Professionalism could lead to new school rugby powerhouses

It’s clear that just like everyday technology, rugby professionalism at schools is not about to wait for anyone. Hardest hit may be those who resist change. Something like the Headmaster’s Agreement looks useful but who knows, in the big picture it might be the equivalent of trying to run on RIM’s BBOS when opponents from other provinces are making use of Android. One is doomed to fail while the other presents a kind of sky’s the limit outlook. It’s not the schools that control this change either. Much of the power is vested in the rugby unions that oversee school rugby and have their own needs to cater for. There is a growing movement towards bringing schoolboy outsiders into a region before they complete their schooling. The common targets right now seem to be boys that attend smaller schools but even this may change as pressure mounts to sign star players at young ages. RU’s seem to have a growing desire to see their contracted players in “accredited” school rugby programmes preferably right under their noses where their progress can be closely monitored and they are able to attend regular higher level training programmes at the union’s facilities. In order to thrive, this process requires a good relationship between the RU’s and their chosen schools. Synergy is key. Schools will act as the forerunners to the post-school rugby academy institutes and allow for a smooth transition between the two. The existing powerhouses of school rugby in SA  probably won’t be unaffected but there is every chance they will be joined by some newbies at the top. A school like Garsfontein has already shown what can be achieved on the rugby field when a strong bond with the RU is in place. In any given season we have had about 50 schools putting up their hands to be included in the Top 20 ranking behind the likes of Grey Bloem, Paul Roos, HJS, Gim and Monnas. This number could be cut in half as a clearer divide emerges between those able to form the RU relationships or commit the finances to keeping pace (the real pro school teams) and the rest (semi-pro and amateur teams).

Leave a Reply

49 Comments

  1. avatar
    #49 Green Hopper

    @oldschool: i have to agree, there is the emphasise on size and not skill, look at how SA tends to run or attempt to run over a player and by selecting size they try and intimidate the opposition, far too often we have seen small players hold their own , Wilkinson , and others, SA seems to think of only the J Loma incident 1995 world cup and don’t look how the All Blacks run and use the gaps,
    This is why we cant win or dominate over sustained periods of time, but only peak every now and then

    ReplyReply
    31 January, 2013 at 08:49
  2. avatar
    #48 rugbyfan

    @BOG: Agree with you 100%

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 13:38
  3. avatar
    #47 BOG

    @meadows: As long as players are selected for reasons other than merit/rugby, they will be exposed. You can hide them in a school side, but beyond that, not possible. One of those Grey players who made it into the SA side, was not even a regular Cherrie(2nds) player. And is it really fair to that player(or the ones overlooked)? Several yrs ago, the lock from the 5th team, went to CW(to meet team requirements) After the week, he was selected for the academy side, effectively the SA schools B-side, but when he returned to school, he went back into the 5th team. Its a farce and its no use looking for him after school. It was obvious to all, except the selectors, that he was not going to make it big as a rugby player, and there are countless such examples.

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 11:44
  4. avatar
    #46 All Black

    @beet: The simple answer is identifying a player who will continue to be good in a far more structured environment. We cannot hide from the fact that Pro rugby has evolved into a semi league scenario. Defenses are incredibly organised and attack is planned on a series of plays rather than relying on a spurt of genius. The laws of the game have also evolved to such an extent that coaches have to try and avoid certain areas of the field in case of penalties, hence the kicking strategy. With all this in mind, the exciting 5ft 3 blitz midget has a huge mountain to climb after school. I remember Russell being picked up in a tackle by a huge forward who ran about 5m with him. I also look at selections of some players with regard to quotas and politics at Provincial level. This is rife around the country. The big phase type player is left out for the small fast guy as CW teams are generally not as organised as settled teams. These players can exploit this disorganization. If Mac wants this to happen then it should happen at provincial schools level and should be done by outsiders who have no affiliation to a particular school, union etc. In short, many of the ‘midgets’ who are so exciting at school level are just not physically equipped to take the step up to top class rugby. Khoza from Kearsney in the early 2000’s is a prime example of this. Brilliant skill and pace but went no further.

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 10:49
  5. avatar
    #45 Playa

    @Gungets Tuft: True true. Saw a bit of both Thompson and Muir as a lightie.

