By Andrew Swift
Educator and rugby coach
Below is the match-day squad for the 2023 Rugby World Cup final. In brackets is the school that the player attended and the school’s ranking at the end of the 2024 season (ranking taken from SA School Sports website).
1 Steven Kitshoff (Paul Roos – 1))
2 Mbongeni Mbonambi (St Albans – 46)
3 Frans Malherbe (Paarl Boys’ – 5)
4 Eben Etzebeth (Tygerberg – 209)
5 Franco Mostert (Brits High – 124)
6 Siya Kolisi (c) (Grey PE – 19)
7 Pieter-Steph Du Toit (Swartland – 73)
8 Duane Vermeulen (Nelspruit – 37)
9 Faf de Klerk (Waterkloof – 13)
10 Handre Pollard (Paarl Gym – 3)
11 Cheslin Kolbe (Brackenfell – 77)
12 Damian de Allende (Milnerton – 48)
13 Jesse Kriel (Maritzburg College – 18)
14 Kurt-Lee Arendse (Paulus Joubert SS – unranked)
15 Damian Willemse (Paul Roos – 1)
Replacements:
16 Deon Fourie (Pietersberg High – 102)
17 Ox Nche (HTS Louis Botha – unranked)
18 Trevor Nyakane (Ben Vorster – 113)
19 Jean Kleyn (Hoerskool Linden – 142)
20 RG Snyman (Affies – 4)
21 Kwagga Smith (HTS Middelburg – 52)
22 Jasper Wiese (Upington – 118)
23 Willie Le Roux (Paul Roos -1)
The strength and success of the Springboks, 4-times Rugby World Cup winners, is often linked to South Africa’s much vaunted schools’ rugby system. The understanding is that there is a clear link between the level of rugby played in schools and the success of the national team. How sustainable is the South African schools’ rugby system in terms of producing generational Springboks? Should we rest on our laurels because we are current world champions, or should we interrogate current trends to ensure future success?
Schools’ rugby has undergone fundamental shifts over the last 5 years, becoming increasingly professionalized, with greater concentrations of power and wealth in schools that are typically ranked in the Top 20. However, there has as yet been no response to these shifts from those who are tasked with guarding the future of the game in the country, namely SARU and SASRA.
Schools outside the Top 20 have found themselves under ever-increasing pressure as their player-resources have been plundered by schools with wealth and power. Top 20 schools call the practice ‘scouting’ while the schools who are plundered call it ‘poaching’. Outside of the Western Province schools’ league – where a framework has recently been introduced to manage learner movement between schools – the governing authorities have been silent as the game in schools has undergone radical changes. What will the consequences be if there are no fundamental systemic shifts in how the schools’ game is governed?
Firstly, there will be an ever-increasing concentration of wealth and power in the top 10 to top 20 schools. This will in all likelihood end up as a semi-professional league featuring schools in the top 20 that will resemble a Varsity Cup-type tournament. Secondly, schools outside of this elite group will find it ever harder to put together meaningful rugby programmes, where young players are exposed to high quality coaching and development. Will this impact Springbok rugby? In the long run the table above suggests that it will and should be of significant concern to those governing the game.
From the table above we see that 57% of the Springboks who won the 2023 Rugby World Cup attended schools that in 2024 were ranked outside of the Top 40. Let that sink in for a moment. 30% attended schools who are ranked outside the Top 100. Springbok rugby is strong not because we have 10 to 20 elite schools playing the game but because we have over a hundred schools with meaningful rugby programmes. These are the schools that rugby authorities have to protect – and they need to be protected with new, well thought out rugby-related legislation.
Those with wealth and power will continue to act in their own self-interest, it is the way that society works. However, governing authorities and legislative frameworks are there to ensure that this self-interest does not do damage to other sectors of society – and therefore damage to the ‘collective’, in this instance the national game.
Regarding the movement of schoolboy rugby players, it is painfully obvious that a new legislative framework is long overdue. Primarily this should be done to safeguard rugby programmes across the entire spectrum of schools’ rugby, which in turn sustain the long-term success of the national side over many decades.
Here’s one option:
If School A would like the services of a player who is School B, then School B must sign a letter of release to formalize the process. If required, School A must compensate School B for the time and finances that have been invested in that player. School B (generally outside the Top 20) can then use this capital to invest in their rugby programme to ensure its future success.
Here’s another:
Ban ‘scouts’ and ‘agents’ from interacting with schoolboys until after Craven Week in their matric year. Scouts generally have one priority and that is filling their own pockets. They have no concern for the damage that they do to individual schools when they manipulate boys to move away to schools with more wealth and power. They must be prevented from doing so by law – if there is the will to protect as many rugby programmes as possible and therefore the long-term future of South African rugby.
