How Michaelhouse will fare during the 2013 season remains a bit of an enigma. Those that have followed the progress of the team will know they have the right ingredients for a meaty pack of forwards. Their power in the forwards should be most obvious come scrum-time. Here they could prove to be very hard to contain. In 2012 their then under-17 props Cameron Holenstein and Chris Whiting not only stepped up to the plate when regular first choices were injured, they pretty much hit a home run against older KZN opposition using strength and good technique. They were decent in the loose as well. Yet these two big boys who would do a KZN Craven Week team proud have no guarantees of MHS first team representation this year. There are two good reasons for this. One is that 2012 first team stalwart Cian Grendon who represented KZN at the Academy Week is still around, although there is talk about him switching positions to either the second or backrow. Also rearing to go after injury derailed his 2012 year is Farai Mudaraki, younger brother of former KZN Craven Week and WP under-19 scrumhalf Hilton. For any coach, it’s a wonderful position to be in. Having both depth and quality in the front-row could take House far this year.
Not too long ago it would also have been reasonable to assume that House’s stiffest local scrumming challenge would come against College on Goldstones. Despite starting 2013 minus one top rated prop College still has a pretty formidable unit. No doubt Njabula Gumede will be the senior partner but there are a few decent players putting their hands up to work in tandem with him on the other side of the scrum.
However right here, right now, today it’s the least unlikely of KZN tier 1 teams that look to have come from way back to suddenly present themselves as possibly the best scrumming 1st XV in KZN this year. To say that Northwood are optimistic about their chances in the set-piece is an understatement. They are relishing the opportunity to compete against the best that, forget just KZN, that SA has to throw at them. The acquisitions of two SA under-16 High Performance 2012 squad props is part of a programme designed to revitalise school rugby just north of the Umgeni River. Not only were Kabelo Matloung (formerly DF Malan, Valke) and Ngoni Chidoma (formerly Uplands, Pumas) attendees at the HP Week, they emerged as the two highest rated frontrankers after the assessments were done. So we are talking about the Northwood Knights now having two potential future SA Schools props engaging in scrums this year and in 2014 as well. Northwood travels to the Meadow in Balgowan on 16 March and you can bet your bottom dollar that the frontrow contest against Michaelhouse’s highly rated props on that day will be a sight to behold.
@BoishaaiPa: Agree there phase it out in Under 16
@BoishaaiPa: Excellent idea. I’ll ask around and get some questions to you asap. Thanks
@beet: I would also love to get the input from Boishaai frontrow guru Richard Visagie. He who coached many a CW prop and hooker including the likes of Guthro Steenkamp, Neil Fullard, JD Moller, Callie Visagie and more recently Frans Malherbe, Marcel vd Merwe, Both WP u/21 hookers Neil Rautenbach and Stephan Coetzee and current WC u/20 sqaud member Freddie Kirsten..(To name but a few who comes to mind).
Maybe you could do a questionaire type of interview, email it to me and I will get it to Richard to reply. Bloggers can add some questions as well and we can get first rate info back from someone who knows SBR frontrow inside out!
@beet: I have no problem with the rule at u/14 and u/15 level..at least I think it will teach props to bind better…but fase it out at u/16 level and give props time to develop and learn their trade the proper way. Else we are going to end up with a lot of injured u/20 props!
@BoishaaiPa: Egg-Frikken-Zactly!!
@BoishaaiPa: I’d also like to know what will happen when the SA Schools team has 2 weeks to prepare for an u18 international in August? The props will have next to no time to make the adjustment. And what if our opponents are as good as the England team from 2010?
What I want to know is this..If the boys dont learn to scrum and hit proper at u/19 level…what’s going to happen to them come u/20 and senior rugby?…What will happen to our u/20 WC teams when they have to learn inside a few months how to absorb and take a hit from a big Samoan or All Black prop come scrumtime?..or am I completly missing the point?
@GreenBlooded: No we’re getting new readers everyday. Feel free to repeat the important stuff ahead of the season. Scrumming changes is gonna probably be the biggest change we have seen in SBR in quite a while.
Front rows tend to make or brake teams
@CyndiAtRugby: I think reffing the scrum will actually get easier for schools. Steve La Marque gave us a very informative talk last year – basically keeping the elbows up (something he insisted on before the law was changed) prevent’s scrum collapse – simple as that. If you insist on seeing ‘4 sets of knuckles’ as he put it binding onto the back of the opposite players shorts you will know very quickly who caused the collapse. It was the bind dropping and ‘dark-arts’ that went on on the opposite side with the elbows down which caused most of the problems. From that aspect I think it will be better. I just think a tremendous deal of advantage will be lost in the hit which will cause teams to shy away from big strong props.