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 09:36
  6. avatar
    #44 beet

    @All Black: Hey All Black. The feedback I’d got from one of the KZN coaches after he’d had a chat to Ian Mac after one of the various July rugby weeks, was a change in approach by selectors. The emphasis was moving from picking players that performed just at CW, to picking players based on future potential to play for the u20 team, hence the involvement of Dawie Theron in the process.

    Do you see this as a first step towards the SAS to senior rugby conversion rate improvement or is it just that the difference between school and junior rugby leading to senior rugby is huge in terms of the quality being so much better (far fewer players involved) and personal motivation playing a much big role. Obviously the SAS selections are also filled with criteria that result in a few better players missing out on selection.

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 09:31
  7. avatar
    #43 Gungets Tuft

    @Playa: You can look further back and remember Dick Muir and Jeremy Thompson for Natal back then. Small guys but right up there in the centre combinations in the country.

    Just look at the winning try in the CC this year. That wasn’t coached, it happened and De Jongh was instinctive enough to take the gap. I agree – the formulaic approach (just like the playbooks you see in Gridiron) do not encourage independent though. Prime example – Andre Joubert – gave every coach he played for grey hair but he was brilliant to watch. I am no coach, so I guess there has to be a pattern for defence and even attack, but the current Bok approach leaves me stone cold.

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 09:24
  8. avatar
    #42 oldschool

    @Grasshopper: Frans Steyn and Jean DV are a great example of the modern day game center / back line player …..NZ rugby would love and nurture that type of talent….size coupled with speed and skill…..bad example boet.
    And both have often outplayed their NZ/Aussie opposition many times ….

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 09:16
  9. avatar
    #41 Playa

    @All Black: Simple answer: The skill is coached out of them after school, at provincial level.You are told straight up to play according to a blueprint, and have to abide if you are to progress.

    Brent Russel for example, was a flyhalf.He played flyhalf at UCT, and then WP wouldn’t take him for flyhalf (they wanted him to play scrum-half,so he opted to leave for the Pumas, then the Sharks and was screwed between wing and fullback.He didnt fit the SA ‘blueprint’ definition of a flyhalf.Kennedy Tsimba as well.In the middle of our flyhalf crisis,he was the standout flyhalf,but couldnt crack it (though he had qualified for SA citizenship).Too “flamboyant”.

    I played against Jean de Villiers when he was at Maties, and I was at UCT in the early 2000s.The JDV I played against then and today’s one are worlds apart as far as skill is concerned.He has been moderated beyond.You can still see glimpses at times.

    Frans Steyn was a skill player at school.He has now been bulked up and made a power player.

    Luke Watson didnt crack it when he was our best available loosie.Too flamboyant they said.

    I could write all day. But I hear you. SA plays and picks according to our historical strengths. An outdated blueprint inmy mind,but still works.But for how much longer is my question?

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 09:13
  10. avatar
    #40 All Black

    @meadows: What is scary is how few of that SA SChools side have gone on to play top class rugby.

    Bog/Playa: lets say that it is rather the style of play that hampers our players rather than lack of skill? We are ridiculed by the amount we kick, not that we cannot kick. Steyn is one of the best in the world, off the deck and out of hand. The offload in the tackle is frowned upon in many SA teams as it is regarded as high risk and therefore we prefer the ruck to consolidate. It does not mean we cannot do it. I would hasten to add that we need to find a happy medium between our style of play (generally) and the use of these skills. Whilst you hear comments from people like Venter, you also get positive feedback such as we got from a top Irish coach who commented on our (SA youth) ability to play to a structure and create space with this structure. Unfortunately we (Boks) have been up against an All Black side of late that has an incredible amount of skill and size. Goes like that. GCB have a very simple and effective system. They play phases and thrive off sucking in the opposition and getting quick ball from the base. Their backs are trained as athletes and this shows. Question for everyone, if GCB are so good at school and they make up a huge amount of the Bok team, where has this skill gone? Dont confuse skill with pace and space created by momentum.

