A recent Old Diocesan interview with Robbie Fleck and Martin Versveld cut through the polite window dressing and admitted what many whisper about: building a successful rugby programme takes serious money — and serious players.
Why the 1st XV Rules the Roost
Like it or not, 95% of interest in schoolboy rugby rests on 1st XV results. You can lose every other game on a Saturday, but if the 1st XV wins, the day is a marketing success. But a winning first team doesn’t just appear. It’s a five-year development process that requires top coaches and, crucially, top players.
Coaching Helps, But Players Win Games
The duo made no bones about it: talent is non-negotiable. Bruce Arians, the Super Bowl–winning former Tampa Bay Buccaneers head coach, put it bluntly when asked about Bill Belichick — widely regarded as the greatest NFL coach of all time — taking charge of a college team: “They’ll be well coached, no doubt. But the old saying goes — you can’t make chicken salad out of chicken s***!” Fleck and Versveld were simply saying the same thing, politely — without quality players, coaching alone won’t deliver results.
The Cost of Competing
Today, schools can’t just rely on tradition or raw talent pools. They need someone to coordinate coaching — call him a director, call him a head of rugby — but he must be on campus, leading, planning, managing, interacting with parents, working with age group coaches and coaching kids. Fleck did not put a number to it but if a school can secure that for under R800k a year, they’re doing well.
Recruitment was another area where the pair didn’t mince words. Bringing in Grade 10 and 11 players is the new standard practice, provided they can meet academic standards and fit into school life. The rub? Cost. The interview figure put on the table was R500k per student per annum including extras. Using known numbers, Bishops’ 2025 tuition and boarding fees alone sit at R341,000 — compared to an average of R130,000 at their Southern Suburbs main rivals Rondebosch, SACS, or Wynberg. That makes Bishops 2.6 times more expensive.
The Maths of Rugby Ambition
Put four rugby players through Bishops for two and a half years and you’re looking at around R3.4 million for school and hostel. With 12 boys across three age groups, the annual bill pushes north of R4 million. To put that in perspective: for the same money, you could put 10 boys through Rondebosch, 10 through SACS and 10 through Wynberg — 30 in total.
Refreshing Honesty
It may not have been everyone’s cup of tea, but what stood out in the interview was its refreshing candour. No euphemisms, no spin. The ODs were clear: to get involved and to take over areas of rugby control because to win, you need strong coaching structures and, above all, the best possible players. The rest of the schools game may pretend otherwise, but money talks — and Bishops just said it out loud.
Youtube Link
https://youtu.be/i3lBhSNncCI?si=alwQnuXuULnBztcS
THANK YOU BISHOPS FOR SACHA FM
@Ringo (Comment #63)
As you know, there are always two teams on the field. Griquas were on a mission, with a 36-year old flyhalf at the front.
A bigger shock was Griquas’ 1970 CC Final win over Northern Transvaal. They had legenary Boks Mannetjies Roux and Piet Visagie in the side; NTvl had legends like Frik du Preez, Mof Myburgh and a few others.
I HUGGED A KES BOY TODAY 😭😭😭😭😭
LOVE THE HONESTY AND CANDID OF BISHOPS CONVERSATIONS
@Ystervark (Comment #60)
Roger didn’t read, maybe 20 are 100%, the rest are partial with performance clauses. Some are only 20%. The point was the volume of them. Bishops offering another 10 isn’t going to suddenly make them more competitive, A team results may improve a bit. Affies as an example have a solid base of say 8x teams per age group, that is where the strength comes from, depth! Especially when boys develop rapidly from 13 to 17 so stars in u14 are overtaken by later developers. Affies covers all eventualities & it shows….then just by having that depth & performance you don’t need to recruit…..
@Roger (Comment #58)
You forgot to add in flights/transport. Grasshopper might not be exactly right at 70, but it’s happening at a ridiculous rate now. Weekly stories of another kid from EP being flown up to Durban and sold dreams. Take the kid to Kings Park for a photo op to seal the deal. Thats not even including Border which is being decimated by the KZN schools. A certain Sharks recruiter also heavily involved and selling falsehoods to 13 year old kids about rugby after school. When does it end?
