School sporting scholarships/recruitment

[Quick Hands]

QS it is beyond a joke that the other schools are "taking a stand" when kids at every school this year have been there on some form of assistance, and some have magically also been talented at sport. No one has complained that grammar marks are so high and they "win" the academics each year off the back of heavily selective entries.

Every GPS school this year had a student play I. Their 1st XV who didn't stat in year seven, and was on some form of assistance, so what right does any headmaster have to cast the first stone? It is a piss poor display in my book and if newington, kings, joeys or river view are one 5 schools it's down right hypocritical!

No school sports team has been so heavily influenced by busary support then this years new 1st XV, yet everyone had no issue playing against them and no stupid letters were getting thrown around. Is whole thing screams of a grumpy headmaster trying to justify his salary to the parents whose boys missed out on a 1st guernsey. Down right poor by them all.

I agree that there are other schools who are also in breach of the code regarding inducements to talented sportsmen. Perhaps a few of them have looked around and seen where it's heading and decided to put a stop to it, notwithstanding their own faults. I honestly don't know, but I do think that they should all stop doing it.

I think that High, Grammar and Shore haven't engaged in the practice, so assuming that they are 3 of the 5, that leaves 2 of New, Kings, Riverview and Joeys as the others. (I assume that TAS don't play in the basketball)

I think that you'll also find that there was considerable disquiet about the New 1st XV, and I'm told that Shore had seriously considered not playing the last game on the basis of safety. I went to the game to watch one of the Shore boys play and they were outsized across the park and received a continuous flow of penalties (I reckon about 25-2) and despite having about 70-80% of possession and territory, still lost 3-48.

It has to stop somewhere, and if this does it, I think it's a good thing.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

QS it is beyond a joke that the other schools are "taking a stand" when kids at every school this year have been there on some form of assistance, and some have magically also been talented at sport. No one has complained that grammar marks are so high and they "win" the academics each year off the back of heavily selective entries.

The AAGPS schools have not agreed amongst themselves not to give academic scholarships.
Every school gives academic scholarships.
There is, simply, no comparison.
The first "A" stands for athletic - there is no Academic Association.

 

[Muglair]

There already are guidelines.

The trend towards professionalism in school sport is to be viewed with caution. Where such an approach involves sound coaching techniques and is aimed at producing a satisfying and improved level of performance, this approach can be beneficial. However, care should be taken to exclude from our schools practices which place the pursuit of victory above those aspects of sport concerned with enjoyment, balanced development and good sportsmanship.
Preamble to AAGPS Code of Practice.

3. In the light of these principles, the GPS Headmasters affirm the following code of practice:

a. No inducements such as sporting scholarships, whether direct, disguised, or at arm's length, shall be offered by any member school. Financial assistance to talented sportsmen shall not form part of the enrolment strategy of any member school.

b. We affirm that the Headmaster of each school is responsible for knowing the special circumstances relating to the admission of boys to his school.
AAGPS Code of Practice

 

[Muglair]

Mr Quick hands

You asked a question and I answered it.

Perhaps rather than taking one part of my answer (which was actually rhetorical) to regurgitate an aspect of the AAGPS Code of practice which is clearly honoured in the breach (by most, if not all, of the schools to some extent over the last ten years) you might give me the courtesy of providing your thoughts on the answer to your question.

Despite the abruptness of my response I am interested in your thoughts.

In particular your thoughts on the efficacy of depriving athletes of the opportunity of attending a GPS school.

Today has been thought provoking. Despite not being a card carrying socialist the thought of a GPS student earning his place through his own sweat, hard work and endeavour is very appealing.

 

[Muglair]

The AAGPS schools have not agreed amongst themselves not to give academic scholarships.
Every school gives academic scholarships.
There is, simply, no comparison.
The first "A" stands for athletic - there is no Academic Association.

My argument is not there should be no academic scholarships but that scholarships should not be restricted to the academically gifted

 

[The Spectator]

Way too much wriggle room on Rule 3a - doesn't specifically exclude old boys unions or old boys or wealthy benefactors. I am sure that is what the review will find and it shouldn't surprise anyone.

What would be more constructive is to redefine the code of practice to either exclude completely or leave it open for everyone to do it. Maybe if scholarships were offered from year 7 the cost benefit wouldn't be as appealing.

