On Saturday Grey High held on to recorded a 23-18 win against visitors Paul Roos. This was their second win in two seasons against Paul Roos.
A feature of the game was the outstanding form of under-16 flyhalf Curwin Bosch who turned out for the home side’s 1st XV. Many locals in attendance feel that the youngster’s play was the difference between the two teams on the day.
Under new SARU Age-banding rules that came into effect this season, under-16 players are not allowed to play in the open age-group. The reason being that open rugby is deemed to be under-19 and SARU made the call that the youngest participants in under-19 school rugby must be 16 year old’s turning 17 during the calendar year (effectively under-17).
However what happens if there aren’t any 18-year-olds turning 19 (under-19’s) in either team? Technically the match then becomes an under-18 game by default and under-16’s qualify to play provided there is Union approval.
From SARU regulation: “ For example in the U18 Age‐grade, the youngest player could be 15 years old, as per the
Minimum Age definition, turning 16 during the year in question, but must have submitted a
completed and accepted SCHEDULE A, and SCHEDULE B where applicable, to the Union’s
offices, before training or participating in an U18 division squad or league”
Full SARU rules here:
http://schoolboyrugby.co.za/blog/?p=1907
So once Grey High had established that both they and Paul Roos did not have any under-19 players in the starting line-ups and on the bench, they were able to complete the necessary documentation and clear the way for Bosch to play.
@beet: Have a look at what I said in the first comment. Hmmm guess I know how to spot talent. Hahahaha
Not many of us knew who Curwin Bosch was when this post was done in 2013. Now he’s about as close to a SBR household name as you get.
My son started amature wrestling at age 5. Although competing in his age group every year he also took part in the open weight division were here sometimes wrestled against 17 year old guys on National level when he was only 13 years of age.
a Sport just as physical and demanding as rugby.
He never had any serious injuries , not even on the rugby field.
It’s a personal decision and with great caution parents and coaches should not hold one back if good and mature enough
I don’t see any problem with him playing if the rules allow. When I was at school in King we had U14 U15 then open rugby, so its no different to back then. We played 3 yrs of open rugby. I remember all the jhb boys who came to the school in std8 expecting to play U15 were always shocked that they had to play open rugby. But hey the guys adapted and the experience stood us all in good stead. Half of Dales side to MC150 were U16s and all approved and That gave them exposure to big boys in prep for next season.
Queens will have to make sure they play one Under 19 boy here
@Tandem: As well as Stephen Rautenbach.
@Mike: Mike look after this boy . There are sharks in Bloem ( remember what happened to Jan Serfontein)
Got to see this young lad
@BoishaaiPa: I’m sure the boys will walk around him like body guards so that doesn’t happen. @QC86: I’m sure the coaches have his best interests at heart and will make the best decisions for him as a player, but some first team exposure will also do him good I believe. @kcman: I’m not sure, but I assume if Wynnerg field no under 19s he’ll be there.
@Mike: I just heard that he has the go ahead to play again this weekend against Wynberg.
@Mike: no doubt he’s good enough,watched him for years,just look after him and make decisions on his behalf that will be to HIS benefit in the long run
@Mike: See him in Bloem next year!…
I guess it’s going to come down to a matter of opinion. The boy is definitely good enough for 1st Xv level, and he’s not your average flyhalf either, he’s really a special player, I think all that saw him will agree. I can see both sides of the spectrum though. Apart from one or two more games this season, he will play u16.
@GreenBlooded: Grey been the professional out fit that they are,i am sure every thing would have been done by the book,but i don’t agree,sorry
Ahhhh – I see the special consent forms were done. They must have checked this very early in the week to get approval so soon.
Not sure if I agree with this interpretation of the Age Banding Regulations. The U19 age group is the only age-group with a 3 year age band:
Under 19 (U19) = Players aged 16, 17, 18, or 19, with these players turning 17, 18, 19, and having turned 19 respectively during the year in question
The U18 age group still has a 2 year age band – meaning U17 and U18 players:
Under 18 (U18) = Players aged 16, 17, or 18, with these players turning 17, 18, and having turned 18 respectively during the year in question
If the game was an U19 fixture – only 17, 18, 19 year old players can play.
If the game was an U18 fixture – only 17 and 18 year old players can play.
Either way – it was wrong to field an U16 player unless a special consent was applied for and granted.
@QC86: Hmmm, or maybe they just don’t make them the same anymore? Either way, you are right, with the demands of the modern game these guys won’t make it past 30 if you play them to early, so player management is key.
@Ploegskaar: thanx for the scores,no disgrace in losing 14 10 to monnas u15’s.
Playing firsts at 16 in those days was no big deal,the first teams today would kill us by 100 points before halftime,things have changed,we must look after our young talent.
@QC86: @QC86: Says he who played 1stXV when he was 16…. Anyway, have some age group results for you from the weekend:
Landbou vs Wynberg:
u/14 BL won 10-7
u/15 BL won 8-7
u/16 BL won 40-0
Stellenberg vs Strand:
u/14 SB won 22-15
u/15 SB won 24-0
u/16 SB won 17-10
The Landbou u/15 side is 4/5 this season and have, apart from a 10-14 loss against Monnas, beaten Kempton Park, Menlo Park, SACS and Wynberg. The Landbou u/16 side is 4/5 this season and have, apart from a 17-22 loss against Kempton Park, beaten Glenwood, Michael House, SACS and Wynberg.
The Stellenberg u/14 side is 5/5 this season and have beaten Rustenburg, Kempton Park, Eldoraigne, HTS Drostdy and Strand. The Stellenberg u/16 side is 4/5 this season and have, apart from a 7-22 loss against Northwood, beaten Rand Park, Ben Vorster, Drostdy and Strand.
@QC86: I agree 100% with what you are saying – I would go further to say that no U21 player should be able to play “senior” rugby – Goosen is just one example – and he is a fly-half – my fear is that guys like Kitshoff, Pieter Steph Du Toit, Siya Kolisi, Eben Etsebeth, Pat Lambie etc. etc. are all going to be seriously injured before they reach their prime. Rather increase the stature of U20 and U21 rugby competitions and keep the youngsters playing in their age groups – their bodies have not yet fully developed and they are required to make massive hits on 25 to 34 year old seasoned brutes!
@kcman: parents and the kid him self will not make the right decision,wrap that guy in cottenwool,make him play age group rugga and harden up.It will prolong his career and that is whats best for him,not the school or coach.Goosen is a good example of how to ruin a Springboks life span
@Amalekite: I am sure this is what all sides will do for the remainder of the season, the boy is a whizz and was clearly the difference.
It seems as though he will end the season playing for the 16A side instead of stealing the limelight in the First XV game.
In my mind if the kid is good enough and the parents give consent why should he not be allowed to -play, it’s not as if he is playing in the front row.
In hindsight, maybe Paul Roos should have found au U19 player to put on the bench, seeing as Bosch was deemed to be the difference between the 2 sides