| Rank | Team | Played | Won | Lost | Draw | Avg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Grey College | 21 | 19 | 1 | 1 | 4.17 |
| 2 | Paul Roos | 18 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 3.67 |
| 3 | Paarl Gim | 15 | 11 | 4 | 0 | 3.64 |
| 4 | Garsfontein | 16 | 13 | 3 | 0 | 3.46 |
| 5 | Monument | 22 | 17 | 3 | 2 | 3.28 |
| 6 | Grey PE | 20 | 16 | 4 | 0 | 3.21 |
| 7 | Wynberg BHS | 20 | 16 | 4 | 0 | 3.21 |
| 8 | Glenwood | 19 | 15 | 4 | 0 | 3.18 |
| 9 | HJS Paarl | 20 | 15 | 4 | 1 | 3.17 |
| 10 | EG Jansen | 18 | 14 | 4 | 0 | 3.17 |
| 11 | Selborne | 20 | 16 | 3 | 1 | 3.07 |
| 12 | Waterkloof | 15 | 11 | 4 | 0 | 2.97 |
| 13 | Maritzburg College | 19 | 13 | 4 | 2 | 2.90 |
| 14 | Outeniqua | 15 | 10 | 5 | 0 | 2.88 |
| 15 | Nelspruit | 17 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 2.86 |
| 16 | HTS Middelburg | 17 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 2.75 |
| 17 | HTS Louis Botha | 14 | 11 | 3 | 0 | 2.65 |
| 18 | Michaelhouse | 12 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 2.65 |
| 19 | Menlopark | 18 | 13 | 5 | 0 | 2.64 |
| 20 | Oakdale | 16 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 2.64 |
| 21 | Westville BHS | 16 | 10 | 5 | 1 | 2.61 |
| 22 | Kempton Park | 21 | 13 | 8 | 0 | 2.44 |
| 23 | Die Brandwag | 18 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 2.43 |
| 24 | Bishops | 17 | 11 | 6 | 0 | 2.36 |
| 25 | Voortrekker (Bethlehem) | 16 | 12 | 4 | 0 | 2.34 |
| 26 | KES | 17 | 10 | 5 | 2 | 2.27 |
| 27 | Transvalia | 20 | 13 | 4 | 3 | 2.27 |
| 28 | Stellenberg | 15 | 11 | 4 | 0 | 2.25 |
| 29 | Diamantveld | 16 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 2.15 |
| 30 | Landboudal | 16 | 12 | 3 | 1 | 2.13 |
| 31 | Jeppe | 15 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 2.13 |
| 32 | Boland Landbou | 16 | 6 | 9 | 1 | 2.08 |
| 33 | Marlow | 17 | 9 | 8 | 0 | 2.08 |
| 34 | Framesby | 17 | 9 | 8 | 0 | 2.07 |
| 35 | St Andrews | 15 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 2.07 |
| 36 | Tygerberg | 20 | 14 | 5 | 1 | 2.06 |
| 37 | Dale College | 20 | 14 | 6 | 0 | 2.06 |
| 38 | Klerksdorp | 21 | 12 | 8 | 1 | 2.03 |
| 39 | Affies | 15 | 8 | 7 | 0 | 2.00 |
| 40 | Kearsney | 16 | 10 | 6 | 0 | 1.96 |
| 41 | Augsberg | 13 | 10 | 3 | 0 | 1.88 |
| 42 | Helpmekaar | 13 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 1.83 |
| 43 | Sentraal | 13 | 6 | 7 | 0 | 1.83 |
| 44 | Jim Fouche | 12 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 1.83 |
| 45 | Queens College | 18 | 11 | 7 | 0 | 1.78 |
| 46 | De Kuilen | 12 | 7 | 4 | 1 | 1.77 |
| 47 | AHS Kroonstad (Rooiskool) | 11 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 1.72 |
| 48 | Hugenote (Well) | 17 | 8 | 8 | 1 | 1.71 |
| 49 | Nico Malan | 19 | 12 | 7 | 0 | 1.71 |
| 50 | Eldoraigne | 16 | 7 | 8 | 1 | 1.62 |
@kosie: Ahhh! I get you loud and clear.
