Okay this one is not as bad as the title might lead you to believe. It’s has nothing to do with politics or transformation. Instead it’s about an idea I thought of to deal with an imminent threat that has the undesirable ability to undermine the integrity and enjoyment of schoolboy rugby.
The danger I’m talking about the so-called “arms race” where schools try to get ahead of rivals by aggressively recruiting the best possible rugby players they can find from under-15 to open age-group. The obsession driving this is either winning at all costs or the fear of losing which is translated as failure.
You might have heard the term “arms race” being used before to describe what is happening in schoolboy rugby in parts of both New Zealand and Australia right now. In those countries it has gotten to the point where the schools are being described as ruthless, their outrageous spending sprees on acquiring rugby players (arms) are not justified and seem to know no limits. It has the feel of the devil possessing some of these schools’ leaders and actively trying to turn schoolboy rugby into a hell on earth. Saddest of all is that part of what made the game special for a century or more down in Australasia has been lost. The frustration levels of those who have become victims of this wrong is simmering. The bottom-line is that an unhealthy and undesirable situation now exists in New Zealand and Australia.
In South Africa, I don’t believe we are quite there yet but we are moving closer to the same scenario. A tipping point will come. It might come overnight and catch many unawares. The guarantee is that it will be ugly unless preventative measures are put in place fairly shortly to drastically change the mind-sets of the schools that will inevitably lead us to that doom.
My idea is a quota system that forces schools to make use of a minimum of 12 boys that have been at the school since Grade 8.
The idea stems from two sources.
1. Defining the objective
Very recently we’ve witnessed the manipulation of the Varsity Cup. An attempt was made to turn a competition designed for student rugby into a professional game. Left untouched, 2014 probably would have seen teams attempting to improve on performances by integrating more professionals into their setups at the expense of proper students.
The organisers have thankfully stepped in to stamp out pros using competition rule amendments. Going forward their objective for Varsity Cup rugby is to make sure it is about university students who are serious about getting degrees and also play rugby. It will not be about professional rugby players that happen to register for a few courses which they may or may not attend or show any interest in passing.
The decision means that Varsity Cup rugby returns to its core. The reason for it’s existence will not be lost. The manipulators have been suppressed.
Just like the Varsity Cup, schoolboy rugby is crying out for a definition. It needs a motto that goes something along the lines of “school students wanting to maximise on their academic opportunities and playing rugby as an extramural activity.” Yes some of these kids will be brilliant rugby players on sports bursaries and scholarships but there is no place for those who see aggressive recruitment beyond Grade-8 level as the means to get results and simultaneously corrupt the system.
2. Removing the incentive
The second motivator has been the success achieved by making Craven Week an under-18 tournament from about 2007/8 onwards. Prior to that, post-matrics and under-19 players could be selected for Craven Week. It provided players with a huge incentive to stay back an extra year, as being able to play at Craven Week often opened doors after school (something that has possibly also changed a lot since then with attempts to recruit boys at younger ages being very much the norm nowadays). Under-19 participation back then kept the post-matric system healthy and also accounted for a good number of matric repeaters. Once under-19’s were banished from Craven Week, the incentive to stay in school a year longer disappeared and so did just about every school’s willingness to continue offering post-matric.
It basically goes without saying that removing the incentive changes the attitude. A school is a lot less unlikely to go shopping for rugby recruits if these recruits will never be able to represent their 1st team. Equally so players and their parents will be a lot more reluctant to move to new schools for rugby related reasons once they understand that the chances of playing 1st XV rugby at these new schools will be significantly diminished.
Conclusion
As I define it, a Grade-8 quota would mean a few things:
1. Schools work hard to recruit well at Grade-8 level which most of them already do.
2. Schools commit to developing the boys that have been there since Grade-8, knowing that 80% of these boys will make up their 1st team one day.
3. All boys arriving at schools after the Grade-8 (under-14 season) concludes will battle it out for 3 remaining 1st XV spots.
This idea of a Grade-8 quota is not an absolute. Like all things in life there so many exceptions to consider with some exceptions possibly needing to be factored in as exemptions from the rule.
What I believe is that a quota like this would remove much of the incentive to spend money on recruitment after Grade-8. It also has the potential to increase the integrity associated with boys moving from one school to another. It would also ensure that a few of the core values of schoolboy rugby from the past are reinstated / preserved – schools competing with their own home grown players and accepting that the spirit and pride with which boys compete far exceeds any final scores.
@Deon: Interesting points made there Deon.
I think if our current situation was as bad as it was ever going to get, most of us could live with the lowish level of unhappiness that exists now because it is very much under control.
The worry would be if we progress to the state that the schools in NZ and Aus find themselves in now, where people in high positions are publicly admitting that there is a problem.
