From a comment posted by Vleis
In South African rugby, the selection of teams for prestigious tournaments like Craven Week (CW) often leans heavily towards players from a handful of top-performing schools in each province. This trend is influenced by several factors, both practical and contentious.
Why Top Schools Dominate Craven Week Selection
There are rational reasons why selectors gravitate towards players from well-known rugby schools:
- Limited Preparation Time: Coaches have minimal time to prepare for CW, so they prioritise players who are already familiar with each other’s playing styles.
- Proven Track Records: Players from top schools are more likely to have been tested in high-pressure, top-tier matches, giving selectors confidence in their ability to perform under similar conditions.
- Accessibility: Coaches naturally see more of the players from leading schools due to the visibility of their games and tournaments.
However, it would be naïve to ignore some of the less equitable factors that can influence selection:
- “Horse-Trading”: Some selections are influenced by deals struck between coaches.
- Institutional Bias: Coaches often hail from the same top schools and may favour players from their alma maters.
- Union Directives: Provincial rugby unions may exert pressure to include specific players for various reasons.
Life After School: Levelling the Playing Field
For players from smaller or weaker rugby schools, the post-school environment provides a unique opportunity to overcome these challenges. At university level or in professional setups, they train and compete alongside top talent under the guidance of skilled coaches. These players can demonstrate their potential daily, often eroding any initial biases.
This underscores the importance of junior rugby tournaments such as the Varsity Cup, Young Guns, and provincial U19/U20/U21 championships. These platforms allow talented players to shine regardless of their school backgrounds. Similarly, a robust club rugby structure ensures that late bloomers or overlooked players have pathways to prove themselves and rise through the ranks.
Determination Trumps Early Advantages
While making a CW or South African Schools team is a significant boost for a young player, it is by no means the only route to success. Many players from smaller schools have proven that hard work and perseverance can help them overcome early disadvantages. Conversely, some early stars fail to maintain their momentum as the demands of adult rugby intensify.
The lesson is clear: rugby in South Africa thrives when opportunities exist for all players, regardless of where they come from. By fostering inclusive development pathways, the sport can continue to uncover hidden gems and ensure that talent triumphs over circumstance.
@Buitestaander
Give this man a Bols!!!
@Vleis
Very cool post Vleisie, I’m happy I tuned in to SBR today. The Lions, Bulls, Sharks and Valke Unions have all tried to promote junior club rugby u13 – u18 levels as evidenced in the annual inter-prov. between them. This should be promoted even more, but in general the level of expertise of the few jnr club coaches is quite patchy. SARU and all unions must be encouraged to train and develop better coaching at jnr clubs, so that the net widens. But Vleis is 100% right…e.g. almost all Lions CW, AW, GK players come from 5 schools only….with very few exceptions.
Geez guys, take dick pics and send it to each other privately.
It is so childish to turn every thread into a measuring contest.
@boerboel (Comment #21)
Nope, that was a hobby…
@Grasshopper (Comment #20)
still designing websites?- should be cheaper from here?
@Grizzly (Comment #18)
Regret leaving a Communist/Marxist Chinese & Russian owned kleptocracy with race based politics, insane crime levels (worse than warzones), highest unemployment in the world & full of Ramapoephol loving Karen’s in gated estates, yes the wrong decision. The only thing I miss is family & friends, luckily most are leaving to join us.
@Grizzly (Comment #18) Hilarious! You’ve only been on the blog for 8 years, newbie. A bit like Garsies, new kids on the block. Glenwood celebrate 115 years next year of which 110 years were playing rugby…
@Grasshopper (Comment #17)Only a fool will try to convince you other wise. Seen it here on the blog for the past 8 years. And no yoy don’t. You want to justify your decision which you terribly regret. 😂
I’m out on this one.Talk next year. Good luck with GW, hope they have a good season next year.
@Grizzly (Comment #14)
Nope, said in jest yes but you meant it really, only a fool would think otherwise…
@Grizzly (Comment #15)
Incorrect, I want SA to thrive. However, the arrogance around rugby is nauseating. I read comments on blogs, articles etc, it’s embarrassing. Keo & Zels too, embarrassing. Zels is more measured. I don’t need to justify anything, I made the right decision for my family & I. No work in SA in my sector for my skin colour, it’s called survival boet.
@Grasshopper (Comment #13)You want SA to fail on all levels. It’s called JUSTIFICATION.I feel sorry for you.
@Grasshopper (Comment #13)Hook, line and sinker Grassy. Only a fool will take my post seriously.