@Playa: I think your last paragraph sums up our view points. I am referring to the marvel of the big rugby player.
It is not necessarily the best rugby player. If we look at the average size of an English pack of forwards, they are in no way small. Man for man they compare well with our forwards. The difference comes in the style of rugby played.
They use their forwards to tactically dominnate the set pieces which we do not do. If the size was used to keep the ball in the scrums and force a penalty then I say the size works for them. If size is used repetatively (a la Bulls) to just bash up the ball and try and run over 15 like sized players, then it is supidity.
I think you get what I am trying to say.
@kosie: I urge you not to gather, but rather look at the effectiveness of the player. Everyone fusses over size. A big player, even those that are useless will always get their mention from commentators…a famous quote by an New Zealand commentator, Murray Mexted: “Look at that Bulls pack. They look like they grew up when meat was cheap”. A big player is a big player and everyone will go
when they see one. SA mentality as per your post is that we assume big is better…otherwise how did you gather what you gathered?
Or maybe we’re talking two different things; you abou how commentators marvel over big players and me about how selectors in other nations pick their teams.
@Playa: I was actually referring to the size of the player more than the intellectual rugby capacity.
Having watched a few Heineken cup games on SS1, the commentator, in an unmistakable Yorkshire accent, always refers to the size (probably meaning weight) of a player/replacement by saying; he is x Stone. The more the stones, I gather, the better.
@kosie: The English like their players big, yes. But one thing’s for sure, they don’t pick a big and dumb player. Don’t for one second think that a player like Heinrich Brussouw would be playing club rugby while they tour New Zealand. That is fixation with size – not caring whether a player has brains to offer or not. You will see the detrimental effects with your own eyes on SS1 at 09:35am tomorrow.
@Ploegskaar: Nice in the sense that it gives us a reason to debate. I personally don’t agree with many of the rankings as well, but at least a few people out there is giving it a go.
@Rugbyman: Well at least the teams mentioned are ON the list. Eldoraigne doesn’t even feature!
Then again, it was not a good year for Eldoraigne. I don’t value those rankings too much
@Vleis: agreed… especially the under age teams are nonsense… for example and with respect frikkie meyer’s u16 team no. 14 in the country? I dont think their listing is even close to accurate… another silly example is menlopark’s u14s rated one place above garsies… our u14s beat them twice this season…
@Grey Brak: Reflection yes, nice and/or accurate, I doubt.
@Cappie: I think the top few are probably accurate but the rest is nonsense. For example, St David’s is at 43 and Waterkloof is at 47 when most of Waterkloof’s B/2nd teams would beat St David’s A/1st teams.
@Grey Brak: Waterkloof op 47? Daar’s probleme by hulle jonger ouderdomsgroepe.
@Springkahn: Have you ever looked at your argument from a different angle?
I agree that less than 1% will make it in professional rugby after school. Therefore, for over 99% of the kids, school rugby will be the pinnacle of their rugby (and probably sport) careers. They will banter on about it with friends around braais (or on blogs like this!!) for the next seventy years of their lives.
I’ll never forget any army mate saying that before his final school rugby match, his coach said that it would be the biggest sporting moment of their lives unless they made the Bok side. I think it was Dale v Queens or Selborne v Dale. He said the coach was correct, although he said winning the Toyota club championships with Despatch (he was inside centre and Danie Gerber Outside) was equally as memorable.
I agree that there must be some balance, but at the same time don’t dilute the greatest sporting memories for 99.9% of the kids. It’s a rite of passage for these boys and is every bit South African as sunny skies and braaivleis.
Nice reflection of all age groups combination ranking at:
http://www.saschoolsports.co.za/rugby/national/rugby-the-combined-u14-u15-u16-first-xv-rankings-for-2014.html
@Springkahn: Don’t for a minute think that the fixation with size is a SA thing. I think the English beat us in those stakes.
Rugbyman is however correct. Memories is what it is about for school kids. Much like we discuss our varsity days.