@Roger (Comment #58)
R10 million is peanuts boet, just one wealthy OB could contribute that (Stephan Saad etc). Put 500+ throwing bits in it’s easy, R20,000 each p/a or R1,666 a month, which is £66 a month. I donate £50 a month. You Okes just love to hate, that’s cool with me & yes the WOB UK chair is actually a very close friend 👍
@Grasshopper (Comment #53)
Classic Grasshoppper – “my best mate is the ‘Ville old boy Chairman yada yada yada”, ” I have two mates who are Bishops old boys yada yada yada”
350 bursaries (25% of the enrolment – 1450 boys as per website) at an average of (let’s be kind) 40% of full fees (boarding and tuition) would equal +-35k per annum for tuition and R45k for boarding (Westville fees as per website = R76k tuition and R96k full boarding). Assuming a 30/70 split between boarding and tuition bursaries (Westville cater for 150 boarders as per website), that would equate to +-R10 bar per annum – and I am not factoring in tours, kit, equipment stationary, sundries, pocket money, bus levies, transport, insurance, school levies etc etc etc – unsustainable. You keep telling us all how KZN is dying and there’s no money and yet you want us to believe a state aided school can throw R10 million per annum at bursaries! Don’t talk kuk man!
@Grizzly (Comment #56)
You make me laugh, okes in SA watch far too much BBC. Yes, we have an Asian community, smaller than Durban, living in Birmingham, Bedford, Luton and near Wembley. The spices are different to those in Durban, especially the combinations. Anyway, you know it all, so will let you believe what you want to…
@Grasshopper (Comment #54)
Grassie you just full of it. With the whole of Pakistan and India there you tell me you must import salt, pepper and coriander? 🤣🇿🇦
@Balikibaba (Comment #49)
PRG vs Bishops results: Saturday 26 April 2025
19A 46-10 Bishops 19A
19B 43-7 Bishops 19B
19C 31-7 Bishops 19C
19E 63-0 Bishops 19D
19F 38-5 Bishops 19E
19G 81-0 Bishops 19F
16A 61-5 Bishops 16A
16B 46-10 Bishops 16B
16D 35-5 Bishops 16C
16E 85-0 Bishops 16D
15A 52-21 Bishops 15A
15B 71-0 Bishops 15B
15D 62-0 Bishops 15C
14A 49-3 Bishops 14A
14B 77-0 Bishops 14B
14D 108-3 Bishops 14C
Points for: 948
Points against: 76
Average Score: 59-5
Played: 16
PRG Won: 16
@Smallies (Comment #51)
hahahha, ja Sitbok, when in fact it’s far better than anything I’ve had in SA, proper Bison/Aberdeen beef used with imported spices made by one of the 100K+ Saffas here…..
@Roger (Comment #50)
Dude, have a little respect. My best man and best friend runs the Westville Old Boys Committee in the UK, I know exactly what is going on there. They give out 70, not all 100%. Work it out. 20x 100% AND the rest partial PLUS they are reviewed annually. They have 1,500 boys now and they have lots of OBs ploughing money in to compete….
@Balikibaba (Comment #49)
Respectfully, two of my mates here are Bishops Old Boys, they are not happy. Most teams getting pumped, games being called early etc. We talking B,C and D teams. Clifton if they could hold onto the prep talent would challenge any school, unfortunately Kearsney, DHS, Hilton and House come in and take them away. Clifton can be as good at rugby as they are at waterpolo. Glenwood are not a factor, stuck in a kak degrading area and no money. They will do well to stay Top 50 for another years without a cash injection from OBs
@Roger (Comment #50)
All that sitbok billies he buys in Ibizza makes his brain shortcircut…
@Balikibaba (Comment #49)
I stopped reading ol’ Grassie’s post at the “Westville hand out 70 bursaries per year” part. I’m sure any Westville governing body member reading here would be hosing themselves! It would bankrupt the school within five years – 350 bursaries – that would be close to 50% of the enrolment! Dream on …….
@Grasshopper (Comment #43)
I don’t comment here anymore, but feel I have to respond to this.
Grasshopper, a very poor Bishops First Team put 70 on Clifton last year and 50 on them this year. The only other Natal team Bishops played this year was Michaelhouse and they beat them too.