Why doesn't the AAGPS conduct an open review of all schools?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Way too much wriggle room on Rule 3a - doesn't specifically exclude old boys unions or old boys or wealthy benefactors. I am sure that is what the review will find and it shouldn't surprise anyone.

What would be more constructive is to redefine the code of practice to either exclude completely or leave it open for everyone to do it. Maybe if scholarships were offered from year 7 the cost benefit wouldn't be as appealing.

Why doesn't the AAGPS conduct an open review of all schools?

(a) takes care of hat.

My argument is not there should be no academic scholarships but that scholarships should not be restricted to the academically gifted

Personally I think that's not viable in this country but putting that aside if there are schools that want to do that then that's fine but the issue is the NSW AAGPS schools agreed not to.

 

[Muglair]

In line with Scarfman's guidelines I have created this thread.

I am very interested in this topic as I have always been of the view that schools should offer the talented sportsperson a scholarship. If they can offer scholarships for the talented musician and talented academic why not the talented sportsman?

I was not educated at a GPS school nor have any of my children. I went to an ISA school so my comments cannot be confused with parochialism.

Sport is part of the Aussie make-up just as much as academic and other cultural successes so I believe talented rugby players should get a shot at attending a GPS school for their all round development.

Durkadurka posted this this morning;

aagps.nsw.edu.au:
Code of Practice
In the light of these principles, the GPS Headmasters affirm the following code of practice:

No inducements such as sporting scholarships, whether direct, disguised, or at arm's length, shall be offered by any member school. Financial assistance to talented sportsmen shall not form part of the enrolment strategy of any member school.

In this vein it appears some GPS schools are defying the code of practice. So I ask these questions;

1. Which schools appear to be defying the code?

2. Are sanctions in place for schools that have defied the code?

3. Are scholarships providing some schools an unfair advantage on the rugby field?

4. Should the code be amended in light of so many schools defying the code and bring it into line with what is really happening today?

Please heed Scarfman's advice when commenting on this topic;

"However, people entering the debate should be VERY careful to remain open and curious, and not simply biased in favour of their own school. And of course, to keep the issue of race out of it wherever possible."

 

[Muglair]

Curse you Observer for starting this thread in 2010.

As Googler (post #2) said; you are asking for trouble.

I suggest we all pack our bags and go home. Nothing new to see here.

 

[I like to watch]

Sorry, but that is idiotic,you sign up today,and the only posts you have made on this forum has been on this topic.
And you are calling for this thread to close?
129 pages on,and the topic is more relevant now,than at any other time.
At no other point of time,has any School ever threatened to boycott GPS competition games.
On Friday 5 Schools have done this,purely on the topic of this thread.
And you think, you will sign up today and shut the whole thing down?
Start up a thread about the flat earth theory before you slink away.

 

[Quick Hands]

Mr Quick hands

You asked a question and I answered it.

Perhaps rather than taking one part of my answer (which was actually rhetorical) to regurgitate an aspect of the AAGPS Code of practice which is clearly honoured in the breach (by most, if not all, of the schools to some extent over the last ten years) you might give me the courtesy of providing your thoughts on the answer to your question.

Despite the abruptness of my response I am interested in your thoughts.

In particular your thoughts on the efficacy of depriving athletes of the opportunity of attending a GPS school.

Today has been thought provoking. Despite not being a card carrying socialist the thought of a GPS student earning his place through his own sweat, hard work and endeavour is very appealing.

I don't think that anyone should be "deprived of the opportunity of attending a GPS school". There are plenty of talented sportsmen at all GPS schools, just as there are plenty of scholars and plenty of ordinary run of the mill kids. As I understand it, the purpose of the code is to re-inforce the idea that games are part of the educational process and ought to be played between the boys who are ordinarily enrolled at the school. All schools, not just GPS ones, are a community and the processs of spending 6 years with the same group of fellow students brings with it enormous social good for the students and is more important than winning a few games or rugby/basketball/or other sport.