The table also gives truth to the lie that boys have to attend a Top 10 school to become a Springbok. This untruth is often peddled by ‘scouts’ and ‘agents’ and repeated by those with a vested interest to entice boys away from rugby schools outside the Top 20. However, the evidence is clear, you can become a Springbok at any school that offers a meaningful rugby programme – even those ranked outside the Top 100. The critical fact is that these schools must be left alone to thrive in their own space and not be undermined by those who have no concern for their future success.
There are other options available, but don’t get caught up in the detail. The key point is that rugby authorities are watching a process unfold that is going to undermine the future success of both the entire schools’ rugby system, as well as the long-term success of the game at a national level.
Schools’ rugby is also about more than performance on the field – it is deeply connected to the life of the whole school, in identity, culture and school pride. Rugby therefore has the ability to impact every corner of school life. In protecting rugby programmes across the entire spectrum of rugby-playing schools in South Africa, we will also be protecting these schools being ‘special places’ that build South African society.
The issues, although complex, are clear. We ignore them at our collective peril.
Andrew Swift
Educator and rugby coach
Having said that,…Mr Swift does make many valid points, many of which I do agree with. I also feel that the Pro Teams (e.g. URC teams) and SARU especially have a huge unpaid debt to the fantastic schools who develop the players for their first 8 – 10 years of rugby development from e.g u7 – u16 age…the Unions and SARU put in relatively little investment into relatively few players in their so-called elite pathways. Instead, thousands of top players were developed by many of the ‘nameless’ hard working primary school or high school maths /geography /Afrikaans /history /woodwork /isiXhosa etc..teachers who do it for the love of the game, service to education and belief and faith in the potential of our country’s incredible young people.
@Kaya 85 (Comment #13)
Good point! Glenwood is 115 years old this year BUT is struggling in an area that is in decline. Hard enough to keep the lights on let alone be competitive with other schools in sport who have multi-millionaire Old Boys funding recruitment & elite programnes PLUS losing the best to the Cape as everyone with money semigrates there…..these are still boys, not professionals. For me, a schools primary service is education, if you want to be a professional rugby player go to an elite academy in Stellenbosch….
I’m just skeptical of when accusatory terms like ‘…schools with wealth and power…’ are thrown around as some kind of substitute for analysis. The schools who are in the top 20 to 30 usually have decades and decades of good leadership, innovative yet disciplined hard work year after year…decade after decade…hard earned and accumulated intellectual property, community investment, monetary investment…selfless cultures of education and service…I can go on and on. These institutions should be lauded, appreciated and emulated. Not maligned. Many many schools who have slipped or ‘fallen’ or who can simply no longer offer rugby or other activities are just overwhelmed by economic difficulties e.g. the school up the road who cannot pay its electricity bill…does not receive its budget from the Department, and the municipality cuts its electricity. Irony is that the Dept of Ed and the municipality are run by the some political party in Power…so those with the ‘power’ its their actions, misactions, corruption and ineptitude sinking school after school…oh they’ve looted the ‘wealth’ of the metro, province, national government.
Many many schools, my own included, can’t keep up with high levels of educational attainment never mind sport. No there should not be laws forcing successful schools, or institutions, communities or whatever, to aim lower, dumb down or be less successful to assuage those who envy success.
These schools are succeeding despite resentful laws, bad faith, real life difficulties, and obstacle after obstacle from corrupt resentful inept ideological haters aka gov.
Then we lose to Australia U20 at home……
It would be interesting to know how much the schools between 11-50 recruit from other schools.
And then 51-100’s recruitment from other schools?
Point is, everyone ‘recruits’. The real question is why can schools not offer the same opportunity – or can they?
Our system is strong and not build on who you played for, but how you play. Hence PSDT can come from Swartland and be the World Player of the year twice.
Dear Mr Swift
Nice article. A few points to ponder.
Freedom of choice is enshrined in our constitution.
Boys don’t move just from lesser known schools to well known schools.
But let us get micro – how would you determine compensation? Let’s take a hypothetical example. Say school fees at school A is R40 000 per year. Say R20 000 goes to academics and the other R20 000 to sport. Of the R20 000 allocated to sport, say R15 000 goes to rugby. Say R10 000 of this amount goes to coaching. And say the coaching added R5 000 value to the boy’s development (assuming we can arrive at an acceptable formula to measure the value added development).
Say the boy was 3 years in a school and coaching fees (value added component) increased by 10% per year. Then the compensation would be R16 050 at the end of the third year.
