largely unknown to the youth rugby community so there are few fingers pointed about favouritism etc.
What I really like about the DRSU method of picking provincial teams is that the starting 15 are picked by indepenant selectors while the coaching team who has watched the players all season get an opportunity to have a say on the remaining 7 positions in the squad – this means they can include the season stars who may have had an off day at trials.
Not sure if this is public knowledge, but as far as I know, the DRSU teams also have no quota limitations – you will be surprised how many PD players are selected on merit!
@GreenBlooded: @Grasshopper:
I’m not even sure I should be posting this but it’s how I feel:
As I see it is that the term used to define the problem is “Glenwood” This is not right because then it implies attacking the whole of Glenwood. Automatically and understandably Glenwood supporters spring to the defence of their school. There needs to be a more politically correct way to define the issue without insulting the majority of Glenwood. I don’t know how to do this. It would definitely be better if the source of the matter could be isolated and named but I for one feel very uncomfortable with the selection of 18 Glenwood players this year. I know the boys do not pick themselves. I know Glenwood is a huge contributor of PD players. I know they have a great rugby programme + coaches but so do other schools in KZN who have caught up and is shown in the results. I feel that there is something not right somewhere in the selection system but I refuse to point the finger at Glenwood because Glenwood means so many important things to so many connected to the school and it is a great school. I worry about the consequences of these 2013 selections for competitive rugby in KZN. I know that all the KZN Tier 1 schools are in this “arms race” to be no.1. Everyone wants to get ahead. But to me the selection message now sent out is that if you are serious about rugby and want to represent KZN, don’t go to any of these other Tier 1 schools, go to a specific one because if you go to that school you have a better chance to make KZN as a 2nd team player than you do playing 1sts at any other school in the province. IF in 5-10 years time if the Glenwood 2nd team is too strong for all the 1st teams in KZN, we’ll have an idea where it all started. And I’m not saying there is but if there is a person or individuals or a whole RU behind it, they or it and not Glenwood is the biggest enemy of competitive school rugby in KZN.
As it is financially and otherwise every year some schools are finding it harder to compete at Tier 1 level. Please don’t let another reason creep in to allow more to fall by the wayside. Long live our 1st team local derbies and may they be competitive affairs.
Heh Hopper – did you write this:
http://www.saschoolsports.co.za/rugby/kwazulu-natal/rugby-profile-on-glenwood-high-school.html
you’re not still claiming Siyabonga Tom are you
@beet: That is what I was waiting to hear, an argument on where the selections could have been better.
So, we have lock and the centre pairing which should be questioned – I would agree, but who could have then made it. Ellse – yes! Perhaps Schoeman, maybe a bit light for lock, but he is exceptional in the lineout.
@GreenBlooded: Yes, I have heard alot about Goodsen but sadly only seen him on two occasions. He is a good player, but has not got a finger on Schramm, just no way! This may be a rather bold statement, but with the Du Preez, Schramm would be the first name on my team list. He plays the perfect number 8 role, combining between the forwards and backs – I feel he may have put on a bit to much weight and should maybe lose a kg or two, but he is top notch and a player I will certainly keep an eye on at the Sharks Academy.
It is going to be an extremely interesting battle between the 2 of them when college face kc
@Grasshopper: What are the criteria for Colours and Honours nowdays? I seem to recall Colours for making South Durban and Honours for Natal Schools? Or was is Colours for Natal Schools and Honours for SA Schools? Can’t remember.
@RBugger: Also like Schramm however………… there is a certain youngster with a point to prove against him next week who I rate better. It will be a head-to-head I would really like to see.
@RBugger: In response to your first comment
It’s definitely not all bad. If we didn’t hone in on the negative we probably would not be Saffas. The u18 KZN team has been selected by a group of very experienced coaches, who face some difficult obstacles in terms of strategy and criteria. I for one can’t now turn around and say the u18 team selected is not a good one BUT what I do know is that I with my zero years of coaching experience managed to pick exactly the same core players as the selectors with probably over 100 years of school coaching experience between them. This tells me that although selectors should be judged on their ability to ID the best players (something that WP schools supporters are currently seriously questioning), this is not the where their expertise really comes into play. It’s in picking all those other players where the decisions could have gone one way or the other that count most. Certainly in KZN without being disrespectful to anyone who did get picked, the frontrow, secondrow (with exception of DDP) and centres are areas where the selectors decisions will be tested not on paper but at CW. Even after applying a reality factor which shows that traditionally KZN is not a top achiever at CW, I still say that the selectors will be judged not on where we believe they picked a strong frontrow and midfield now, but rather on how they perform relative to the teams they come up against.
