Schoolboy Rugby Blog Rankings for the week ending 30 May 2026

1 June, 2026 beet Top 50 Rankings 12

# SCHOOL REG AVG CAT P W D L PF PA PD TTL LAST 8 GAMES
1 1 Paarl Gim WP 4.98 5.00 12 11 0 1 615 170 445 59.82 AHS GCB HMK DHS BL BIS WYN OAK
2 2 Paul Roos WP 4.89 5.00 12 11 0 1 410 193 217 58.69 STE GHS GAR OAK DUR RBH HJS BIS
3 3 Garsfontein BUL 4.75 5.00 12 10 0 2 434 270 164 56.98 AHS PRG NW HMK WK NH MEN RUS
4 4 Stellenberg WP 4.71 5.00 13 11 0 2 447 188 259 61.29 PRG MBS MC DIA WYN OAK HJS RBH
5 5 Paarl BH WP 4.71 5.00 11 6 1 4 286 225 61 51.79 OAK WYN NW AHS GCB STE PRG SAC
6 6 Affies BUL 4.65 5.00 13 9 0 4 505 354 151 60.39 GHS GIM GAR OUT HJS JEP GCB KES
7 7 Grey College FS 4.64 5.00 12 8 0 4 478 215 263 55.66 HMK STE NUD GIM NH JEP HJS AHS
8 9 Waterkloof BUL 4.33 4.50 13 10 1 2 515 269 246 56.30 NEL MEN DUR WVL RUS GAR MEN MID
9 8 Oakdale SWD 4.30 4.50 11 5 1 5 241 229 12 47.35 NH HJS DUR WVL PRG STE OUT GIM
10 10 Monument LIO 4.25 4.50 14 11 0 3 710 368 342 59.44 KIN DHS NM EGJ NH JEP HMK MEN
11 11 Outeniqua SWD 4.15 4.50 11 7 1 3 452 223 229 45.68 KES WK BL PEA AHS MC OAK FRA
12 13 Northwood KZN 4.11 4.50 12 7 0 5 363 247 116 49.32 WVL DHS HJS GAR WVL MC JEP KEA
13 14 Maritzburg Coll KZN 4.09 4.50 12 8 0 4 334 203 131 49.06 GLE PBH STE OUT STC DHS NW HIL
14 12 Hilton KZN 4.07 4.50 10 9 0 1 352 140 212 40.65 HEI NEL NUD BIS MHS GLE PBH MC
15 16 Durban HS KZN 3.96 4.50 11 7 0 4 336 234 102 43.61 RUS HMK NW MON GIM MC KEA WVL
16 15 Westville KZN 3.88 4.50 14 7 1 6 470 258 212 54.31 JEP OAK WK KEA NW KES GLE DHS
17 19 Michaelhouse KZN 3.73 4.50 10 6 0 4 316 222 94 37.34 AHS JEP GHS STA HIL KEA SJC PBH
18 21 Rondebosch WP 3.68 4.25 11 7 0 4 418 265 153 40.49 WYN BL GLE KES SAC PRG STE DUR
19 18 Drostdy BOL 3.64 4.25 9 7 0 2 428 185 243 32.77 WYN EGJ MON HER STS SEL HUG WOR
20 17 Helpmekaar LIO 3.60 4.25 14 6 0 8 459 424 35 50.33 DHS GIM QC GAR MEN EGJ MON NH
21 22 Kearsney KZN 3.57 4.25 11 6 1 4 340 269 71 39.26 TRA ZWA GRA SAC WVL MHS DHS NW
22 23 Jeppe LIO 3.55 4.25 14 7 0 7 399 481 -82 49.64 KES WVL BL GCB AHS MON NW SJC
23 20 Durbanville WP 3.52 4.25 12 5 0 7 296 338 -42 42.21 SAC OAK WK EGJ PRG TYG BIS RBH
24 25 Noordheuwel LIO 3.39 4.00 13 5 0 8 272 349 -77 44.12 MAR KES GCB BL MON GAR EGJ HMK
25 26 Grey HS EP 3.37 4.25 10 7 0 3 346 228 118 33.69 AHS DAL PRG MHS GLE WYN STA DAN
26 24 Wynberg WP 3.34 4.25 10 6 0 4 289 228 61 33.35 INV STS RBH HJS STE BIS GHS GIM
