Spieber
Bob Loudon (25)
I would also posit that the SMH was given the heads up as part of a broader offensive.
School sporting scholarships/recruitment
- Thread starter observer
- Start date
I would also posit that the SMH was given the heads up as part of a broader offensive.
Stan Pilecki's Left Nut
Bob McCowan (2)
Hey, I've got a great idea...Why doesn't the AAGPS conduct an open review of all schools? What could be fairer than that?
Some Notes....
1. 1. The Scots 1stXV this year had 2 or 3 boys only on Scholarship – it was a freakishly talented ‘natural’ year – they deserved to be outright GPS premiers and in a level playing field they would have been. Normally I would feel sorry for them that they have been ‘caught up’ in this unfolding drama – but unfortunately as Scots are main offender number 2, I am not.
2. 2. Scots however are a big recruiter – their 16A’s team this year was heckled by Scots own supporters – I have been told that many Scots full fee paying parents are disgusted by what has happened – some have told me 8 new boys this year, others have said 10!! All because historically that year has not been winning. Scots Basketball 1sts is almost all Scholarship (since when is Basketball important?).
3. 3. The Newington 1stXV this year however broke all GPS records for rorting the system - 13 or 14 of the boys were on Scholarships. Only one boy started at the School in Year 7 – Lachlan Anderson – everybody else arrived in year 9 or later. Yes 14, year 9 or after in the 1stXV – not 14 as stated in an earlier post for both 1sts and 2nds.
4. 4. The only time anybody went close to Newington’s effort this year was Scots in 1993 which cost High what would have been its last ever GPS Rugby title – which confirms two things – One this is not a new problem and Two these schools place way to much importance on 100 or 150 year anniversary’s.
I am a big supporter of balanced scholarship programs and intake. I think when it is handled well it enriches every School, – Unfortunately when you take things too far – way way too far – it just ruins it. Newington crowds at Rugby this year were the lowest in living history – unusual when the team is winning. Certainly the 2 round comp, and the ‘absent’ 3rd grade comp did not help – but the reality is MANY people at Newington, both Parents and some boys wanted them to lose. Boys have dropped out of Rugby because they think – ‘I will never make an open Rugby team here’. Clearly the situation is unhealthy.
Consider the following
1. 1. Most Rugby players in year 7 at every GPS School would like to make it into firsts – it is their dream.
2. 2. Parents who are paying full fees and standing on the sidelines watching their sons in the 13a’s and 13b’s are probably thinking and hoping for the same thing.
3. 3. Everybody who attends Scots & New (& Joeys) know that GPS rules say no sporting scholarships – yet they know that their Schools blatantly break the rules – This is saying to the kids – it is ok to break the rules in life – do whatever you need to do to get ahead - it is a very BAD message.
4. 4. 'Somebody' must assume that the Parents at his School are idiots – the Scots parents all know the truth. Scots (& New) will argue – ‘yes they are on Scholarships, but they are not for Rugby – they are ‘all rounder’ Scholarships’ – Please, who are they kidding!!!!
5. 5. Newington and Scots ( re 16A’s) seem to have no desire to improve the boys within – it is just easier in their eyes to buy superstars rather than try and get the best out of the boys. Newington and Scots 6 years ago in the 13 & 14A’s had some very close contests – 9 of those Scots boys made firsts and have improved dramatically – only one Newington boy was given that same opportunity. Scots this year in the 16A’s have given up on trying. It is on the Schools part a dereliction of duty – isn’t a School meant to nurture and improve!
6. 6. I am worried that many of these poorly treated boys will not play Rugby post school – this will not only be their lose, but also Rugby’s lose – for many the treatment and circumstance is just demoralizing.
7. 7. It is better to loose with dignity and honour than to win by cheating.
I played in the 13 & 14a’s and eventually firsts – I would have been absolutely gutted if I had missed out because my School bought in NSW reps in year 9, year 10 and then even more in year 11. As a parent who is paying huge fees your expectations would be for your Son to be treated well – not to be treated appallingly!