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 08:52
  11. avatar
    #39 meadows

    @BOG: Incidentally that WP side that OFS thrashed in the final game were not a bad side. Johan Sadie and Danie Poolman were the centres – Jurgen Visser played flyhalf (I think). They were led by Nick Koster at No8 who was also outstanding as a schoolboy

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 08:00
  12. avatar
    #38 meadows

    @BOG:
    I will google the clip – They were outstanding schoolboy players – I thought Robert in particular was destined for the green and gold – perhaps our fixation with size here in SA has counted against him. Here is the OFS CW team from that year – I see thay have Pietersen as being at Grey but I’m sure that he was already at UOFS. what happened to Hadley Smith who made the SA Schools side as well that year

    Free State: Moekoa Bolofo (Louis Botha), Josias Ebersohn (Grey), Robert Ebersohn (Grey), Jannie Geldenhuys (Grey), Egan Gysman (Grey), James Hallewell (Grey), Richard Harris (Grey), Frank Herne (Grey), Paul Keeza, Pieter Labuschagne (Grey), Thamsanqa Mcinga (Louis Botha), Tumelo Moholo (Louis Botha), Johannes Mpande (Sand du Plessis), Sakkie Muller (Grey), Mayibuye Ndwandwa (University of the Free State), Coenrad Oosthuizen (Grey), Roelof Pienaar (Grey), Wilton Pietersen (Grey), Johan Prinsloo, Hadley Smith (Grey), Andries Theisinger (Grey), Johan van Schalkwyk (Grey), George Whitehead (Grey)

    SA Schools 2007

    01. Dale Chadwick (KwaZulu-Natal)
    02. Johan Oberholzer (Golden Lions)
    03. Julian Redelinghuys (Golden Lions)
    04. Marchand van Rooyen (Golden Lions)
    05. Cornell Hess (Blue Bulls)
    06. Marnus Schoeman (Blue Bulls)
    07. Roelof Pienaar (Free State)
    08. Nicolas Koster (Western Province)

    09. Rudy Paige (Capt, Golden Lions)
    10. Marnitz Boshoff (Pumas)
    11. Ompile Marotothe (Blue Bulls)
    12. Robert Ebersohn (Free State)
    13. Earl Snyman (SWD)
    14. Riaan Arendse (Eastern Province)
    15. Patrick Lambie (KwaZulu-Natal)

    Replacements

    16. Sibi Masina (Pumas)
    17. Coenraad Oosthuizen (Free State)
    18. Kene Ockafor (KwaZulu-Natal)
    19. Moeka Bolofo (Free State)
    20. Kelvano King (Eastern Province)
    21. Yondela Stampu (Blue Bulls)
    22. Hadley Smith (Free State)

    interesting to see what has become of these guys – also highlights the big step up from being a schoolboy star – to suceeding as a professional player

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 07:22
  13. avatar
    #37 Queenian

    @BOG: GCB has had many great side including 1970/71 and 1979

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 05:25
  14. avatar
    #36 BOG

    @meadows: The FB was George Whitehead. He is in and out of the Kings side and very versatile. He plays any position in the back line except SH. With him there is the hooker, Frank Herne, who was in that side.I expected that a lot more will come from that side, but as a school side they were remarkable. Labuschagne was lock then but now plays flank for the Cheetahs, while Boom Prinsloo, plays SA sevens and the Cheetahs.The SA schools flank, Pienaar, has disappeared.Muller was SH then but he too,is “missing” yet Piet V Zyl, the current Cheetah SH, played Thirds. Strange indeed. Like the sides of 1981 and 1987(Hansie captained that side) were good, but in my opinion not as good as the 2007 side, yet both of those two sides, each produced 5 Springboks. If you want to see some unbelievable ball skills, watch the clip on Youtube, “Ebersohn Twins”

    ReplyReply
    24 January, 2013 at 04:25
  15. avatar
    #35 meadows

    @BOG: I had a son at that craven week at Paul Roos in 2007 and the OFS/Grey side were on a different level. included the Ebersohn twins and Coenie Oosthuizen. One of the outstanding players in that side was the fullback Wilton Peterson whose career was cut short by a terrible car crash. He was still U18 but no longer at school (they subsequently changed the rules) so could play at CW but was ineligible for SA schools. Pat Lambie who was only U17 that year got the nod as the SA Schools fullback.
    KZN side had the Michaelhouse backline (9,10,12,13 & 15) without the wings (Ruan Combrinck and Mark Richards) who went to the Academy week instead for reasons not worth discussing here. They battled up front though and saw a healthly lead against WP at halftime get clawed back to a narrow loss when the forwards ran out of steam in the second half.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 19:50
  16. avatar
    #34 BOG

    @Gungets Tuft: I know about that. He deliberately did that after he was misquoted(I think) as the coach of Saracens. No, this was years before that incident- when he had just completed his medical studies and was still sane :lol:

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 19:17
  17. avatar
    #33 Gungets Tuft

    @BOG: Maybe one of the few lucid interviews that Venter ever gave. He was notorious for nonsensical interviews.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_twJ0hmeDB4

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 17:56
  18. avatar
    #32 BOG

    @Roger: Hehe Roger, I have indeed, but when GCB has a very good side, their skill is something which you simply dont see elsewhere, including Bishops on a good day. The 2007 side, with all 15 players in the side represented FS in the CW final vs WP and won 53-3. Ask anyone who watched that side, argueably one of the best school sides ever. And they were not an exception. And by the way, I told you what Brendon Venter said and confirmed by results!!