It would be the sort of situation where say Paul Roos, who are already a popular choice for some of the most gifted SBR players in SA is forced to rethink its stance and draft in 5 or 6 Gr.11-12 players just to keep up with the professionalism of rivals.
I also appreciate that we are not NZ and Aus, we are South Africans! Perhaps sanity will prevail and we will have to fear the same consequences
@Playa: This is something that definitely needs to be addressed.
We have a belt stretching from the Cape East coast to the West coast where rugby is part of the culture of previously disadvantaged communities. It only makes sense for SARU to redevelop their plans around this.
The other initiate should be to get primary schools from around the country that don’t offer rugby, interested in playing the sport or a variation of the sport even if it only for 10 weeks per year.
@beet:
Fair enough…as the saying goes….Ke December Boss!
To answer your question, I would certainly prefer that Dale did the former. It is, however not possible to capture the bulk of the talent at an early age (by grade 7).However, if SARU were to be more active in schoolboy rugby and actually identify the ‘disadvantaged’ rugby playing schools of which there are plenty in the EC alone, then there would be no need for rugby related migration if resources were ploughed into those schools as a way of development. Grey High, Selborne, Cambridge, Dale, Queens, Graeme to name a few have benefited from talent spotted at schools such as Ithembelihle, Ndzondolelo, Forbes Grant, Bhisho High, Nathaniel Nyaluza, Ntsokotha, Zweliyanda, Nkwanca to name a few. And those are schools with a proud rugby history. But resources, and ‘development’ (or lack thereof) have resulted in their rugby standards going backwards.
If SARU was serious about ‘development’ they would do well to place a focus on such schools instead of inflicting quotas at under 16/18 level…which is where this whole mess begins…and put an end to this child trafficking.
Interesting article concerning the 2013 Affies 1st team at http://www.affiesrugby.co.za , go to blog, article titled “2013 1e span spelers: 2009 – 2013”
Also interesting a message from AB De Villiers to his old alma mater on http://www.affies.co.za under title “AB se boodskap aan Affies”. Suppose any boy from any school and hostel can associate with this message.
One boy from M.College out of 26 odd was not from Grade 8. He came from Middleburg as his parents now live in the Midlands.
Beet, I follow your argument. However I do not think quantification of any aspect pertaining to “buying” would provide a solution. One cannot enforce a regulation regulating the number of players from “outside”, the amount payable for a player, the entry age into any school, of permissible “purchased players” as in grade 8 is ok but not grade 10 etc. There are various reasons for this, one being constitutionality, another would be the fact that 12 players out of 1200 would be 1% in school A, whereas school B, with 600 pupils, will have a regulation forcing them to retain 2% of its grade 8 pupils. Just not fair! Percentage based “quotas” will not work either, since it just would not be fair towards bona fide new entrants into schools. Purchasing/buying etc is now a confirmed, well established practice and we will never be able to rid ourselves from this. I believe that if we decide to regulate the practice, we should start by setting qualitative guidelines. First of all, the player’s services should be purchased, not the player himself. His ability may be a commodity, but the player himself can not be bought like a commodity. The term “buying a player” implies that someone sells the player. Therefore, by determining that only the player may benefit directly financially, it would be a good start. The player is certainly not owned by anyone, including his parents. By the way,I know for sure if my parents could have sold me when I was a teenager they would have done so for any price. Transparency is also very important. Transparency may help regulating the manner in which a player is approached by another school, as to promote schools rather offering scholarships rather than a parent pimping his child to an approaching school. No covetous acts! there should be a code of professional/ethical conduct, as in many professions, regulating the ethics between schools. I am puzzled by the amount of players joining a new (purchasing) school, and leaving again shortly afterwards. I believe that if a player and his parents are well informed as to what to expect, this would not happen. The information provided by the purchasing school should also conform to specific standards. If the player is at fault and just wasting everyone’s time, money and effort, and leaves the purchasing school shorty after arriving, he should be held responsible for at least some form of damages. This will ensure that players and parents grasp the weight of the decision, and think at least three times before accepting an offer, knowing that this decision is not reversible at will. Naturally there would be acceptable exceptions to this rule. But a player for instance leaving school in the Eastern Cape for a school in Gauteng will be forced to contemplate the move more seriously. There will always be those trying to and succeeding in obviating regulations, but qualitative measures are so much more enforcible, and leave room for debate in individual and unique circumstances.
@Woltrui: I dont have those stats available, but looking at the primary school which produced the most S15 players, will tell a story. Ask Beet to post it again ! So, it tells a story- not only from Gr8, but from primary school. I can recall that the great side of 2007, had something like 7 or 8 who attended GCB FROM GR 1 .