@Grizzly (Comment #12)
The arrogance in SA is astounding! The Boks greatest could only beat an ABs side in rebuilding by a few points at home. There is no more naturally ability in SA as there is in Argentina, Brazil etc. Imagine if Argentina had rugby as No1, they would annihilate SA. The ‘greatest’ Bok side in history lost 2 games in a year, one at home. The 2.8% more difficult is incorrect, you need to factor in the number of countries & players playing the sport. Football is played by over 200 countries, rugby barely 20. Only 4 can actually win the WC. Football is less about brute force and more about skill, hence why any good team could beat another on any given day. In rugby, generally if your pack is stronger you win. Football is the biggest sport in SA and Bafana Bafana are useless…
@Grasshopper (Comment #10)I’m implying it’s 2.8% more difficult to win a soccer WC.If soccer was our game and it was structured like the Craven and provincial weeks and it was a religion for white people like rugby. We would have dominate soccer like we do with rugby. You tell me Spain and Italy could match our natural ability and born in ball skills? The soccer world can go on their knees and say thank you we choose rugby. 🏉⚽
@Grasshopper (Comment #10)
The only comparisons between soccer and rugby is that:
1. In both most crucial games are won by one point
2. The UK do not compete as one
3. The USA suck at both
@Grizzly (Comment #9)
Not sure what you implying but to win a rugby WC is far easier than football. That is a fact. In rugby, only 3 countries treat the sport as a religion, SA, NZ and Wales. In reality only SA, NZ, England & Australia can win it. Ireland and France have a mental block..
@Vleis (Comment #8)
Lekker Vleis! Fakts matters! 😂
@Grasshopper (Comment #7)
I agree that it’s more difficult to win a football world cup than a rugby world cup. However, since England won in 1966, there have been six different winners in 14 tournaments (i.e. 42.8%), whereas, there have been four different winners in 10 rugby world cups (i.e. 40%)…so, there is not too much difference at the top level. At least the RWC has been won by teams from three different continents…not just two!
.
The other sports that you mention are more difficult to assess, as the US mostly don’t send their top players – e.g. they haven’t won an Olympic gold in ice-hockey since the miracle at Lake Placid in 1980 (I was at school in the US at the time – the country went as ballistic as us when we won the RWC in 1995). In basketball, they’ve sent most of their top players since 1982, so have won nine out of the last 10 Olympic golds.
.
On a different note, I’m battling to post comments – I keep getting messages saying: “There has been a critical error on this website”
@Vleis (Comment #6)
Agree with your comments and one to add to the last one, football is a truly global game so the chances of winning that are much lower than rugby which if we all had to be honest is only really played by 10 countries, 4 of which have a realistic chance of winning it. So SA or NZ winning it regularly isn’t exactly a surprise when the sport if a religion in each of those countries. Spain, Italy, Brazil and Germany are the equivalent of SA but for football. Rugby is just above the US winning the baseball, basketball and ice hockey ‘World Champs’ or Olympics. The English league is strong because it’s so multi-national. England would win a cup with a better manager. The coach, as we’ve seen with Rassie, makes the most difference….
@Grasshopper (Comment #5)
Even the rugger team did better by wining in 2003! 
I agree with some of your points, but have a few comments on your post:
1. Rugby in the UK is far less elitist these days. Per a study in 2014, 61% of the England squad went to private schools; however, this figure dropped to 37% per another study in 2019…so the trend is clearly moving away from elite schools.
2. A lot of the ex-private school England players were originally from humble backgrounds (e.g. Itoje), but ended up at private schools via rugby scholarships, which widens the net further. Indeed, while the school rugby culture in the UK is weaker than here in SA, the the club rugby culture in the UK, at the junior level, is stronger than in SA. This further helps attract more kids from state schools to rugby – some of whom end up at elite schools.
3. In all countries (SA, UK, USA, India, etc, etc) there are a mammoth amount of kids that don’t participate in extra curricular activities for various reasons, not just because they attended weak state schools with overworked, underpaid, unmotivated teachers – e.g. limited facilities – my son played cricket against the v prestigious/elite Royal College in Colombo, Sri Lanka, which had ONLY two open team squads of 20 boys each, chosen from 1,000 boys!
4. Increasing numbers does not guarantee success – e.g. you mention that everyone plays soccer in the UK, plus they have the best professional league in the world….and yet, they haven’t won an international tournament since 1966!