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 16:34
  19. avatar
    #31 Roger

    @Ploegskaar: jeez, in age group rugby we were not allowed to klick the ball unless we were in our 22 – were dropped if we disobeyed. Had to run from everywhere

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 16:20
  20. avatar
    #30 Ploegskaar

    @Roger: But, with the Landbou teams of old definitely not being amongst them :wink:

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 16:10
  21. avatar
    #29 Ploegskaar

    @All Black: I think that when many, including myself, complain about the general lack of skills, catching and passing are but two of many facets that need to be worked on. Frankly the mentioned two skills are of less concern to me than off-loading skills in the tackle, running lines and running for the “weak” shoulder as opposed to running into players. Same goes for kicking out of hand. Players mostly look “unskilled” as they play according to prescribed game plans and are confined to roles dictated by the coaches. Maybe a better balance between phase play and instinctive play should be encouraged in South Africa, as shown by the top team in world rugby.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 16:09
  22. avatar
    #28 Roger

    @Ploegskaar: indeed – many other schools you can add to that list as well

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 16:03
  23. avatar
    #27 All Black

    Sorry,’played’ with and against….

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 16:02
  24. avatar
    #26 All Black

    I have heard this argument so many times. Skills are better overseas etc etc etc. Why do Dale concentrate on running rugby? Easy, because they have not had the forwards to match the bigger teams. Yes, our catching and passing under pressure at schoolboy level needs to be improved, as does the off load in the tackle. I think that goes for all countries though. Having watched all of the last 3 or 4 U20 world cups, our teams have been equal with the best. Some of the tries scored last year were brilliant. I do get a little irritated with the constant negativity towards our rugby and how limited we are. I have with and against players from all over the world and they have not blown us away with their skill levels. There is always room for improvement and a big lad who can pass both ways and run at the same time is better than a big lad who cant. We are not however poor in this regard. We have the results in all world cups to prove it.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 15:59
  25. avatar
    #25 Ploegskaar

    @Roger: You can include SACS in that list as well, with Ikeys carrying the flag for many years at senior level.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 15:46
  26. avatar
    #24 Roger

    @BOG: Hehe Bog – I take it you have never watched Bishops, KES, Dale etc play rugger – all schools that are the exponents of the beautiful game. Grey do not have a monopoly on running rugby and skills boet :lol:

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 15:34
  27. avatar
    #23 Ploegskaar

    @boxkick: You share a bed with The Beast? Wealth, success, happiness etc. are all relative, just like your, mine and Grassy’s opinions, so no need to keep harping on about the same thing.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 15:16
  28. avatar
    #22 boxkick

    @grasshopper – dont be fooled by the title mate…when its yours, you the boss.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 15:00
  29. avatar
    #21 Grasshopper

    @Boxkick, no bok caps for Joe yet, but he was in a squad if I remember correctly. He was one of our better fullbacks last year in my opinion……which may mean nothing. On the job front, no I don’t own the company but have shares…

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 14:36
  30. avatar
    #20 beet

    @Greenwood: That was a fantastic game of rugby to watch. It was in 2011 with Kearsney winning it thanks to an excellent kick from the corner by James Lambert.

    The thing I notice as the players progress from school to u19 to u21is the speed with which defenders close down spaces. The same Dale 13 centre Sphu who looked so stylish with the ball in hand during that Kearsney game suddenly found better defenders closing him down quicker in u19. The same time on the ball just was not there anymore. As a result he had to turn to more physical attributes to survive. At about 1.73m and not very heavy he did not offer much resistance this way and as a result got very little game time at the Sharks. Worse still is that the tempo gets upped even more after u21 rugby.