No-one begrudges boys or parents being given an opportunity, but the big picture is that when some schools go out and recruit talented athletes and others don't it actually decreases the standing of the competition in the long run as less and less of the schools in the association remain competitive. 20 years ago there was an 8 team GPS rugby competiton in which all schools had a chance of winning, now there is a 6 team competition and one of the 6 didn't win a match in 1sts and struggled in most of the age groups. As someone else has said previously, winning or losing by big margins benefits no-one. So schools building super teams by bringing in elite/representative athletes to bolster their chances of winning the competition in effect diminishes the competition over time.

In terms of academic scholarships, I guess they are given as education is the core business of the schools and schools aren't in an academic competition, they're in a sporting one and they've all agreed not to provide inducements such as sporting scholarships. I also think it's poor that a number of the schools try to get around something to which they've agreed.

I certainly hadn't meant to be discourteous to you, I replied to your question not realising that it was rhetorical. It is the norm to only reply to relevent parts of a message.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Muglair, there is a very good reason for this thread to have oxygen.

It is not compulsory to read or post on threads. If you want to pack your bags because there is nothing new here then, by all means do so.

This thread is a good pressure relief valve, although as you do suggest, there are not all that many new concepts in the debate. A new batch of posters arrive each year, and a bunch depart. The new entrants don't seem to review all 100+ previous pages of posts before launching in.

 

[Muglair]

Thanks Hugh although I do point out that there are a lot of pages and that the means of trawling from 1 -129 is not easy. You are a patient and persistent contributor and I can see why you note that little is new.

Irrespective of how many posts I may or may not have read the point remains that post #! is even more relevant today than when posted. While this forum can only be a relief valve the hope for posters is that the generation of ideas might prompt change.

My real beef today is that the AAGPS has avoided its responsibilities, firstly in glibly drafting a rule that appeared to address a problem so that they could avoid addressing it. Second in allowing this issue to fester to this point.

While I might appear to favour scholarships some of the rumoured scenarios are just astounding and almost hard to believe. While I respect the decisions of Grammar and the realities of High I fully agree with the above comments of Quick Hands, transparency and some clarity that allows a level playing field is urgently required to preserve a competition that is in everyone's long term interests to maintain as a genuine contest.

However we do need to move with the times. The problem is genuinely complex, but the AAGPS can't pretend to ignore it until boycotts such as this happen

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Muglair, there is a very good reason for this thread to have oxygen.

It is not compulsory to read or post on threads. If you want to pack your bags because there is nothing new here then, by all means do so.

This thread is a good pressure relief valve, although as you do suggest, there are not all that many new concepts in the debate. A new batch of posters arrive each year, and a bunch depart. The new entrants don't seem to review all 100+ previous pages of posts before launching in.

While generally true, recent events hardly fit the bill of being "nothing new".
I know Vic & QLD tuned out long ago but perhaps they could tell us if anything similar has happened there.
Muglair I'm not sure what decisions you mean.

 

[Muglair]

While generally true, recent events hardly fit the bill of being "nothing new".
I know Vic & QLD tuned out long ago but perhaps they could tell us if anything similar has happened there.
Muglair I'm not sure what decisions you mean.

Certainly the event itself is major news, but only a predictable outcome. In a way the active existence of the forum recording both disagreement with the rules in the first place and the alleged stretching/breaking of the rules by various schools meant that some scandal was brewing.

Somewhere previously (and there are several references) it is noted that in Qld this was addressed by opening up scholarships and making it more transparent. This is obviously one way forward and an area ripe for discussion on how that would be achieved.

This is a rugby site and the comments on the weekend from Chieka et al regarding the dependence placed on private schools in rugby development are very concerning. A wholesale return of the independent schools in Sydney to a more utopian ideal of schoolboy sport reflected in the guidelines clearly has major implications for rugby. Some posts here would prefer to see this and in the past the AAGPS has highly regulated many aspects of training for sports.

As noted elsewhere pathways are a problem and financially impossible for rugby at this time. A grounding in professional rugby league isn't a bad pathway when the resources put into the player enables a relatively swift transition back. Mind you this doesn't apply so much for tight five forwards but they need to get used to the lack of recognition anyway.