Bishops u16a, while not the strongest, have beaten a few schools this year that would smoke Clifton.
Bishops u15a are a problem.
Bishops u14a beat Paarl Boys this year. You are probably not aware of this.
But methinks you make too many assumptions with very little knowledge.
Don’t be too quick to forget that 2 years ago Bishops drew with Paul Roos on the Markotter with Paul Roos scoring the match drawing try with 3 minutes to go. Bishops then almost scored to win but wing had foot just out. The year before Bishops put a record win against Paul Roos on the Piley.
Bishops can easily compete with the bigger Paarl Schools once they get their act together as per the Fleckie and Martin Versveld interview. They know the landscape and they know what they are up against.
Your comments are somewhat laughable. Said with respect. Good luck to Glenwood next year. Give Bishops 5 years with a proper rugby programme and they will be high up in the Top 20 yearly.
PRETORIA BOYS HIGH
Baie goeie en sinvolle post. Elke skool doen dit wat vir hom nodig is, en wat sy ouergemeenskap wil hê hulle moet doen. Dit is elke skool se goeie reg. Skole moet dan eienaarskap neem vir hul werkswyse of strategie, want as openbare skool, kan die publiek met reg deursigtigheid, integriteit en etiese en opvoedkundige verantwoordbaarheid vereis.
@Grizzly (Comment #24)
Hoekom se jy uitgesluit PBHS, as jy dink hulle gee nie beurse nie gaan kyk die youtube video net voor die affies game waar hulle met die afrigters en van die spelers onderhoude doen. As ek reg onthou is dit “Backtrack of so iets”
Alle skole wat top rugby programme het ‘n tipe beurs vir van die leerlinge of dit van die skool of sponsors of oud leerlinge kom. Wat sommige mense ongelukkig maak is dat die verskillend gedoen word. Maar mens moet ook onthou skole is verskillend.
Affies of hulle “sponsors” hoef dalk nie beurse te gee na graad 9 nie want hulle het 200 spelers per ouderdom om van te kies, en van daai 200 is daar heelwat wat in ander skole A span moontlik sou gespeel het, en vir Affies is dit dalk belangrik die 5 jaar op skool vir die kultuur van skool, ens, ens. Garsfontein het nie 200 spelers per ouderdom nie (volgens my inligting, seker Djou sal my vinnig regstel as ek verkeerd is), so hulle gaan dit anders moet doen om dan ook kompeterend te wees. Die skole is nie dieslefde nie en moet sommige dinge anders doen. Ek het geen probleem met Beurse vir kinders as dit positief is vir hulle en die skool nie, vir my bly dit net solank dit ten bate is van die leerling in die langtermyn. Die leerlinge en sy familie is die engigste persone wat kan besluit wat is beste vir hulle.
Wat my partykeer net persoonlik bietjie krap is waar ek hoor ‘n seun wat se familie baie, baie welaf is maar dan aandring op ‘n beurs, maar dit is ook hulle keuse en die skool sin wat dit vir hulle gee,
Wat wel vir my ‘n probleem is dat mens nie oor sekere dinge normal net kan debateer of redeneer nie, veral hier word dit baie keer persoonlik, of mens nou met die amerikaner Charlie Kirk saamgegestem het of nie, dit was altyd ‘n respekvolle debat wat hy probeer voer het met ander sprekers.
Just my 2c about Bishops. Without trying to sound all doomsday prophet (and perhaps I am completely wrong – I would be happy to be), I think there are bigger problems in their rugby programme/culture than not winning. When I was at school (around 10 years ago), Bishops boys were vociferous in the stands and loads of them watched the first team games. Last year on Markötter, not more than 20 Bishops guys stayed for the first team game. More guys were on the field than in the stands. That becomes a culture problem. Even at Paul Roos’ lowest ebb in 2013 (I was there!), loads of us – even many of us who didn’t play rugby on those Saturdays – travelled with the school to watch and support. The thought of playing on a Saturday and then leaving without supporting your mates was a completely alien concept.
@Grasshopper (Comment #43)
Well…you’d be unwise to assume that Bishops’ current low ebb (rugby wise) will become the status quo. Nevertheless, they’re still comfortably above Clifton in the age group rankings….so, again, we’ll have to agree to disagree.