    There certainly is opportunity to allow our backs to be more instinctive, creative and show better quick hands + understanding of where their support and the spaces to attack are. But it’s not altogether a case of just poor coaching. The evolution of defensive patterns in rugby has played its part to in killing flair.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 14:34
  31. avatar
    #19 Grasshopper

    @Greenwood, agreed on Dale. Small forwards that go dominated in the 1st half, but once the bigger packs ran out of puff their backs started running rings around opposition. Glenwood had the Dale game in the bag until they moved it away from the forwards in the 2nd half. That played into Dale’s hands and they caught up quickly. hopefully lesson learnt. Methinks the Glenwood backs this year will be similar to Dale’s last year, lightening quick. I head 2 of the players run 10.6 and the others under 11…..wow, if they can learn to pass, run angles and into gaps they will be lethal. However, the forwards still need to give them some ball to work with. It’s a hard act to balance, size and power with speed and skills….Grey Bloem normally has the perfect balance here and that is why they win so much…

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 14:34
  32. avatar
    #18 Greenwood

    Playa

    I totally agree with you here –

    off the main topic – reading comments about having big forwards on steroids bulldozing their way through the opposition remined of the 1st time I saw Dale playing at Kearsney last year –
    what a pleasure to see open running rugby played by slim trim and skillfull backs- a joy to behold !!!

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 14:18
  33. avatar
    #17 BOG

    Let me repeat myself. More than 10 yrs ago, Brendon Venter, in an interview with SA Rugby(I think) identified the lack of skills at school level, as a big problem.He pointed out two exceptions- GCB and another (one of the WC schools which I cannot recall. I still believe, generally speaking, that skill is the one thing that sets them apart in a good year. Murray Mexted, about 2 years ago, at the U20 WC, said the same thing about SA players, and on this occasion, he did so in a very polite manner. Grey would be a very boring place if it was exclusively about rugby and I would hope that if they were to choose, being a “super glorified rugby academy” and that what they are now- an all round academic institution which offers opportunities to its students in all areas of life, ie academics, cultural development, spiritual, and of course a very wide variety of sport, they would opt for the latter. I would be very surprized if they did not.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 14:16
  34. avatar
    #16 boxkick

    @grasshopper – md – not too shabby i suppose, do you own the company?

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 14:00
  35. avatar
    #15 All Black

    This is a very accurate article. I do think that some of you have perhaps misinterpreted what is actually happening. It is not a move by unions to dictate how rugby is played at the schools but more about ensuring that a potential star is correctly trained and given the opportunity to mix with other talented players. If a Union has a ‘relationship’ with a school that they believe has the right coaching and general structures they will introduce that boy to the school and ask them to look after him. They wish to ensure he eats properly, gets a good education and is basically groomed for the future. I would think that the school chosen for this would be required to supply the ‘dreaded bursary’ as they would be benefiting from the players skills on the field. When he finishes school he would then be taken over by the Union in question. You would probably find that these are mostly kids from distant, smaller areas that do not have the schools recognized in rugby circles. Northwood are definitely doing their utmost to forge an alliance with the Sharks Academy. I dont believe this will affect the traditional big schools too much and the placement of local boys. I see huge problems if Unions start paying/contracting boys and paying for their schooling. that is when a can of worms will be opened.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 14:00
  36. avatar
    #14 boxkick

    @grasshopper – how many bok caps does joe petersen have?

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 14:00
  37. avatar
    #13 Grasshopper

    @Boxkick, also a ‘better life’ again that is subjective. Some of the poorest people in the world are far happier than the richest. I thought you comment was a little low blow and personal especially considering you don’t know me from a bar of soap…..

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 13:48
  38. avatar
    #12 Grasshopper

    @Boxkick, what I meant was Bok caps, they both could have plenty more. Not too sure about the last statement considering I am an MD of a global digital measurement service…..but hey…..maybe these days rugga players with all their sponsorship deals etc are making tons. If it was football no doubt…but that is off topic. What is the definition of ‘made it’, in my context it was Bok caps….

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 13:46
  39. avatar
    #11 boxkick

    @grasshopper…what makes you think Joe and brent didnt make it…trust me, they make a far better life than you my man…

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 13:39
  40. avatar
    #10 Greenwood

    Greenblooded

    what’s up with the Jersey ? Beets’ sense of humour ?

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 13:19
  41. avatar
    #9 Greenwood

    Rugbyfan

    this may not destroy SBR rugby but what has happened in KZN over the past 24 months has destroyed relationships between some of the top Durban and surrounds schools

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 13:16
  42. avatar
    #8 Grasshopper

    @Playa, spot on! I could not have said it better myself!