27 27 Boland Landbou WP 3.30 4.00 10 4 0 6 296 326 -30 32.98 HMK OUT RBH JEP NH GIM SAC MIL
28 29 Diamantveld GRQ 3.29 4.00 13 8 0 5 485 328 157 42.79 DUI UPI QC STE SEN FIC JF NK
29 31 Zwartkop BUL 3.24 4.00 16 14 0 2 666 262 404 51.81 MV MTA KLE HEI TRA ELD WES KEM
30 28 Graeme EP 3.22 4.00 12 10 1 1 541 266 275 38.62 REX SEL KEA STC STA CAM HP NM
31 32 SACS WP 3.19 4.25 12 6 0 6 289 262 27 38.27 DUR BIS SEL KEA RBH BL PV HJS
32 30 Menlopark BUL 3.08 4.25 13 7 0 6 488 420 68 40.07 OM WK TYG MID HMK WK GAR MON
33 33 Dale BOR 2.92 3.50 14 12 0 2 472 259 213 40.85 QC PEA MUI REX SEL STI CAM MAR
34 36 Rustenburg LEO 2.88 4.00 15 7 0 8 418 413 5 43.13 PCG PAR INV MAR WK EGJ MID GAR
35 34 Nelspruit PUM 2.87 4.00 12 9 0 3 331 352 -21 34.49 HIL ALB WK OM OM TRA MTA KLE
36 35 KES LIO 2.87 4.00 12 5 1 6 291 292 -1 34.40 JEP NH RBH PEA PAR WVL AHS BEN
37 37 Nico Malan EP 2.86 3.50 11 5 2 4 283 348 -65 31.44 HTS MUI FRA EGJ MON PUN MAR GRA
38 46 Charlie Hofmeyr BOL 2.81 3.00 8 8 0 0 274 109 165 22.50 DFA BVJ LIC PR STR HOP WOL SWA
39 39 HTS Middelburg PUM 2.76 3.50 12 8 0 4 295 306 -11 33.12 NM EGJ MID KEM MID MTA KLE WES
40 38 Bishops WP 2.66 4.00 11 5 0 6 248 376 -128 29.23 SJC GRA SAC HIL WYN GIM DUR PRG
41 43 Kingswood EP 2.66 3.50 11 9 0 2 536 179 357 29.23 SDC MON STC STS HP REX MUI BW
42 41 Pearson EP 2.64 3.50 9 6 1 2 266 188 78 23.78 ELD CRA SEL OUT DAL INV KES MUI
43 40 Parel Vallei LIM 2.63 3.00 11 10 0 1 352 146 206 28.93 MIL STR FRA HP DFA BOS SAC BRA
44 47 Queen’s BOR 2.57 4.00 12 6 0 6 310 295 15 30.78 KES STI DAL DIA HMK SEL HP STA
45 42 EG Jansen VAL 2.55 4.00 15 4 0 11 372 515 -143 38.31 HTS BV NM DUR MON RUS HMK NH
46 48 Glenwood KZN 2.51 4.00 13 3 1 9 217 353 -136 32.65 EGJ MC RBH GHS HIL STC WVL CC
47 50 Montana BUL 2.47 3.00 12 7 0 5 332 249 83 29.66 KEM ZWA WES WES NEL HTS KEM OM
48 49 Ben Vorster LIM 2.44 3.00 10 7 1 2 401 234 167 24.41 MID EGJ DIN RPG LIG LIC ELD PR
49 51 Kempton Park VAL 2.42 3.50 16 9 1 6 471 318 153 38.72 PR TRA PAR HTS OM TRA MTA ZWA
50 44 St John’s LIO 2.39 3.00 10 6 0 4 200 271 -71 23.85 PAR BIS GL ITA SAS MHS PBH JEP
51 52 Sentraal FS 2.37 3.50 14 10 0 4 511 318 193 33.20 ANK LAN FIC DUI INT DIA JF BUR
52 55 Transvalia VAL 2.36 3.50 14 6 1 7 314 325 -11 32.99 FRA ELD KEM NEL ZWA KEM OM KLE
53 45 Marlow EP 2.35 3.50 12 5 1 6 329 392 -63 28.25 NH BW HP INV RUS STA NM DAL