@Woltrui: The starting team for 80% of the games for Boishaai this year and the grade they joined
15 – Gr 8
14 – Gr 8
13 – Gr 8
12 – Gr 9
11 – Gr 8
10 – Gr 9
9 – Gr 8
8 – Gr 8
7 – Gr 8
6 – Gr 8
5 – Gr 8
4 – Gr 8
3 – Gr 8
2 – Gr 8
1 – Gr 8
We had one lock join us from Garsies in Gr 11, but he played one or two games and a wing from Paul Roos who joined in Gr 11 for reason other than rugby and did not play many games and was mostly a reserve.
@Woltrui: That is an amazing Affies stat.
I wish we had access to those figures. I think Kearsney was at 100% this year and I suspect that Michaelhouse, Hilton and College were not far behind.
It would be great to put up a Gr.8% alongside the schools on the national rankings. It might give us a much clearer indication of schools developing the talent vs those buying it.
@Playa: There is no doubt its an extreme measure and it is much harder to sell this concept is in some regions that others.
In NZ and Australia, the talk suggests that SBR has been ruined.
BHP used a key phase the other day : “best opportunities” When it comes to schooling it’s not something anyone should ever attempt to undermine.
Getting back to my proposal, perhaps the question you have to ask yourself i: would I rather Dale have improve it’s efforts to bring in the regions best talent in Gr.8 or accept that Dale becomes a kind of feeder school at risk of losing its best players at any stage to others with deeper pockets?
FYI December is also the slowest traffic month on the blog
Mr Beet it would be interesting to find out the stats from different schools for 2013 in above mentioned regard, from the esteemed bloggers.
Affies stats in this regard look as follow:
27 Players played for the first team in 2013.
24 of these kids started school at Affies from grade 8.
Would be interesting to find out how schools like Grey Bloem, Kloof, Garsies, HJS, Paarl Gim, Kwaggas, Glenwood etc look in this regard.
I suspect “platteland” schools like Nellies and HTS Middelburg must almost have a 100% grade 8 to grade 12 start ratio.
Beet, you know that I support any possible solution to the anti-poaching/anti-buying of schoolboys mission. This, however does sound like an extreme solution to an extreme situation. For example, in my matric class, even though, ALL the matrics in the 1st XV had been at Dale since grade 8…in the entire class of 82 boys, only about 55 of us had been at Dale since grade 8. 8 boys who had played under 14As in our grade 8 year had left the school…none of them poached. The best player we had at under 14 in fact left for Stutterheim High School
What I am getting to is that, boys will change schools for many reasons during their high school career, some of the reasons will have nothing to do with rugby or any sport for that matter. Some boys will change from rugby to hockey or some other sport. But fair enough, a 1st XV will constitute Grade 11 and some Grade 10 boys, which makes your solution mathematically feasible.
But consider this. At Dale, situated in a town surrounded by rural areas, with many talented sportsman, each year old boys are asked to sponsor a disadvantaged (as opposed to previously disadvantaged) boy from the rurals to come to Dale and increase their chances of success. Most of these boys join Dale in Grade 10…Makhaya Ntini is the biggest success stor in this regard. What then becomes of that boy if he is good enough, but the quota has been made?
I am trying to avoid being political here, but I would say that this law should apply, but should be waived if the boys who join the school are currently disadvantaged and come from currently disadvantaged schools, and colour not being a factor (before I get chewed up). A few years ago, Old Dalians sponsored a white boy who came from a poor family, and was a talented cricketer and rugby player, and came to Dale in Grade 10.
What you have proposed are tough measures, which probably would get dismissed, hence the lack of commentary, but do need to be refined.
I can work with 12 from a 23 man match day squad.
Fortunately all the schools I’ve been involved with over the years revolve around the child and not the parents, teachers, coaches or the school itself.
Hence the wonderful phrases
Vra maar die kenners…………………..Monnas is wenners
Dis is n fees………………om n Schoemie te wees
KHS is die beste………………in die Noordweste
Vrede is inderdaad………………..die beste in die Vrystaat
Kom sing n lied…………………soos n Lindeniet
Word n Affie……………….anders kan jy nie saam die groot honde blaffie
Kom leer by Grey………………hoe om jou hare te sny
The Green Machine………………is the best team I’ve ever seen
Come to KES……………and your rugby will be a mess
Beet, I think your idea has much merit. At present, some schools are being forced into recruiting at all levels to avoid being beaten on a regular basis by schools who have professional teams of recruiters and systems that would make pro unions jealous. Unfortunately you are not up against a system but also a mind set that causes some schools to look for a ‘gap’ in the rules rather than just keeping to the rules. When you see the amount of substance abuse, boys not writing exams to ensure being eligible for rugby, overage players etc you will understand that monitoring such an idea would be very difficult and lead to more matches being called off etc. The bottom line is we are caught up in a sad state of affairs that will not end unless drastic steps are taken.