Grammar's decision as I understand it is to rigidly apply academic entrance criteria and then presumably apply its resources accordingly. I don't follow GPS sport but note that generally they appear to be less competitive in rugby and rowing which appear to be subject to intense effort and financial support of some of the other schools. Ditto High, a state school with a highly competitive selective intake and also presumably without the resources to compete. Note that these are generalisations, I don't really want an argument about various successes they have had etc.

In short, the guidelines are now probably too vague and much more work is required. Whichever way the schools want to take it

 

[Kingmaker]

Kings athletics program will be exposed next and shore rowing program

 

[random2]

It's not all about the offering of scholarships, I know Joeys big issue about Scots is their approach to sport which I believe distinguishes them from Newington. Joeys have always been strongly opposed to professionalism in the GPS and I think this will be the basis of their argument regarding Scots. A lot of schools import for a range of sports other the Rugby, Newington in Water Polo, Kings in Athletics etc but whilst they do this they mostly steer clear of professionalism. What Scots do however is a deadset joke. Autograph sessions and player profiles which treat 16-17 year old boys like gods. The 5 schools involved are Shore, Grammar, Joeys, Kings and View and I believe they have a right to take action. I for one hope something is done before the infamous Scots 16As, who were this year booed by their peers which goes to show even some at Scots are opposed to this, reach 1st grade level and get treated like the gods they already think themselves to be.

 

[Quick Hands]

It's not all about the offering of scholarships, I know Joeys big issue about Scots is their approach to sport which I believe distinguishes them from Newington. Joeys have always been strongly opposed to professionalism in the GPS and I think this will be the basis of their argument regarding Scots. A lot of schools import for a range of sports other the Rugby, Newington in Water Polo, Kings in Athletics etc but whilst they do this they mostly steer clear of professionalism. What Scots do however is a deadset joke. Autograph sessions and player profiles which treat 16-17 year old boys like gods. The 5 schools involved are Shore, Grammar, Joeys, Kings and View and I believe they have a right to take action. I for one hope something is done before the infamous Scots 16As, who were this year booed by their peers which goes to show even some at Scots are opposed to this, reach 1st grade level and get treated like the gods they already think themselves to be.

Interesting that High aren't part of it, although more generally they are against the recruiting of talent in GPS sport.

 

[Quick Hands]

Certainly the event itself is major news, but only a predictable outcome. In a way the active existence of the forum recording both disagreement with the rules in the first place and the alleged stretching/breaking of the rules by various schools meant that some scandal was brewing.

Somewhere previously (and there are several references) it is noted that in Qld this was addressed by opening up scholarships and making it more transparent. This is obviously one way forward and an area ripe for discussion on how that would be achieved.

This is a rugby site and the comments on the weekend from Chieka et al regarding the dependence placed on private schools in rugby development are very concerning. A wholesale return of the independent schools in Sydney to a more utopian ideal of schoolboy sport reflected in the guidelines clearly has major implications for rugby. Some posts here would prefer to see this and in the past the AAGPS has highly regulated many aspects of training for sports.

As noted elsewhere pathways are a problem and financially impossible for rugby at this time. A grounding in professional rugby league isn't a bad pathway when the resources put into the player enables a relatively swift transition back. Mind you this doesn't apply so much for tight five forwards but they need to get used to the lack of recognition anyway.

In short, the guidelines are now probably too vague and much more work is required. Whichever way the schools want to take it

The Queenslad solution isn't the success that you might think. The opn slather approach has led to instances of boys changing schools at the start of term 3 in Year 12, to do nothing else but play rugby. A few posters have remarked on the fact that the whole school doesn't really go out and support the 1sts anymore as the team isn't really representative of the student body i.e. there isn't the 6 years of shared experience. So you have a series of all-star teams fighting it out to win a trophy which has been diminished in the eyes of their peers.

It's been said before that parents don't send their kids to GPS schools to be the development arm of the NSWRU. In fact up until the last 5 years or so the state system developed approximately the same number of schoolboy rugby players as the GPS (see the Schools Championship thread), the recent recruiting practices have fueled the myth that the GPS produces all the best rugby players. Look at the current Newington 1st XV 4 players from St Augustines, 2 from Randwick, 1 from Killara etc.

EDIT: I agree that the guidelines are too vague.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Kings athletics program will be exposed next and shore rowing program

Pandora's Box.

Glasshouses?

John 8:7.