@Vleis (Comment #42)
hahaha, well you know what yes Bishops have a lovely view BUT quite a bit more competition than the KZN Midlands. I reckon the CLifton u14, 15s and 16s would beat Bishops these days….
@Grasshopper (Comment #41)
We agree on some points, but let’s agree to disagree that, inter alia:
– MHS and Hilton are “lucky” geographically compared to Bishops; and
– Bishops is even in the same galaxy as Clifton re rugby.
@Vleis (Comment #40)
Hilton and Michaelhouse are geographically lucky, within 5hrs drive of Joburg (or 30 mins via helicopter) for wealthy Joburg parents, so they tap into a really big pool of talent. Bishops have a harder task around English speaking rugby kids with a wealth of choice of schools. I just can’t see them competing even with 20x bursaries a year….I see Bishops more like Clifton in Durban….or Kearsney in Bothas Hill…
@Grasshopper (Comment #34)
I agree that it’s very unlikely for many private schools to get too competitive in rugby due to funding (like you say), but also their smaller sizes (in most instances), different visions of their school Boards, etc. In Gauteng, there are so many privates that they can play each other in a “Tier 2” league…so the need to be brilliant in rugby is way less intense. That said, it’s different for other privates like Bishops, due to the landscape that they occupy. Moreover, Bishops have the ability to be very competitive – e.g. Hilton probably does not have the historical rugby pedigree of Bishops, but via significant funding/recruitment, they’ve been ranked in the top 20 almost every year of the past decade and in the top 10 three or four times.
.
I’m not saying that Bishops should embark on the same path as Hilton, but they certainly have the firepower in the OB network to achieve similar results…plus they have a stronger local player base to choose from.
@Ystervark (Comment #32)
Yes, let’s get rid of all the hundreds of boarding establishments…as we can’t have these pesky kids from elsewhere attend the schools in OUR province!
@agter_die_pale_pa (Comment #37)
Gaan net een skool kos om te innovate ,die res sal baie vinnig die waarde daarin insien…
@Smallies (Comment #36)
Dit sal ‘n monumentale stap wees vir SA rugby, kan jy jou indink die talent daar buite wat op die radar sal kom?
So let’s imagine, the Noordvaal-management decides to allow schools to “partner” with smaller/less-priviledged schools in their area. You are allowed to use some of their players, but in terms of an agreements to help them develop their programme. Cheez, whilst NV wants to extend the competition to D-teams, why not use those smaller schools’ A-teams to play each other on the same day as the NV-games, for log points? The big brother school can accumulate some easy log points by investing in the smaller rural communities. The opportunities to leverage of the existing structures to grow the game through the big rugby schools are endless..
I know it seems far-fetched, but perhaps these extremes are where things may need to go in order to find common ground?
Om almal op hierdie bladsy te kry gaan egter Salomo se wysheid verg.
@agter_die_pale_pa (Comment #35)
Actually not the fact that they developed those kids to a level that made the big schools take notice is positive ,I would go as far as trying to build a relationship with one of the established rugby schools ,help us develop coaching and structures and well act as a feeder school for you ….always see the positive instead
@Kaya 85 (Comment #33)
And this scenario is the perfect setup as to why this is such a contentious matter. Let’s say those 3 talented boys are given the opportunity at an established rugby school… Absolutely massive for them and that will develop them further and pave the way for them and their families to a better future, whilst benefitting the school as who knows one day the Bokke.
But where does that leave that programme up the road? Back to square one and surely deflating for the 2 teachers trying to built a competitive structure with minimal resources. Yes off course they are very happy for the boys (usually knowing best how much it could mean for them), but talent brings new talent and the programme takes a shot. Eventually they run out of steam and you can’t blame them. And that’s why everybody is not on the same page on this, it depends from whose perspective you are looking.
It would be short-sighted, especially in our country, to not see the benefit to the individual, but one have to acknowledge that it impacts the school/team where they came from and that there will be negativity.
