| # | TEAM | P | W | L | D | PF | PA | PD | CAT PTS | BP | W% | TOTAL | AVG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Grey College | 12 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 494 | 162 | 332 | 54.50 | 0.000 | 100.00% | 54.500 | 4.54 |
| 2 | Paarl Gim | 11 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 416 | 169 | 247 | 44.50 | 0.000 | 90.91% | 44.500 | 4.05 |
| 3 | Garsfontein | 8 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 292 | 156 | 136 | 31.50 | 0.000 | 87.50% | 31.500 | 3.94 |
| 4 | Paul Roos | 9 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 233 | 174 | 59 | 31.00 | 3.750 | 77.78% | 34.750 | 3.86 |
| 5 | HJS Paarl | 14 | 11 | 3 | 0 | 399 | 250 | 149 | 44.50 | 6.375 | 78.57% | 50.875 | 3.63 |
| 6 | Outeniqua | 8 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 262 | 103 | 159 | 25.00 | 3.750 | 75.00% | 28.750 | 3.59 |
| 7 | Hilton | 9 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 289 | 145 | 144 | 29.00 | 3.000 | 88.89% | 32.000 | 3.56 |
| 8 | Monument | 12 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 373 | 220 | 153 | 32.50 | 10.125 | 66.67% | 42.625 | 3.55 |
| 9 | DHS | 15 | 10 | 5 | 0 | 460 | 273 | 187 | 34.50 | 16.500 | 66.67% | 51.000 | 3.40 |
| 10 | Boland Landbou | 11 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 260 | 193 | 67 | 33.50 | 3.375 | 72.73% | 36.875 | 3.35 |
| 11 | Michaelhouse | 9 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 254 | 172 | 82 | 26.60 | 3.375 | 77.78% | 29.975 | 3.33 |
| 12 | Wynberg BHS | 10 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 298 | 133 | 165 | 25.50 | 7.500 | 70.00% | 33.000 | 3.30 |
| 13 | Jeppe | 13 | 8 | 4 | 1 | 478 | 303 | 175 | 31.70 | 10.125 | 61.54% | 41.825 | 3.22 |
| 14 | Waterkloof | 8 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 205 | 158 | 47 | 25.50 | 0.000 | 87.50% | 25.500 | 3.19 |
| 15 | Affies | 10 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 287 | 277 | 10 | 20.50 | 11.250 | 50.00% | 31.750 | 3.18 |
| 16 | Stellenberg | 11 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 241 | 260 | -19 | 15.60 | 18.750 | 27.27% | 34.350 | 3.12 |
| 17 | Welkom Gim | 15 | 11 | 4 | 0 | 512 | 334 | 178 | 38.50 | 6.375 | 73.33% | 44.875 | 2.99 |
| 18 | Bishops | 9 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 305 | 136 | 169 | 23.00 | 3.750 | 77.78% | 26.750 | 2.97 |
| 19 | Oakdale | 10 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 177 | 211 | -34 | 18.60 | 10.125 | 40.00% | 28.725 | 2.87 |
| 20 | Maritzburg College | 13 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 411 | 261 | 150 | 30.50 | 6.750 | 69.23% | 37.250 | 2.87 |
| 21 | KES | 12 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 355 | 220 | 135 | 27.50 | 6.750 | 66.67% | 34.250 | 2.85 |
| 22 | Noordheuwel | 13 | 7 | 6 | 0 | 499 | 297 | 202 | 22.50 | 14.250 | 53.85% | 36.750 | 2.83 |
| 23 | Kearsney | 10 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 197 | 179 | 18 | 10.90 | 17.250 | 30.00% | 28.150 | 2.82 |
| 24 | Rondebosch | 10 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 274 | 159 | 115 | 27.50 | 0.000 | 70.00% | 27.500 | 2.75 |
| 25 | Queens College | 13 | 10 | 3 | 0 | 365 | 204 | 161 | 31.00 | 3.750 | 76.92% | 34.750 | 2.67 |
| 26 | Durbanville | 11 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 417 | 221 | 196 | 22.50 | 6.750 | 63.64% | 29.250 | 2.66 |