54 54 Selborne BOR 2.32 3.50 12 5 1 6 330 323 7 27.85 PEA GRA SAC DRO OKG DAL QC REX
55 56 Jim Fouche FS 2.28 3.50 14 11 0 3 374 302 72 31.95 ROO FIC LAN BSA INV DUI SEN DIA
56 57 Pretoria BH BUL 2.24 4.00 10 4 0 6 202 357 -155 22.41 SAC RBH PAR MC SDC HIL SJC MHS
57 59 St Andrew’s EP 2.23 3.50 11 2 0 9 260 349 -89 24.55 KES NW MHS GRA MAR CAM GHS QC
58 58 Middelburg PUM 2.21 3.50 13 5 1 7 324 380 -56 28.76 HPY PIE BV HTS MEN HTS RUS WK
59 60 Framesby EP 2.19 3.50 12 6 0 6 255 413 -158 26.23 WVL GLE TRA DAN NM PV HP OUT
60 61 Welkom Gim GRF 2.16 3.50 13 8 0 5 454 476 -22 28.03 GL WL BVH TRI OTT WIT HEN GOU
61 62 Pietersburg LIM 2.12 3.00 13 10 0 3 382 204 178 27.52 HEI WAG FIC TYG MV MV HEI SEC
62 64 Hugenote BOL 2.11 3.50 10 7 0 3 332 264 68 21.08 TRA BEL ROB NEW DRO HER WOR STR
63 66 St Charles KZN 2.09 3.50 10 4 1 5 287 281 6 20.89 NC KEM KIN GRA MC CC GLE STS
64 53 Oos-Moot BUL 2.08 3.50 11 5 0 6 265 345 -80 22.86 STR MEN NEL NEL KEM WES TRA MTA
65 65 Hudson Park BOR 2.05 3.00 13 5 2 6 297 331 -34 26.62 CAM MAR DAN PV FRA KIN GRA QC
66 67 Heidelberg VS VAL 1.99 3.00 14 9 0 5 391 273 118 27.90 PIE WES FIC ZWA PR PIE MV LIC
67 63 Klerksdorp LEO 1.99 3.50 11 4 1 6 255 258 -3 21.90 TRI MV ZWA WAG LIC NEL HTS TRA
68 73 Swartland BOL 1.92 3.00 10 7 0 3 320 204 116 19.17 PV VB BW ELL WOR HER ROB CHA
69 68 Brandwag (EP) EP 1.81 3.50 12 6 0 6 295 264 31 21.73 MV SWA HER MAR MUI DAN WTR KIN
70 71 Beth. Voortrekker GRF 1.73 3.00 11 4 0 7 250 314 -64 18.99 ZWA NEL WEL HEN DRM TRI GOU WIT
71 72 Upington GRI 1.69 3.00 10 6 0 4 265 192 73 16.94 LG HER C&V KAT DIA INV NK DUI
72 70 Fichardtpark FS 1.65 3.50 14 7 0 7 304 342 -38 23.10 JF SEN PIE HEI BUR LAN DIA SAS
73 69 Daniel Pienaar EP 1.64 3.50 13 5 3 5 301 387 -86 21.34 MV ROB FRA OTT HP BW DES GHS
74 Parktown LIO 1.61 3.00 12 3 1 8 193 260 -67 19.30 SEL PBH RUS KEM KES SDC STS ALB
75 Wesvalia LEO 1.55 3.50 13 6 0 7 251 287 -36 20.14 MID WAG HEI MTA MTA OM ZWA HTS
76 Witteberg GRF 1.53 3.00 11 4 0 7 233 371 -138 16.83 JF MID ZWA HEN GOU WEL TRI BVH
77 St Stithians LIO 1.44 3.00 10 3 0 7 227 287 -60 14.42 BEN SJH WYN DRO KIN ALB PAR STC
78 Marais Viljoen LIO 1.34 3.00 14 5 1 8 284 362 -78 18.71 KLE MER MER PIE PIE SEC HEI ELD
79 Muir EP 1.06 3.50 9 1 0 8 207 329 -122 9.50 GRV OTT NM BW INV DAL PEA KIN
80 Milnerton WP 0.95 3.50 11 1 1 9 169 346 -177 10.49 PET WVL PV BRA BEL STR BL DFA