@Vleis (Comment #29)
Bishops is older than them all in SA, it’s about cost again. Private schools just cannot afford to give out more than say 5x bursaries a year without outside money or sponsorship. The extra 10x Bishops are offering will help BUT will not make them suddenly competitive with a Paul Roos, Booishaai and Gim, they just won’t have the depth. Maybe schools like Bishops should just compete with A teams, same with all the other private schools across the country. For me it’s simple, recruit as much as you like, just be open and honest about it. Competing schools can then decide if they are willing to take on bought success or not. Remembering Glenwood were one of the first who went semi-professional, recruiting, gym, physios etc, 2000-2020 were great for results BUT plenty of other nasties and hatred came with that too. I’m more at ease now being competitive and top 40 than those days…
There’s a school rugby programme up the road here on the other end of this…. 3 teams in the school… Growing interest, a sponsor covers cost of jerseys only..(mostly guys wear own black shorts and random socks)…the local pharmacy sponsors first aid, stretcher, neck support, etc. Only 2 teacher-coaches at school… Fantastic guys…what they’ve done is amazing. About 30+ percent of enrolment is at sub economic level. Tough times but rugby again booming in that context. What they need: Sponsor for shorts, socks… Some nutritional input??, some pro conditioning and strength input …another coach,..and a Booster (Kaya)
3 or 4 of the first team were easily talented enough to be “poached” or offered something but at this stage the programme is totally under the radar.
@Vleis (Comment #29)
Bursaries are a reality. But they should be used to nurture and develop playing talent in your own backyard. Not what the likes of DHS (actually KZN in general) and Garsfontein are doing.
@Vleis (Comment #29)
Great post Vleis.
@HSBR (Comment #28)
As die grense voor 94 getrek is en enforce word belowe ek jou die Bere sal fine wees. Leerlinge mag dan nie skuif nie soos toe ons op skool was. 89 Matriek.
@buitestaander (Comment #27)
You’re in favour of schools with “traditions stretching over decades”, which means that you’re against “newer” schools trying to make their mark – e.g. Stellenberg, Garsfontein, Wetville, etc. Moreover, you’re anti-bursaries, which further handicaps the newer schools, who haven’t had the luxury of success over many decades to attract new pupils.
.
I suppose that all newer schools should either: a) give up; or b) wait a hundred years to be acceptable? Are you King Charles, or Marie Antoinette, or [insert the name of any snob that you prefer]?
@Grizzly (Comment #24)
Jou bewering oor die koshuis situasie by die Paarl skole en Affies is baie van toepassing op Garsfontein. Onthou voor Garsfontein koshuise gehad het, ek verwys ook na die een wat hulle eerste gebruik het by Pro Arte, was Garsfontein n baie middelmatige skool wat bitter min in die top 20-30 skole in die land was. Al die goeie rugby seuns het destyds na Kloof en Affies toe gegaan en selfs ook Menlo
Agree. That is what I like about schools such as Grey, Gim, Affies, HJS, Oakdale, Paul Roos, etc. Surely they all offer bursaries, but they all have a strong rugby culture and will most likely be Top-10 schools on a regular basis even without an extensive bursary program. Due to a culture and tradition stretching over decades, there will always be huge public interest and support. Fielding 30+ teams on a Saturday will always ensure that rugby involves large numbers of learners, and be an activity that unites the complete school community. That is also why eg the Southern Suberb-fixtures in Cape Town will remain great fixtures, even without having the most competitive teams. Affies vs PBHS is another example.
@Smallies (Comment #25)
Exactly!