No point lamenting it to death (although I will no doubt many more times) – it is here and we need to deal with it. Let’s see what happens……………..
@GreenBlooded: I agree with you concerning the catastrophic injuries, and where they occur.
I still think that it will be a positive to have the number of collapsed scrums potentially halved from a spectator point of view, as well as reducing the number of players that will have to spend half their careers in a neck brace
@GreenBlooded: I’m offended by the term “Mommy-Scrum”
You haven’t heard what some of the Mommy’s scream at their boys to do in the scrums.
Jokes aside – I think the scrumming is going to be interesting this year to say the least. I’m just sad that they didn’t phase this rule in. I think the refs are going to have to keep their eyes open now, because the boys have more time to focus on mischief in the scrum rather than preparing for the impact.
@All, sounds like Michaelhouse are going to have a beast of a pack. They are not really known for massive packs, more for their backs so it will be interesting to see what gameplan they have. It seems Glenwood might battle up front against both Northwood and Michaelhouse. The Glenwood potential front row of Zondi, Mtembu and Vermuelen are quite small. However, once we get the ball other sides will need to catch our backs….
One very significant and overlooked part of the law change is the binding of the props. They are no longer allowed to bing with elbows down – elbows must now be level with the shoulder. This will have a significant effect on scrumming technique and will definately reduce scrum collapses or the deliberate variety.
This year the CW selectors really have no excuses for not finding a big enough frontrow. Even without the new NW players we have guys like Holenstein, Gumede and Jackson (Westville). All big kids with a bit of ability. How ironic that when we finally seemed to have overcome a major CW stumbling block, true scrums become a thing of the past at SBR level.
@Amalekite: I respect your view but I am going to seriously disagree with you. The object of the exercise is supposedly to reduce “catastrophic injuries” – we are talking about PERMANENT damage to the neck or spinal cord (or worse!!). These VERY SELDOM happen due to collapsed scrums. The are where all of the serious-injuries occur today is during the TACKLE and this is where attention needs to be focussed.
I also played front row my entire school career. So did boys for a hunder years before me and for 25 years after me. While I was at school I never heard of a catastrophic injury to a front row player. I’m not talking about a guy being in a cervical collar for a week or 2 – that is not a catastrophic injury. Shit happens – it’s a tough game. I spent half my life in a collar (OK maybe not half).
We need to assess the risks and decide if we are happy with them. I’ve just been chatting to a guy who has decided that the risks are too great and won’t allow his son to play – justified by things he has seen and been invovled with. Doesn’t fit his acceptable risk profile – instead of trying to make the game softer, he chooses not to participate and good on him for that.
The game is getting softer and softer and I for one don’t like it.
You are correct on one thing – the scrummie feeding the ball under the lock/No8 feet. I’m gonna nail those guys this season!!
I am in favour of the new laws. I believe that srum collapses will be reduced by about 50%. Having played in the front row, I believe that a front row that is stronger and technically superior to their opposition will still be able to shove them backwards.
Howvever, being able to claim a tight-head remains very difficult for 2 reasons:
1. The 1.5 m ( I think ) distance that scrums are limited to shove their opposition.
2. The fact that scrummies can almost feed the ball under the locks’ feet.
The ‘reduced hit’ means they align (and bind) with ears in line. So the mini-hit is simply the distance between ears-touching to shoulders-touching – about 20-30cm. The mini-hit happens WHILE BOUND so no real opportunity to get an advantage. Still a mommy-scrum in my book. The “dark-arts” are going to get lost I’m afraid.
@GreenBlooded: Sorry I modified the blog a bit. These guys were part of the u16 HP in 2012, so they are now u17. Not sure what grades they are in tho but even if still gr10 they will be eligible for 3 years.
I was under the impression that u17-u19 (open) rugby still had the hit except it was defined as a reduced hit (not sure what this means) but it’s not the passive (mommy) engage of u16 and lower.
A few comments:
1. Are these guys U16 this year or last year? If U16 this year then they cannot play open rugby – new age-banding laws.
2. What grade are they in this year?
3. Did Northwood consider the new mommy-scrum engagement laws and how drastically they will affect the game before poaching these 2 props?
4. How will these 2 props fit in with the new mommy-scrums where faster and more skilled players will trump big strong scrummagers?