@Springkahn: Hi, interesting argument you make that kids are forgotten after school by the school even if that kid sacrificed a lot for the school… Isn’t that so everywhere in life?
People quickly forget you when you leave, even if you sacrificed a lot. It becomes very philosophical… In my opinion it’s about the memories you as an individual creates… I can assure you that whoever played in for instance the 1996 Affies team that beat Grey College still remember that game very well and will never forget the feelings of emotion experienced… Same with other big games, it becomes memories for the individual upon which he can smile on… You are right, the school probably doesn’t even remember the individual, but that’s not what it’s about! It’s within our DNA… the sense of achievement, of belonging, of being important to the school/province/country… of meaning something to your coach or team mate…
Nobody remembers what they did on a specific day in a maths class… but I can assure you they WILL remember a big rugby match where the person or team proved themselves in front of a big crowd… Yes there is pressure, enormous pressure… But life is about coping with pressure and what better way to learn it than on the sport field… Yes only 0.7% makes it, but hey the others that were a part of those special occasions will remember it for as long as they live…
All of this is only my opinion…
Pleased to hear about Affies approach, it is all about balance. A friend’s son went on exchange to a top rugby school in NZ and the difference was remarkable. Yes they have derbys but it it not at the fervour found in SA. During one of the games a fellow player changed position with him as he wanted to try a few moves at fly half. There is no way a coach in a top rugby school would allow the boys that kind of latitude. It just wont happen as the pressure to win is all consuming.
One may consider the players like Cheslin ( he is brilliant) creative but they will not perform on the world stage in the same way a Cruden or Daig will. NZ will produce consistently more creative players than we will. Don’t look at the backs take a careful look at the forwards and see the skills these guys have in NZ. To be a good forward player in SA it is all about size. We are so fixated with producing big school boys and bashing the ball up we don’t get into the skills. If a school has a 120kg 2m guy they will play crash ball all day as this is how they will win. We can defend what we are in doing in SA all day but can anyone explain why with more rugby players and and equally committed rugby culture we are so far behind NZ. It starts t school and we just have the wrong approach.
There are a lot of exceptions of the single lad being a great sportsman and academic but generally this not the case. Kids thriving to play first team, who may not be that talented, have to work four times harder to make the first team and hence sacrifice more. The fascinating stat is that only 0.7% of school leavers go onto play formalised sport after school (hockey tennis, soccer, rugby basketball, water polo etc etc) 0.7%!!! (a tiny% for rugby) and yet schools dedicate programs to cater this tiny small minority. Parents, coaches and schools fall over themselves making excuses as to why they need to recruit and build top sports programs? 0.7% !!! perhaps dedicated science maths languages may help the other 99.3% Makes no sense.
@Pedantic- 100% It is all about balance. The Westville captain from last year De Lay Rey who I think got 5 As is starting for the Sharks U19 at 6 this weekend. Another player who epitomises your last statement is young Meaker. I remember watching him with his father at U15 level and I think he was playing C or D team. He obviously was not ” afraid to dream and go after” his goals. It must also be noted that the top 2 ranked KZN sides from last year have almost 50% of the Sharks U19 representation. Not bad for the Highway boys.
@Springkahn: The reality of the situation is that school ranking systems are here to stay – while they may not be the most accurate representation of a school’s success, they are a great topic of discussion and yes, schools will strive to improve their ranking wherever possible.
I’m not sure I agree with the generalisation that school rugby is becoming robotic – after a day of watching SBR have you ever tried to watch a Currie Cup or Super Rugby match? The pro game is terribly boring after watching the youngsters show their flair on the SBR field.
The key to what you are alluding to is balance – a properly mentored teeenager does not necessarily struggle academically simply because he has rugby aspirations.
While I see many people throw out very low conversion statistics of school players going on to be pro players it doesn’t mean that it’s impossible to succeed and any player with the potential needs to give himself every chance to do so.
If one looks at the bigger picture, playing rugby after school in the amateur / semi pro ranks can open doors for these boys, giving them the edge on University entrance & scholarships (and in some cases a little pocket money), so even if they don’t make it into the 1% elite, their rugby has still provided opportunities after school and not all is lost.