@Grizzly (Comment #24)
Ek begin al hoe meer dink die ou wou vreeslik graag n beurs by n skool hehad het vir sy laaity en toe kry die nie een nie….nou is die druiwe moer suur
@buitestaander (Comment #20)
Die enigste probleem is dat daar sekere bloggers is wat intitled voel oor die skool wat hulle ondersteun. Let wel nie die skole nie mense. Grey het n saak hoeveel beurse Garsfontein beskikbaar stel want hulle weet hulle doen dieselfde. Maar ondersteuners van skole wat 100 jaar OUD is voel net die reg kom hulle toe… Pleinweg jalosie. Nous hier bloggers wat woorde en sinne spin om nie op tone te trap nie. Se jou se reguit. Alle skole wat kan werf gee beurse behalwe Pbhs. Plein en simpel. As Alle koshuise vandag af gebreek moet word is skole soos Affies en die Paarlse skole in groot moeilikheid. n Skool soos Garsies sal fine wees maar dan moet die reels daar vir almal wees.Dan in 12 jaar van rugby beurse was daar nog net n wen situasie vir kinders wat by Garsies beurse gekry het.Hulle is die unies vol omtrent in elke unie 3 of 4 wat elke naweek op Alle vlakke speel.So wys my nou asb die negatiewe kant van kinders wat beurse gekry het by watter skool ookal. Nie jou opinie nie werklike voorbeeld bv daai seun het n beurs gekry by daai skool en is vandag n boemelaar. Of hoe het dit die skool benadeel wat die beurs gegee het??? Ek sukkel om te verstaan… As ons die beurse gee dan gaan dit oor 10 jaar gebeur en dit gaan nie meer so wees oor 5 jaar nie en en en… Wat n klomp k#k.Miskien het die landskap Verander na 94,miskien is dit oor dat rugby profesioneel geword het, miskien het die dimise van klub rugby iets daar mee te doen… Daars baie dinge wat verander het en gaan verander maar party mense sal nooit aan beweeg nie. Ek gaan dit plein stel, adapt or die.
@TWE (Comment #22)
Success breeds success and with nearly everybody with a decent job heading to the Western Cape it makes sense that the Paarl/Stellenbosch schools are ‘propvol’ with talent, no need to give out bursaries. It’s those expensive schools OR schools stuck in declining areas like Glenwood that need to attract or buy the talent in or face being non-existent in 20 years….
The irony is of course that 1-5 on the rankings all have more than 10 teams they can field on a Saturday in u19 alone. That is not bought. That is culture. And in addition, look at eg Paarl Boys Facebook, it is not only rugby, in fact it is a wide variety of sports, culture and academic pursuits. Whether a good first team in SA assist in a performance culture or vice versa, that is a different question.
@buitestaander (Comment #20)
In all honesty, I can see in 10 years from now a Top 20 league then the rest playing for the enjoyment of the sport and vs traditional rivals. St Stithians, St Johns, Bishops etc will all drop to 2nd tier. Talent is pooling in these Top 20 schools, the tide cannot be turned now. It’s why I like the UK system, clubs have the real talent, not a few schools…where academics is why they exist…
We are all in agreement that we love schoolboy rugby, that it attracks huge public interest, and that we want it to be played at a high level. Surely we all also want high quality competition amongst schools. What we should debate: are the schools who are spending such huge amounts of money on their rugby programs, receiving the required return on their investment? Is that the best or most productive way of spending it? Are we not creating an animal that we will not be able to feed in 10 years’ time? Are we not creating an even more artificial and unequal playing field? Are we not killing long standing and great traditional fixtures? Where will all of this end up? We have seen at professional level that only a few unions could survive to play at the highest level. Is that where we want schoolboy rugby to end up? No rugby blog will bring the answers, but discussing these matters remains an interesting debate. Normally a balanced approach seems to be the only sustainable one. Hopefully, in the interest of schoolboy rugby, most schools will follow that approach.
@Kantman (Comment #13)
Not all the bursaries are 100%, some are 25%, 50%, 75% etc. Westville literally offer the whole SA Primary schools swimming team something to protect their unbeaten gala record. Some of their B team swimmers swam in SA Primary schools. The same for rugby in some places. Grey Bloem used to attract over 50 primary provincial rugby players only 10 years ago, I think that has dropped off hence Grey now being almost human. Glenwood has dropped back to where we always were in the past, a Top 6 KZN school and probably Top 40 in in SA. The money dried up, it will happen elsewhere too…
@ForeverHorseFly (Comment #16)
Funny thing is these schools that are seen as “rugby”schools are proparbly the best balanced schools in terms of all sports and academics in the country.
Like they say a healthy body houses a healthy spirit….
@buitestaander (Comment #15)
@agter_die_pale_pa (Comment #14)
Holrug geryde ou perdjie….