Also I don’t think this is a great year for Kearsney or Glenwood supporters to be leading the charge for saying the u18 selection process was good or produced a strong team. I would much rather here it from Westville, Hilton, MHS and College supporters.
2 years ago on R365 I don’t recall a single Kearsney u16 supporter blogging that they liked the KZN u16 team chosen that year. Again this year, I’d feel great if MHS, Hilton and KC u16 fans came along and said yes I feel totally comfortable that CW criteria aside, that the team selected is a strong won and the process is great.
Until we have that kind of harmony across the board, like there seems to be at DRSU there is room for improvement or work to be done on convincing people that all is well.
@Grasshopper: Agreed, in my mind, the best players have been picked from Glenwood and Kearsney. I also rate Ellse, I do not know who Jackson is?
I have nothing against Glenwood at all and likewise, have nothing against Westville. I have watched both teams play, and the reality is that Glenwood have better players in their respective positions.
Reece-McHardy and Ellse are quality players, but who else can actually be described as quality?
I do not know all the names etc – but for Glenwwod, their 6 Mazibuko I think, there hooker, the left wing, centre and then Vermaak and Joubert are all very exciting players who I would want in my CW side.
I also rate their 8 Coetzee, although I am a Schramm supporter through and through – but still, Coetzee is my back up…
I feel this side will surprise at CW
@Amalekite: It all boils down to having independent selectors with no allegence to any school. Each zone can have a day to hold the trial and boys are sent from the schools who they believe have a serious chance of progressing. This will enable them to select boys who shine on the day and reserves. Once the process has been concluded(all zones ) then a list comes out of who and where the boy will play in a selectors team. That will do away with the so called favouritism and in the end you will get a side selected on merit.
@GreenBlooded: Yep, I can’t wait until no Glenwood coaches are involved with trials and Barend Steyn and co still select Glenwood players. The Westville guys just want no Glenwood players in the side. I agree 18 is too many in the 2 squads but the 7 of the boys who made the A team are the best in their positions in the province no doubt about it…..the Kearsney picks are spot on too. I do think Ellse, Jackson and Martin from Westville were unlucky…
@Amalekite: It is very easy for the coaches to watch all the matches because they are all at the same venue. Not an option for school coaches / selectors.
@Black and white: Yup – I think if there are issues with selections then it happens at a higher level than “Glenwood” or “Sean Erasmus” as so many love to believe.
@RBugger: Exactly why everybody is saying that the trials are a farce !! it seems that the teams are all predetermined by the powers that be !! Saw some boys have cracker trials as well as BIG names have shocking trials . but still get through while the boys who had good trials — no where ??
@Amalekite: Sorry if i didnt get my point across well . Am well aware how DRSU works as i have been in club rugby for 10 years now . I like and agree with the DRSU club selection process . i just think that the selectors should not be from a school as it bring another whole set of agendas to the table . Although i do think that a players season should count for something. If a player week in and week out performs for his school and happens to have a poor trials or is sick on the day , it should be taken into concideration .
@Black and White: Yes, true – players need to be judged on their performances over the course of a season. But then the question is, what role do trials actually play? If a player stars during the course of the season, but has a bad trial, where does this leave him?
@Amalekite: As per my point above, trials are one off games, what about players who have performed all season and are the best in their respective positions, but have an off day? You can’t just base a team on a trial match.
Fair enough, perhaps it is not right to mention players who should not be there, but I would just like a relevant argument based on who should right-fully be in the squad. Glenwood have a large representation in both squads, while I do not agree this is right, going through the Midland squads, I am unable to find players who stand out to me..?
Perhaps there is some talent down South, but there needs to be argument based on fact – who are great players that have missed out?
@Black and white: Perhaps you have misunderstood the way that the DRSU works. They select a coach, assistant coach and manager beforehand. These guys then watch the various clubs play week in and week out, and they invite 30 players to the trials. The club coaches can then add a few more if they feel that they have been overlooked.
@BoishaaiPa: I only feel if an unbiased panel of selectors, with positional knowledge, select the team honest mistakes may be made but the current system allows for to many personal agendas etc.
This way we will also be able to identify the better coaches as well.
I think this may be the current shortcoming of the CW selections. The time to prepare a winning CW team is too short so rather pick the boys from rugby schools and if possible in combinations. These boys is admittedly used to playing under similar conditions of CW i.e. intensity/pace and pressure although they may not be as talented as other boys.
So we must ask us what is the real reason CW was started. To showcase our talent or to win. Doc Craven would love to answer this.