    @Bog, let’s ask Joe Pietersen and Brent Russell what they think of our skills. They are two prime examples of skilled players who just did not make it because of their size. Yet we stick with lumbering backs like Fran Steyn, De Villiers etc. Both Fran and De Villiers are good but too predictable…

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 13:11
  43. avatar
    #7 Playa

    I am unashamedly one of those people who resist change.

    The priceless features of schoolboy rugby are tradition, rivalry, cammeraderie and the building of life long friendships and relationships.Yeah, rugby post school is a proffession.But those of us here who played before the sport became proffessional, or rather before the schoolboy version became proffessional have stories and anecdotes that we share and no amount of money can buy.Memories that surpass our own minds’ abilities to remember everything else.

    Playing proffessional rugby should be a choice a boy makes in matric, like any other career choice any other kid makes.We are filling our schoolboy playing grounds with egos instead of characters and young men with pride to wear their jerseys.Doping has spiralled out of control because of the pressure to perform and be seen by the big unions.Age-old rivalries and traditions are at stake.Relationships between the boys are also hanging on the thread.Its ludicrous.

    Who will find excitement in 10 top teams playing each other twice a year.I would only rather watch the 100 honest ameteur schoolboy teams who are in it for priceless reasons.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 12:08
  44. avatar
    #6 rugbyfan

    Another big issue here is for the overall health of SA rugby the day school boy rugby is controlled by say 3 big rugby unions will be a sad day for SA. That means all top schools will be dictated to how they play from school level that means your player development will develop only around 3 thought patterns were at present you might have all top 50 schools having there own type or blend of rugby.

    And here in a big problem that will push our rugby more and more towards the big forward barge and dont pass mentality we have allready with very little or no ball skills ability.

    A well known Bok of the 70,s and old Grey Bl boy spent 2 months in NZ this last year doing rugby camps for under 17 and under 19 boys. Which he has done for 4 years now and after discussions with the SARU he advised them to make a fundemental change to the long term style of rugby SA must play, which did not go down well with them they beleive there way forward is the correct way.

    He,s opion of what he has seen in NZ the last 4 years is that in one training camp he had in Christchurch he saw more talent and rugby ball skill than he sees in a whole year in SA, he beleives the biggest problem is that in SA schools system the main aim now was to get kids as big as possible by as younger age as possible and the kid that has the rugby skill is being left on the sideline.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 11:25
  45. avatar
    #5 rugbyfan

    This is most likely was has being happeming for the last 10 years anyway the issue how will this be controlled and will this in the long run not destroy schoolboy rugby.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 11:01
  46. avatar
    #4 noordwes

    Omdat ons met seuns werk wat nog ontwikkel, is die proses om hulle semi professioneel te hanteer gedoem.Net n voorbeeld.Die kaptein van Pukke se o/19 span was laasjaar nie n beurshouer/akedemie seun nie maar een wat met die eerstejaarsliga raakgesien is.As ek reg is was hy ook nie n cravenweek speler.Soos die tyd aangaan gaan rugby unies besef dat hulle geld in die water gooi agter seuns aan wat nie aan die verwagtinge voldoen nie.Daar gaan n tyd kom dat slegs n klein persentasie van die spelers dit maak.Spelersbegrotings kan nie onbeperk groter word nie,dus sal hulle ophou om hierdie duur proses te ondersteun.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 09:36
  47. avatar
    #3 GreenBlooded

    @Greenwood: When it get’s to that I will not be watching SBR anymore.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 09:21
  48. avatar
    #2 Greenwood

    This is what bloggers here have been saying on this site for some time – lets face it Glenwood , College, Westville , maybe Northwood & the Flies and the KZN privates are going this route whether this is part of their planning or they are going with the flow -, semi pro seems to be the correct term here – we are going to have a small group of elite tier 1 schools competing in “unofficial” 1st team semi pro league playing each other twice a year and competing more with stronger schools from other provinces (there won’t be enough locals schools strong enough to compete at this level) – ethics and Headmasters agreements will fall away and a dog eats dogs senario will prevail – players will be bought openly & nobody will blink
    – no doubt the Sharks will benifit in the end ….

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 09:13
  49. avatar
    #1 Roger

    would be very happy for KES to operate in the latter category, maintain traditional fixtures and continue providing a fantastic all-round education.

    ReplyReply
    23 January, 2013 at 09:01