@buitestaander (Comment #15)
I think the fact that you are asking these questions on a schoolboyrugby blog answers your own question as to if rugby is such a big deal in SA (for some) . Its why there’s no school academics blog or school cricket blog or hockey or any other sport. We are all here because we value rugby and school boy rugby in particular and with that interest comes a financial incentive for those who can afford to use it to enhance the rugby fortunes of their chosen schools. Its why certain school rugby games can have more spectators than most professional games but the only people you see at any other school sport game is mostly the parents of the kids playing. The ranking of the schools rugby doesn’t define the quality of the school overall, but then again when the most popular sport with everyone around the school isn’t performing as it should, the brand of the school takes a hit. It is the perception
School fees may not be used for bursaries in any capacity. Even if a parent is just exempted from paying school fees (without legally qualifying for exemption), it should be regarded as a tax benefit. It still bothers me why being regarded as a top-ten school in rugby is regarded as so important. Obviously it is great to have a successful year in any aspect of the school, as it will enhance the reputation of a school, but surely rugby achievements should never define the quality of a school. Are we not creating expectations and a narrative that does not exist in life after school? It rugby really such a massive thing in SA, or do we over-estimate its role? Should schools really spend millions on rugby programs, whilst education in SA is in such a desperate state? Interesting debate with no obvious answers.
@Kantman (Comment #13)
Good luck to whoever is tasked to managing the 50 dads’ expectations!
On a more serious note, if those funds come from the school’s normal budget, I would love to be a fly on the wall during budget-presentation time. Surely it must be massively skewed towards rugby (I am talking of the average public co-ed), which is in my opinion not healthy nor sustainable. Rugby remains one of many disciplines offered by a school.
So that leaves sponsors, who bulk up the rugby’s budget. Fair enough, but somewhere along the line the wallets get empty or angry, and then it is back to square one.
Co-ed schools, it’s rugby-program, the parents and players need to decide whether it is worth-while to try and compete for top 20, or whether it is okay to be ranked top 50 or top 100 or whatever is decent for the school in question.
Will it change in the foreseeable future? No it wont. Luckily you have a choice. Horses for courses. You as a parent should have a pretty good idea on a school’s rugby-philosophy when considering the environment you want for your child of 13 years young. A wonderful opportunity to teach an early lesson in the workings of capitalism in the 21st century!
It you don’t agree on the role of money in SBR, avoid the schools that take that approach. But don’t worry too much about rankings (and make sure your son knows that), because you are likely to be disappointed. If you support such approach, good for you, but then be prepared to also take the scrutiny, critics and constant pressure to perform with that.
@Grasshopper (Comment #11)
Not doubting what you were told, but how can a school have 50 boys per year with rugby bursaries? Why do you need so many?
@Vleis (Comment #3)
Agree, the chance of any sort of regulations similar to US football are close to zero. Looking at it from SARUs viewpoint (or even the dept of education for that matter), is there any benefit to put in regulations? In a country with limited resources, why not rely on private money to nurture the cream to the top and then feed into the pro system from there….?
@buitestaander (Comment #9)
Yep but back in the day it was maybe 10x boys a year across multiple sports & academics, it’s now in the 50+ region for some ‘academies’ as I call them. Recruit & offer as much as you like but be honest & open about it, even name each bursary/scholarship so schools & their management can decide if that fits with their ethos & if they think it’s fair to play against an academy. It will remove the 100+ scores I saw quite a bit of this year, those games are pointless
@Tang (Comment #7)
Yeah, my point is that if the cat is steadily exiting the bag in the US even, we have zero chance of any regulation and enforcement here in SA when, inter alia, we haven’t even got to step one.
.
Sticking to the US theme, our school rugby is becoming closer to the US, where it is extremely rare for a talented player to make it to the NFL unless he attended a strong football high school. Josh Allen is one exception. The Allens rejected offers from stronger football schools and kept him at the local school. As farmers, their family motto was “you bloom where you’re planted.” Of course, it required a number of flukes for him to even land up at a mediocre College, where his talent was finally exposed…and now he’s one of the top QBs in the NFL. That said, fortunately we have other safety nets help to catch more of the talented high school fishes – e.g. Varsity Cup, club rugby, provincial age group comps, etc.