Keep working hard boys and don’t be afraid to dream and go after your goals!
@Springkahn: Have you been to a NZ local schools derby?..They do have a rankings system for schools in NZ as well. They have a huge schools league played all over the country where the county champs eventually plays in the final stages to determine the top school team in NZ. That is how they determine what team goes to Sanix tournament in Japan. Schools like Auckland Grammar, Hamilton Boys etc all strive to be the No 1 in NZ.
I agree with Djou, many coaches stay in touch with their boys long after they have left. I’m still in touch with mine 18 years since I left. I see many of the boys are connected to their coaches on LinkedIn & Facebook. I also don’t agree with not producing creative players, telling me Cheslin Kolbe, Morne Joubert, Keyter, Human etc are not creative…..
@Springkahn: I agree to some of your arguments and that is the reason why Affies and a number of other schools decided a few years back to withdraw from all competitions to help solve the problem of creativity and spontaneity of schoolboy players. However after a while the ranking system came to light and everybody tries to be nr1 which was counter productive. I believe that the ranking system is there for the schools to measure them against other schools where they did not play against each other and give them a feeling of achievement if they are in the top 10. Although you get a lot of coaches who coach their teams according to their fixed ideas and game plans I believe the players do profit on the long term playing in a sucessfull school teams. From my experience at Affies the players do not only excel at rugby but as the school has a tradition of learning, sport and culture which complements each other, they leave the school as young adults ready for life after school. It is not only Affies but a lot of schools (most of them features on this rankings) who are well balanced and the players won’t neglect their social, academic or family to perform as a 1st XV player. They just want to feel as if they achieved something by being on the ranking list as high as possible. As this is the final list we can congratulate a lot of teams with their achivements as it was not always easy to maintain the high level of play. The winners of the different competitions can enjoy their time as champs and well done to each and every one.
I am new to this blog and the comments are general but in my experience most coaches do care for the boys after school but mostly in terms of rugby but once they leave the sport, there is little interaction.
@Springkahn: You are probably new to this blog as what the are saying were written numerous times. However, I disagree with one sentence. Where I am from, coaches care for the boys long after they left school.
Ranking schools creates an artificial goal that cannot be properly measured and is counter productive to producing quality citizens or rugby players.
No matter what stats you beat into confession, no one can really rank (taken from above) Outeniqua above Nelspruit if they don’t play one another. There are just too many variables at school level. i.e. A school running three terms play a school running four terms and the game is set at the end of a term. The end of term school will be facing exams etc and therefore the results will be offset. It is not a professional sport where kids are dedicated to the sport and hence it cannot be ranked.
The fall out of such an approach, is that it becomes a focus for schools to achieve higher status and this skews the usual benefits for school sports. This will then encourage deviant behaviour (recruiting practices) that are not in the games or the boys best interests. The game is suffering as a result of over professionalism at school and these rankings are a contributing factor. The more we professionalise school sport the less creative these players become. They become robotic in their approach as they have to produce winning rugby in order to climb the ranks. Winning rugby is a game of percentages and the good coaches know this and will play pre determined well structured game plans that will achieve the result expected. It kills creativity and spontaneity required to keep the game fresh and alive. NZ do not have this over fixated approach to school sports and their stars come out to play in their mid 20’s having being allowed to develop into creative players. SA will not produce a really creative player out of the top 20 rugby schools as they are not allowed to be too creative as the risks are too high and the professional coaches will not allow this.
Again this over fixation is not in the kids best interests, the hype of game and derby day is so consuming to a young adolescent, he cannot filter this out and think it is only a game, and in 5 years time, he probably wont even be playing rugby. It is all about now and he sacrifices everything to be the best rugby player he can be, as the school, coach and parent are stringing him along. He will sacrifice his social, academic, cultural, family just to get in to the 1st XV for derby day, thinking this will open doors for him. The reality is, this day passes and a couple of years after matric he is forgotten and he yet has compromised some of the basic foundations of education necessary to tackle life. The schools and coaches don’t really care as long as they have this year’s current crop of mind controlled, hypnotic kids believing rugby is all they need worry about.