Great post. Now don’t knock me because I’m talking about English schools rugby, its to give a reason why SA schools rugby is so strong. English Schools rugby is elitist, that’s a fact. It’s played and promoted only in the private schools. The gov schools play it for fun, max two teams per year group, one that plays every week. A private school in the UK is extremely expensive, it makes Hilton and Michaelhouse look like nothing. Going to a Whitgift, Sedbergh, Millfield, Bedford, Tonbridge, Dulwich etc is £30k a year plus. If England had as much passion and focus on the Gov schools here as in SA, they would honestly smash everyone. The athletic talent wasted on football/soccer etc is insane! My daughters school has 8 teams per year group both boys and girls. Look at any England side, mostly private school Old Boys. I think the point here is that in SA, because the pool is much bigger and the sport is played across more schools, the depth is huge. In England, if you are good at a sport, you either have to go to a club or a private school. SA does need to be careful though pooling all the best players in the top 20 schools, also look after them after school. SA U20 rugby falls off a cliff as it seems in SA the pinnacle is really 1st team at school with 20,000 spectators and not U20 rugby in an empty Newlands…
Awesome post. We should make sure we allow talent to rise regardless of the school you attend.
BUITESTAANDER'S VALUED COMMENT TRANSLATED TO ENGLISH
Statistics confirm that many players who do not come from traditional rugby powerhouses still go on to reach the pinnacle of the sport. This is excellent for the growth and inclusivity of rugby, and it is important that this remains the case. Similarly, it is significant that many players from strong rugby schools, who do not make the Craven Week team, later become exceptional international stars. This, too, is a positive phenomenon. However, we must be cautious about making generalisations:
1. There are approximately 20 to 30 traditional rugby strongholds, while there are hundreds of schools that play rugby. In terms of numbers, the success of around 400–500 boys from strong rugby schools is being compared to the success of thousands (10,000+) of players from other rugby-playing schools. This is somewhat of an unfair comparison.
2. Outstanding players often miss out on Craven Week selection due to the “quota system.” Unions such as the Bulls and Free State are especially affected, as they are forced to leave talented players behind, which can delay their development.
3. Talented players from non-traditional rugby schools are quickly developed after school through platforms like the Varsity Cup or various provincial rugby academies. Within two years, these players are equipped with the necessary skills to succeed at the highest level, effectively eliminating any potential “disadvantages.”
4. The national exposure provided by tournaments (e.g., Wildeklawer, Noord-Suid) to players from strong rugby schools gives them a head start, smoothing their path to success.
5. If there ever comes a day when only players from prominent rugby schools reach the top, it would spell the end of rugby in many other schools. The very belief that success is attainable for everyone is what keeps players motivated and dreaming.
6. Ultimately, rugby is about more than just achieving success at the highest level. The excitement and privilege of being part of matches such as Grey vs. Paul Roos or Paarl Boys’ High vs. Gimnasium, or participating in tournaments like Wildeklawer or Noord-Suid, already represent the fulfilment of lifelong dreams for many players. From their perspective, this is the ultimate achievement.
For the sake of our players, schools, and rugby as a whole, it is essential that every player can dream and believe that success is within their reach.
@buitestaander (Comment #1)
💯
PLAYER SELECTION
* daar is tussen 20 en 30 tradisionele sterk rugbyskole. Daar is egter honderde skole wat rugby beoefen. In terme van getalle, word die sukses van ongeveer 400/500 seuns uit die sterk rugbykole, vergelyk met die sukses van duisende (10 000 plus) spelers uit die ander rugbyspelende skole. Ietwat van ‘n onredelike vergelyking
* daar is uitstaande spelers wat nie aan Cravenweek deelnaam nie agv die “kwotastelsel”. Veral unies soos die Bulle en die Vrystaat moet noodwendig talentvolle spelers by die huis laat, wat hul ontwikkeling vertraag
* talentvolle spelers uit die nie-tradisionele rugbykole word onmiddelik na skool dmv die Varsity Cup of die onderskeie provinsiale rugby-akademies binne twee jaar ontwikkel itv dit wat nodig is om op die hoogste vlak suksesvol te wees. Dit skakel potensiële “agterstande” uit
* die nasionale blootstelling (dmv toernooie) wat spelers uit die sterk rugbyskole geniet, plaas hulle op die voorvoet, en vergemaklik hul pad na sukses
* sou daar ‘n dag kom dat alleen spelers uit prominente rugbyskole die hoogste sport bereik, sal dit die einde van rugby by baie skole wees. Dit is juis die wete dat sukses vir almal beskore is, wat spelers laat volhard en aanhou droom.
* na alles gaan dit ook oor meer as net eventuele sukses. Die opwinding en voorreg om bv deel van ‘n Grey/Paul Roos-, of ‘n HJS/GIM-wedstryd te wees, of aan bv Wildeklawer en/of Noord-Suid deel te neem, is vir die groter massa reeds die verwesenliking van ‘n jare-lange droom, en uit hul perspektief die bereiking van sukses.
In belang van spelers, ons skole en ook rugby, is dit noodsaaklik dat elke speler kan droom, en weet dat prestasie ook vir hom moontlik is.