Bursaries and scholarships probably date more than a century back. Priviledged schools also have a responsibility in this regard, especially in terms of assisting those who can not afford decent education. There is no reason why bursaries and scholarships can not be an integral part of any school’s recruitment policy or program. That being said, is there no reason why awarding bursaries and scholarships can not be transparent. That will remove all elements of unhappiness, suspicion, speculation and blame. Eventually every school will have to face public scrutiny on the manner and way in which they recruit, and justify what they do. If their parent community aggrees and approves ….. all good.
@Grasshopper (Comment #4)
Grasshopper – It’s not only DHS who have seen such a rapid change in fortunes. Over the last 15 years, many rugby programs have been transformed. Look at the top ranked schools. Is there one who doesn’t have a formal recruitment and bursary program?
@Vleis (Comment #3)
Yes – The NCAA now allows students to get paid. I think the rule applies from 1 July 2025. Schools (Colleges) can now share revenue directly with athletes. I think there is a cap of $20.5 million per school. Athletes can also earn money from name, image and likeness deals with 3rd parties for endorsements and appearances separate from the school based payment system. However, boosters are still allowed. Boosters pay for student athletes and programs. Boosters are very similar to what we have in SA. Rich donors who fund multiple bursaries or build gyms, etc. Boosters in the US also work at school level but they are heavily regulated. They can’t give money, gifts or special benefits to players, coaches or prospects. All I would like to see is transparency. Each school should declare the number of bursaries and when and how the athletes were recruited. Watch any school boy game and you never hear the commentators talk about how many players have been recruited.
If it is about money and not opportunity you will never win in the long run.
RESPECT
@Tang (Comment #2)
Maybe Bishops should throw in a car rental for boys over 18, some pocket money for the weekends & of course a summer trip to the Maldives for the family. They just won’t get the scale they need unless they can find a Stephen Saad Billionaire type open to funding like over 50 boys a year….it’s funny how DHS’s resurgence has correlated with a massive cash injection…….it always comes down to the moola….buy success….
@Tang (Comment #2)
I don’t see anything happening.
.
Recruiting violations are taken very seriously and are enforced extremely rigorously in US College football. In short, they don’t want college students to receive a single cent (other than for tuition, accommodation, etc)…even though the top college coaches earn north of R200m per annum. The NCAA has significant volumes of rules/laws and an equally large war chest to investigate infractions. Of course, we don’t have either of these. In fact, we haven’t even made any progress with far more serious matters like tackling the Zondo Commission report findings.
.
….and yet, even the NCAA is buckling under pressure of litigation, so have softened their stance in many areas – e.g. students are now allowed to receive Image payments worth up to R20m per annum; they can now transfer to another college without sitting out a year, etc, etc. Thus…we get back to my first point.
@Grasshopper (Comment #1)
It’s gone beyond crazy and it won’t stop until it’s properly regulated. Old Boys and parents living vicariously through the first rugby team. Do you remember a few years back, Beet set up a spreadsheet with the good, the bad and the ugly in terms of recruitment? I think this should come back so we bring sanity and transparency to the whole question of bursaries and recruitment.
Interesting and well done to them for recognising the issue BUT it’s like farting against thunder. Getting a handful of players on bursary will not be enough, I mean 8, 9, 10 bursaries is nothing. Westville give our over 70 a year PLUS the Paarl schools are recruiting 2x teams at grade 8 level. Private schools have a difficult task as the fees are so high, for 1 boy they can get a Gov school can get 4. What they should do is focus on sports with smaller teams or individual sports, waterpolo, golf, tennis, cycling, triathlon etc. St Johns and St Stithians are a bit like that now, B-league rugby schools. Plus this oh we just recruit a few in grade 10 at GK, that is just open poaching, like they did with a recent Glenwood player. Hilton and Michaelhouse are different as they feed from the Joburg cream. Bishops are more like Kearsney and maybe should just play the smaller private schools, Clifton, St Charles, St Stithians, St Johns etc. Also, my view is the best way to build strength is from the E/F team up, coach the basics as many of those kids in the E team will end up in the 1st’s. The heroes at grade 8 are usually that because they are early developers. But good luck to them, in the Cape I just can’t see them competing with the Paarl schools again anytime soon….