School B is willing to pay.
Now, how will school A use the R16 050 to improve its rugby programme to the extent that other boys don’t leave the school?
Say 10 boys leave, the school will receive R160 500. With 5 boys left, and R160 500 in the pocket, what will school A do in terms of investing in its rugby programme so that boys don’t leave?
I don’t know, so I ask?
@Rod (Comment #6)
To be fair, rugby at school “commodifies” children in much the same way as any other school activity, albeit on a larger platform. E.g., a school posts on social media about their top academic achievers, their cricket team’s results or an ace chess player. Yes, the school wants to give recognition to those kids, but the school is also trying to market itself to the public. Why is it that smaller schools are so against bigger schools poaching their players? Is it only because they want what’s best for the kid in question, or is it, in some part, because the smaller school loses an “asset”?
As someone from a small town who left to attend PRG (not on a bursary), I experienced this firsthand: I had loads of people trying to guilt trip me into staying (and yes, I was useless at rugby, but moderately good at cricket and relatively clever). Kids who excel at anything are commodified by all schools. And I’m completely against poaching, but I think it’s a bit hypocritical for any particular school to take an overly moralistic stance on the commodification of kids, when it’s always been happening everywhere.
@BoishaaiPa (Comment #7)
I agree with your general sentiment, but I’m not sure that it’s only “pure luck” for a school to produce a Springbok. There are loads of wonderful teachers and coaches that have inspired and shaped young men to become high performance athletes and equipped them with the skills to succeed at the highest level.
This is not something new..over 120 plus years of Bok rugby the so-called top 5 has only produced around 12% of all Springboks. The balance has always been in favour of the rest of the schools, exactly represented in the current teams as well. The difference is that these schools have been consistantly producing players since 1906 and have been top playing rugby schools for 100 years or more. Contrary to believe..schools dont produce Springboks..natural talent and willpower produce them. It is by pure luck a school can claim that a Bok was there. How many Springboks have you heard did not play for his schools 1st team? Exposure nowadays is important…but there were no exposure in the old days either and yet those players from unknown rugby schools still came through. It is all about the structures after school that needs a look at. To be able to accommodate all these late developers and give more exposure to senior rugby.
It can never be too hard to right an obvious wrong. Lest we forget that commodifying children is illegal. This is school sport afterall.
@agter_die_pale_pa (Comment #4)
Yeah I agree that its too hard to change things now.
It would have been great if there was a regulatory body that could create rules and govern with a motive of looking after the overall health of schoolboy rugby while promoting its evolution.
Without inviting in Grasshopper’s negative sentiments about South Africa, there is a context to SBR which suggests that at a competitive level, it possibly will become the exclusive domain of the schools that are able to retain their wealth or access to good funding. These changes are more evident than some are willing to acknowledge and will continue IMO.
Great insights thank you to mr. Swift. A topic that I really enjoy.
Although I am in solidarity with the writer’s sentiment, I fear that the beast have been fed too much already. Any measures to try and turn things around will be immensely difficult to monitor, proof or govern. Unfortunately South Africa, and the schooling system in SA, has bigger challenges than to try to make inter-rugby fair and competitive.
Times have changed and the reality is that it is a billion-Rand industry (for the foreseeable decade or two at least). Teenage boys (and their parents) are easily influenced, and although the stats provided in the article is solid evidence (for now), emotions are easily caught by the euphoria of the top SBR-schools (most of the times more than justified, as they are great institutions on many fronts). Programs like “Rugby of Niks”, which I thoroughly enjoyed, further fuels these emotions.
I do feel however that the balance have been shifted across too quickly, and I think there could be a re-balancing of some sort. This will be driven by communities, parents and leadership at schools, to decide whether they want to be part of this adrenaline-filled, testosterone-fueled roller-coaster. Maybe not something a SBR-blog wants to hear, but a top 20 rugby-program does not define the success of a school, it only enhances it. You can be a great school for all walks of life without a top 20 rugby team, but you can also be a school that places all its resources into rugby, at the expense of everything else. Eventually those rugby programs will fizzle out, happened before and will happen again.
The one thing I am certain of is that the divide between top 20 and the rest will increase for the foreseeable future, and the debate is only heating up.
@Bungee (Comment #2)
Wynlandwater?
What Im also seeing is that if you go to one specific school, that is mentioned more then once, your odds are improved compared to the others
Fabulous article and so true. I think both options are valid. Compensate for transfers. Ban agents and scouts until after Craven week. I think the school rugby system is already in trouble. Power is being concentrated in a few schools and ranking systems have become the benchmark of success.