@RBugger: I have attended both the DRSU trials and the KZN trials. There is no comparison. The DRSU trials are fair to all the players and there are never any complaints. They are run in a very professional manner. Another thing that impressed me at the DRSU trials, was that the place kickers were then given time to display their skills.
I think that it is right to wait for the announcement on the website. This way, everyone has access at the same time. For certain KZN boys to have been informed beforehand is unacceptable.
I refuse to name players who I think should, or should not have made the KZN sides, as I feel that it would be unfair to the boys. What’s done is done, and now we need to support all of our teams.
It does not take a rocket scientist to realise that there is something amiss when the number one ranked U16 side in the country only manages to get one player selected as a reserve.
The same applies for Glenwood managing to get 18 players selected at U18 level. The comments about their second side being so amazing are unfounded. They drew with College and only just managed a win against Kearsney.
Once again, I say that the KZN system is need of a major overhaul. It appears that we are not the only ones…
@RBugger: Sorry but cant comment on the CW side as i watched the GW selections . Also feel that the selectors should each week watch the schools play and get a better understanding of players in various situations . for example a glenwood selector will very rarely watch any other schools play , other than their own or their opposition for the day . How will they really get to know players from other schools . The Springboks dont get selected from a trials but from how they have performed so far in a season !! Consistant performance during a season must count in a players favour .
@Tjoppa: Remember..they have to play with whomever they choose…dont you want to play with the best?…besides, any system is still reliable on final decisions by people…no matter how clean and sterile your process might be, it is still up and open for discussion at the end. And remember ..this is clubs we are talking about here..not schools…whole different ball game!
Beet: Please tell this to the Border Rugby Union or should we say Border Idiot Club.
@BoishaaiPa: Yes and boys will be boys. So their friends and those with beautifull sisters will be the first to be chosen. No BHP I think this system is the best that I have seen.
You telling me the selectors have no clue to who the boys are?….The problem is not the selection process or how trials are conducted. It is the failure of Selectors themselves!..All you need is independant obervers throughout the season who can nominate up to max of 7 to 8 players per team to trials. At trials these independant selectors can then watch the trial games and if need be pull in some more players. Best yet is for the schoolboys to sit down, each one pick a team and the players with the most votes make it!…The boys knows best who is the better players in each position!..But that is just the socialist in me talking!
@Black and White: I understand where you are coming from, but I also feel the trials were based on strength vs strength. Meaning, even if you played in a weaker team at trials, you were playing against like for like opposition – so if you have star quality, you should be able to exploit the weaknesses in the other team…
Selections will never be truly fair, but my argument is based on who should have made it that did not? And if they should have made it, who would you leave out?
An example, Ellse for me should have made it – had a strong trial and played well all season. But drop who – maybe Coetzee of Maritzburg College, I do not know much about him as every time I saw him play, he was on the left wing.
I just want to know why everyone feels trials are unfair and base their thoughts on players who should in their oponion have made the team.
@beet: It seems to be a very fair process. I wish somebody could present this to Western Province rugby ! I guess the reply would be: “We have had our own system for many years now and it is working perfectly, thank you”.
I particularly like the idea that the selectors are not allowed to speak to each other.
@RBugger: I think that there were a few boys that never got the same opportunity as some of the BIG reputation players . Dont forget that a selector can be potentially prejudiced against his own schoolboys , for example . All boys should have a clean slate at trials and equal opportunity to show their talents . Many boys only played in the stronger sides at trials , thus giving them a better platform to perform. Not sure if this will ever change though !!
definitely sounds better! should take care of all the favouritism & nepotism & cronyism
Having experienced this last year as a parent, I found that it felt a lot fairer. Each boy could then show their skills in a real environment and then compete at the final trials. Every boy was given his 2 chukkas regardless of whether the selectors has chosen him or not.
They also alternated age groups and chukkas which gave the selectors a ‘gap’ between players. E.g. U15 chukka 1, U16 chukka 1, U15 chukka 2, U16 chukka 2, etc. This also gave the boys a break instead of playing back-to-back games.
My only improvement to the process would be direct communication on the final acceptance (e-mail or phone call).
Looking forward to Colts rugby season which will start soon!
@beet: Just to get a bit of a debate going within the KZN region, who would you have picked in the team (KZN Team) as opposed to who is there… Ie, who woulod not have made it and why?
Your points above are obviously valid, but in my oponion, KZN are pretty spot on.
WP seem to be a bit of a mess, but having said that, I am sure the players are of a very similar standard.
As opposed to just moaning, it would just be interesting to see a valid debate going as to who should have made it and on what basis.