| 27 | Fichardpark | 9 | 8 | 0 | 1 | 280 | 175 | 105 | 23.70 | 0.000 | 88.89% | 23.700 | 2.63 |
| 28 | Grey PE | 13 | 8 | 4 | 1 | 289 | 237 | 52 | 31.10 | 3.000 | 61.54% | 34.100 | 2.62 |
| 29 | EG Jansen | 14 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 369 | 232 | 137 | 33.70 | 2.250 | 64.29% | 35.950 | 2.57 |
| 30 | Middelburg | 9 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 260 | 123 | 137 | 19.00 | 3.750 | 66.67% | 22.750 | 2.53 |
| 31 | Rustenburg | 9 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 268 | 201 | 67 | 18.00 | 4.500 | 66.67% | 22.500 | 2.50 |
| 32 | Glenwood | 13 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 323 | 295 | 28 | 26.50 | 5.625 | 61.54% | 32.125 | 2.47 |
| 33 | Pietersburg | 6 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 194 | 56 | 138 | 12.50 | 2.250 | 83.33% | 14.750 | 2.46 |
| 34 | Helpmekaar | 14 | 5 | 8 | 1 | 392 | 308 | 84 | 23.10 | 10.875 | 35.71% | 33.975 | 2.43 |
| 35 | Westville BHS | 13 | 6 | 7 | 0 | 264 | 280 | -16 | 21.00 | 10.125 | 46.15% | 31.125 | 2.39 |
| 36 | Marlow | 13 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 374 | 269 | 105 | 23.50 | 7.125 | 61.54% | 30.625 | 2.36 |
| 37 | Heidelberg Volkskool | 10 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 210 | 165 | 45 | 18.20 | 5.250 | 60.00% | 23.450 | 2.35 |
| 38 | Kingswood | 10 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 339 | 120 | 219 | 23.00 | 0.000 | 90.00% | 23.000 | 2.30 |
| 39 | Eldoraigne | 9 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 294 | 191 | 103 | 17.20 | 3.000 | 55.56% | 20.200 | 2.24 |
| 40 | Marais Viljoen | 9 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 202 | 140 | 62 | 14.50 | 5.625 | 55.56% | 20.125 | 2.24 |
| 41 | St Andrews | 9 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 184 | 192 | -8 | 14.50 | 5.625 | 55.56% | 20.125 | 2.24 |
| 42 | Selborne | 13 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 290 | 268 | 22 | 20.70 | 8.250 | 46.15% | 28.950 | 2.23 |
| 43 | Witteberg | 8 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 176 | 160 | 16 | 17.80 | 0.000 | 62.50% | 17.800 | 2.23 |
| 44 | Pretoria Boys High | 13 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 355 | 278 | 77 | 27.50 | 0.000 | 69.23% | 27.500 | 2.12 |
| 45 | Pearson | 14 | 11 | 3 | 0 | 301 | 206 | 95 | 25.50 | 2.625 | 78.57% | 28.125 | 2.01 |
| 46 | Transvalia | 11 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 245 | 469 | -224 | 21.50 | 0.000 | 63.64% | 21.500 | 1.95 |
| 47 | Die Anker | 9 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 251 | 227 | 24 | 17.00 | 0.000 | 66.67% | 17.000 | 1.89 |
| 48 | Jim Fouche | 14 | 8 | 5 | 1 | 442 | 355 | 87 | 21.90 | 4.500 | 57.14% | 26.400 | 1.89 |
| 49 | Kempton Park | 10 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 279 | 286 | -7 | 16.00 | 2.250 | 60.00% | 18.250 | 1.83 |
| 50 | Wesvalia | 10 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 236 | 184 | 52 | 11.40 | 6.750 | 40.00% | 18.150 | 1.82 |
@beet: thank you for explaining that means our 2 point loss to Affies is as good as a win then
…. not that rankings matter I only make the comment to jibe at my old mate Tang who detest them if I remember accurately…… I know boys High have a power side this year ….. I am sure if our team is even one step off this coming weekend….. we could catch it …..
