Establishing a Rugby culture within a school is never a straight forward matter.In my experience its the school's leadership that really counts, followed by a supportive teaching staff who are prepared to coach after school.This is again assisted by parental support, number of Rugby Ovals and alternative sports such as soccer.
Our decline in Rugby numbers at the major independent schools, is based on these factors in general and at Grammar the pursuit of academic excellence in particular. However, scholarship( the study version) and sportsmanship can co-exist and in fact should complement each other. As the personal qualities that makes a great sportsman, will largely be the same that develop a quality academic.
Self-discpline,good organisation, attention to detail and a high level to achieve. Also, the family environment cannot be discarded. Parents who are middle class professionals is another vital component. In other words the traditional social background of Rugby Players.
Grammar has these qualities, but leadership at the Headmaster level to promote the game according to some Old Boys ,I know, has been lacking.
Inside Shoulder, as an informed Grammar Old Boy, I wondering if you could give us a perspective, particularly regarding the leadership of Mr A.Mackerras. Who is reputed to have said "Rugby is a repugnant Game". My apologies if I cannot offer you a Chocolate Frog.
The demographic at grammar might still be middle class professionals but who makes a middle class professional these days is markedly different from the old days.
Those attracted to grammar now are often the first generation of middle class professional in their family. They have a son or sons who probably won't get into a selective public high school and so they go for the academically next best thing. They do so because they think the most important thing you can give a child is an education.
They are very often disinterested in sport and perceive soccer to be the least unpalatable winter sport. Soccer is also the real football to many of them. I understand that they have to turn kids away from soccer (and I think basket ball) and believe they have introduced rules for some younger boys that they may not transfer into soccer from rugby unless they fullfil incompetence criteria. Then they have kids doing cross country so they can play aerial ping pong on sundays.
Have a look at the grammar boatshed numbers - terrible: demands too much time and is poorly run. Look at the 1sts cricket results too - well credentialed professional coach with high level background in the sport. These kids have never done anything athletic in many cases when they arrive in year 7: they think the beep test is a reality TV show.
Mackerras was a turd (though I liked him): he disliked sport of all sorts and only watched rugby for the cream buns afterwards. He hated rowing too. Despite preaching tolerance of others and supporting the concept of choice because HE didn't like sport he actively sabotaged it. Even in 1978 when they won 1st and 2nd VIII he was undermining them by trying to limit how much training was done.
However, once he succeeded in making the school academically highly selective he broke the old boy model on which rugby, in particular seems to be built: since very few fathers of students went to a rugby school or played rugby they have no particular interest in the fortunes of rugby at the school.
in short, there is no rugby culture among the parents.
Funnily enough, Lachlan Fear concentrates on emulating the rugby culture by organising tours and I have heard from soccer parents how much a son would love to play rugby because it is much more fun culturally, but the mums think it's to dangerous.
Also there are only 180 kids in a year (all of whom sit the HSC): 'View have that many kids trialling for rugby in year 7!!
New headmaster next term - old boy from 94 - coached 2nds cricket at his school in the UK so maybe he likes sport and knows a little about it.
PS - he never gave me a chocolate frog and he never invited me to a retreat at Kiama as he did with some of my age peers (I was not their intellectual peer)