Leave a Reply

12 Comments

  1. avatar
    #12 Kantman

    I prefer looking at average points rather than absolute ranking as a measure to compare teams in a year. Gut feel over the years – fairest ranking comparing results and quality of the team in THAT year.
    For 2026:
    1-2, avg points difference = 0,09 points
    Gap to next: 0,14
    3-7 (5 teams) 0,11 points
    Gap: 0,31
    8-14 (7) 0,26 points
    Gap: 0,11
    15-23 (9), 0,44 points
    Gap: 0,13
    Etcetera

    ReplyReply
    2 June, 2026 at 22:17
  2. avatar
    #11 Maroon machine supporter

    @Farmer (Comment #9) The way I see it Grey High has only won 1/4 against the Top 25 ranked teams…that is a 25% win ratio. Most of their wins were against lowly ranked teams. In my opinion Grey is on par with the likes of Drostdy, Helpmekaar and Kearsney, so a ranking around 20 seems fair. As for Boishaai, I can’t see a team outside the Top10 that will beat them…so they deserve to be Top10 in my humble opinion.

    ReplyReply
    2 June, 2026 at 21:15
  3. avatar
    #10 Vleis

    @Farmer (Comment #9) I’m not sure exactly how the system works, but it takes into account the standard of opposition AND (very importantly) the margin of victory (or defeat) v same – e.g. Grey has only beaten one school in the top 20 (MHS at 17) and lost HEAVILY v Affies, Wynberg, etc, whereas HJS has lost narrowly v the top teams and beaten the teams at 12, 11 and 5 and drew with the team at 9.
    .
    That said, I’d have Grey and Wynberg higher and HJS a little lower – e.g. at 7…for now.

    ReplyReply
    2 June, 2026 at 15:22
  4. avatar
    #9 Farmer

    @Vleis (Comment #8)
    Understand how they do it.
    But this way means if you play top teams you wil stay in top 10, even if you only win 55% matches like Oakdale and HJS this year. Grey high lost to PRG & Affies did not help them much even though its top 10 schools. Maybe some IT person should write an program that works it out on the algoritherm pike the Playtomic app in padel.

    ReplyReply
    2 June, 2026 at 06:47
  5. avatar
    #8 Vleis

    @Pine (Comment #7) Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your point, or maybe you haven’t looked at the rankings too carefully as you’d realise that the standard of opposition is obviously taken into account? Otherwise, how would HJS be at 5 with a 55% win percentage, while Parel Vallei is at 43 with a 91% win percentage…and both are W Cape schools, so even have one or two common opposition.

    ReplyReply
    1 June, 2026 at 20:15
  6. avatar
    #7 Pine

    LOG RANKINGS CRITERIA

    I wish to raise a point on the criteria to determine the log. We need to take into account the different competitions the schools are involved in as the opposition for some schools are far more stronger and therefore the school is lower on the rankings , especially those who participate in the Noord Vaal . Just a suggestion
    ReplyReply
    1 June, 2026 at 14:27
  7. avatar
    #6 OupaPB

    @Smallies (Comment #3)
    Stem saam. Hoe lank gaan dit nog vat voor keuses net op meriete plaasvind.

    ReplyReply
    1 June, 2026 at 12:42
  8. avatar
    #5 beet

    @Gimnasias (Comment #2)
    I’m thinking if the WP selectors are bold enough to go with a squad pack of 7 Gimmies + 5 POC players + Burden, that would surely equal the CW title again.

    ReplyReply
    1 June, 2026 at 12:15
  9. avatar
    #4 beet

    @Coolguy (Comment #1)
    Two things come to mind:
    1. Money rugby. The more expensive it becomes to compete at the top end, the more likely one is to see the richer schools gaining an upperhand.
    So one can see Jeppe, KES, PBHS, Grey HS, BL, Menlo, Nories and the SS4 upping the stakes but not too many others with the budgets to occupy those positions on a regular basis now.
    2. Reasonable strength local league. Much harder to climb the table if the domestic league is too difficult or too easy. Too difficult is better than too easy because at least when you perform, you are well rewarded. KZN schools are enjoying the benefits of a Goldilocks favourite choices league – not the hardest but also not the easiest :mrgreen:

    ReplyReply
    1 June, 2026 at 12:13
  10. avatar
    #3 Smallies

    @Gimnasias (Comment #2)
    Gaan n klug weew …..soos alle craven week spanne maar is,dis mos wanner meriete by die venster uit vlieg en poletiek by die voordeur in drentel ….

    ReplyReply
    1 June, 2026 at 11:56
  11. avatar
    #2 Gimnasias

    Ek wag in spanning vir die WP Cravenweek span. Wil nou sien of die keurders weer van die voorste spanne gaan te na kom met hul keuses. Ek se nie dat hul bv. die meerderheid Gimmies en Paul Roosers moet kies nie maar gee darem erkenning waar dit saakmaak. Ons het almal gesien wat gebeur in die verlede en dit het net nie sin gemaak nie. So kom ons kyk, gaan dit n span op meriete wees of n klug.

    ReplyReply
    1 June, 2026 at 10:50
  12. avatar
    #1 Coolguy

    Has there been a season where KZN schools have been stacked up so tightly 12-17?

    ReplyReply
    1 June, 2026 at 10:44