@Ringo: Its an interesting formula which I’m sure BHP would share with you but I suspect Kearsney are benefiting from those 75% of the value losses as they have had so many defeats by less than 7 points this season.
They are not a bad team. They get something good out of Sisa France but he’s not a Kevani type finisher. Kearsney could do with another needed X-factor who has gainline penetration or super speed.
For Pretoria BH, I think it will do down as a season of underachieving based on what they have on paper but admittedly the long fixture list coupled with injuries take a toll. If you offered me a win against SACS, I would include it in my resumé of achievements for 2023.
@beet: just need BHP to swap Kearsney and PBHS around…. we play them in PTA this weekend and I think they will be ready for us …. I might be wrong but I think Paul Anthony has not beaten us since he came back ….. he has a win against Affies and Grey PE two big scalps but not against us ….. that might be a bit of swore point for him….. plus exams started today for the kids and we don’t multi task so well and rugby will be second priority for the kids this week
@beet: https://youtu.be/DEbAUcdfbmk
I’m sorry I just couldn’t get enough and had to share with somebody…
@beet: the handshake’s in the contract, and from the contract there’s no turning back…
@Ringo: @Grasshopper:
You guys will be added to the payroll next week to buy your silence.
To refer back to the band Kaya85 mentioned earlier in the week:
It’s a competitive world
Everything counts in large amounts
@Ringo: I agree with you, PBHS far too low. Kearsney have a padded season, Hilton usually do the same to protect the ranking and win rate..
@BoishaaiPa: Glenwood only has 6 games left for the season, we two thirds of the way through already…
@Grasshopper: They will drop down the order and Glenwood will progress…still early days.
@BoishaaiPa: I was meaning they should be lower. Glenwood beat them 18-13 and are 9 places lower, having beaten Welkon Gim above them and coming within 4 of Waterkloof, who were lucky not to get a red card for a tackle on Williams at fullback…
@Grasshopper: Kearsney..where you questioned their no 23 status
@BoishaaiPa: who you talking about?
@Grasshopper: Played 10 won 3?..Wins against Clifton, Hentie Cilliers and Nico Malan…no Powerhouses…draw with Secunda. Who would they beat above them if you put money on that?
@Kantman: Yep, Glenwood used to play them all the time, but gathered sense and only play them in tournos now. But I don’t agree with the 8 games in a month thing so results from those games are iffy, in my opinion vs playing weekly and preparing properly and managing injuries properly. Glenwood lost to Paarl Boys 13-35 at Wildeklawer, lost 28-32 to Waterkloof at Noord/Suid and beat no17 Welkom Gim 17-16 at Wildeklawer of the teams above them from outside of KZN. I think a fairer position for Glenwood is around 25 and I would be happy with that. KZN sides always lack the depth of the Cape & Gauteng Schools, but do punch better these days. Pre 2000 we would have got pumped 70s and 80s by the Paarl & Stellies Schools. KZN Schools combined will be a good outfit. I think Hilton and DHS are too high currently…
@Grasshopper: Very difficult for me to place KZN teams without them playing the Top 10 regularly. Would love to see them play in a season against one or two of the traditional top 6, as well as a couple from the Southern Suburbs.
Kearsney at 23 is just wrong, sorry.
@apple: Yes I try to follow the College playoff scenario. It was a big relief when they moved to a playoff system a few years ago.
The 12 team setup is a considerable and overdue improvement but why not just have a conventional 16 team KO.
Or why not have a next 12 teams from 13-24 doing a second level playoff to increase the excitement.
So do the school rugby rankings pose a risk to traditional derbies??? I don’t know. I believe the quest to be the best or just stay competitive is generally part of a healthy sporting culture – you compete to win. But we all know there is a tipping point where this can turn to very unhealthy practices or obsession/s. So rankings can get you off your ass and trying harder, it can generate interest and valued marketing but it can just as easily be counter-productive.
I sort of wish for the LRR Hood and three bear fairytale. Not too hard, not too soft, just right but that perfect balance seldom exists.
Personally I believe financial well-being is the greater risk to tradition.
Where derbies that once existed that no longer do, its often due to one opponent weakening economically and no longer being able to keep pace or offer the same quality of opposition or number of teams etc. Conversely the improvement in financial wealth has seen new schools rise to prominence while some resurrected themselves to positions in line with former glory days.
I guess another hurdle is maintaining rugby culture in the face of changing demographics at schools where the challenge is to keep rugby participation and support strong. Without the right and enduring commitment, rugby risks being relegated to a minor sport without much depth. In this regard it was quite interesting hearing how the Southern Suburb schools had to work with their rugby boys who observed Ramadan during April.
@beet: If you look at College Football in the States, they have exactly the same problem when they have to decide who are the top 4 teams to move through to the College Football National Championship (12 from 2024), often with the same controversy. There it is decided by committee. One just hopes we don’t end with rankings replacing derbies, or where schools plan their rugby program with rankings in mind, eg not travelling to the other end of the country to “protect” their rankings.
@Rainier: This is the spinner. No matter what officials close to school rugby say or do, the general public want to see rankings.
There will have to be a lot more marketing done to make average scores and number of matches won the in-thing.
For example even if Jeppe loses every single match age group match to Affies on Saturday by a record margin but wins the 1st XV game, all anyone will be interested in, is that history was made – first ever 1st XV win against Affies.
Maybe the AI Chatbot can influence a new way of relating to SBR but for now its rankings, rankings, rankings.
I just remembered my friend who ranks the rankers. I need to get in touch with him.
Results of PRG against HJS and Jeppe v AHS – both seperated by a single ranking position – will separate the wheat from the chaff this Saturday…
@Tang: ironically Marais Viljoen could quite conceivably beat a PBHS…yes their fixtures so far this year ain’t exactly ‘big league’, but see how they go against Garsfontein you might be surprised.
@Vleis: agreed. As someone who works in data & stats, this is as close as you can get to accurate. It’s an indicator, that’s all. Too many variables to include to make it more than say 60% accurate. Glenwood beat a lower ranked team this past weekend & dropped 5 or 6 positions. Top 10 is pretty spot on because most of them play each other. Round Robin is the only way for better accuracy. Using last year as a base for the index doesn’t work with schools who have good & bad years….
@Vleis: Completely agreed. I think the only aspect missing from the formula is being rewarded with bonus points by winning margin.
Take Wynberg for example at the Easter festival: Beat St Alban’s 54-0 and Northcliff 41-0 which in reality hurts their ranking.
@Tang: as for Stellenberg, mate you must consider against whom they lost so far this year ,Grey ,Gim Boishaai ,Boland all top schools
@Tang: Overall, I think that BHP does a great job…but there are a few fundamental weaknesses. These weaknesses have a low impact for the Cape Schools, GCB, etc…but are fatal for any team that plays too many Soutie schools from Gauteng for a few reasons: Said schools’ category rankings are too low, so you are severely penalized just by playing them, especially due to the second weakness – i.e. you do not get rewarded for hammering them if they do happen to be weak in a given year, like you did to Saints this year. You can be thankful that you beat SACS and Durbanville and lost fairly narrowly to PRG…or you wouldn’t be in the top 100!! 🤣
That said, it’s a thankless (and very difficult) task and I think that BHP’s ranking is probably the best for the Top 20 schools.
Marais Viljoen above PBHS
PBHS beat Grey PE at Grey PE but ranked 16 places lower than Grey PE
Kearsney have a win rate of 30% but ranked 23rd
Stellenberg have a win rate of 27% but ranked 16
Isn’t it time to give up on rankings or are they purely for entertainment?
Beet, why is this ranking still being published?
This is much less valuable than the average score and number of matches won on a specific day.
Eish, sou verkies het dat Boishaai bo Paul Roos gebly het voor die naweek se wedstryd 😂