Dismantling of the system – and hopefully this action by the 5 heads is the beginning of the end – may in the long term even see the return of Grammar & High to Firsts. As a minimum however it will create a more balanced and more passionate comp and remove some of the duty of care issues that Shore parents and teachers must have been concerned about this year. It will also force Schools like Scots and New to treat their own students much better than they have been.
New have effectively spent $500,000 earning a co-premiership this year (13 boys at say 25K – 6 of whom were borders at say an additional 15K each, more boys on scholarships in 2nds, more top line coaches than the Waratahs etc etc etc). Scots have gone professional (supposedly the main reason that Joeys have joined the gang of 5) – how many schools in Australia have a hyperbaric chamber? Scots next year may challenge Newington’s Scholarship madness for Rugby as well as their current Basketball madness. The whole thing is offensive.
My suggested way forward
1. 1. Unlimited Scholarships – but they can ONLY be given out in year 7. No School can afford to carry 13 or 14 ‘free’ boys for 6 years. A Scholarship boy from year 7 becomes a part of the School – it stops the Scots 16A scenario which is not healthy. It is also much harder sometimes to pick the year 12 stars in year 7 – few boys that make the primary School NSW team(s) also make the under 18’s team – this will deter them from going too berserk.
2. 2. Any exceptions to the above is OK only if agreed to by a majority of the GPS Schools – for eg because of Newington’s demographic and because of boys leaving the sport because of the madness of the last few years, they may have trouble fielding the appropriate numbers in the opens (No 3rds!) – under these circumstances the other Schools may agree to some later additional intake.
3. 3. Adopt the Shore and Iggies game day program approach – they list every team the boys have played in during their time at the School. Providing this information to the host School and printing it in your program on your game days is compulsory. Eg Tom Smith, 13d (Soccer), 14e, 15c, 16a, 2nds. This stops them getting away with anything improper. Any boys that are down as starting in the 15’s or 16’s can be easily researched – just a walk down the sidelines will find out if they are full fee paying or on Scholarship – the beauty of teenagers is that there are no secrets!
Finally – I am not the parent of a child who has been negatively impacted by ‘Scholarship’ stupidity, nor am I a current student – though I have stood on many sidelines and heard parents and boys complain – it is easy to feel, and understand their pain.
And as quoted in today’s SMH – I could not have said it better.
The King's School headmaster Tim Hawkes, who declined to comment on Scots, said the use of such inducements killed ''off meaningful competition … Do we play sport to develop character, resilience and teamwork, or do we play sport to build enrolments, prestige and provide the gift of bragging rights?''
My advice to New & Scots – apologise and admit you went too far – agree to follow the current GPS rules OR assist in the creation of a new set of rules which you WILL adhere to - anything else may create long term problems within the GPS.
1. 1. The Scots 1stXV this year had 2 or 3 boys only on Scholarship – it was a freakishly talented ‘natural’ year – they deserved to be outright GPS premiers and in a level playing field they would have been. Normally I would feel sorry for them that they have been ‘caught up’ in this unfolding drama – but unfortunately as Scots are main offender number 2, I am not.
2. 2. Scots however are a big recruiter – their 16A’s team this year was heckled by Scots own supporters – I have been told that many Scots full fee paying parents are disgusted by what has happened – some have told me 8 new boys this year, others have said 10!! All because historically that year has not been winning. Scots Basketball 1sts is almost all Scholarship (since when is Basketball important?).
3. 3. The Newington 1stXV this year however broke all GPS records for rorting the system - 13 or 14 of the boys were on Scholarships. Only one boy started at the School in Year 7 – Lachlan Anderson – everybody else arrived in year 9 or later. Yes 14, year 9 or after in the 1stXV – not 14 as stated in an earlier post for both 1sts and 2nds.
4. 4. The only time anybody went close to Newington’s effort this year was Scots in 1993 which cost High what would have been its last ever GPS Rugby title – which confirms two things – One this is not a new problem and Two these schools place way to much importance on 100 or 150 year anniversary’s.
I am a big supporter of balanced scholarship programs and intake. I think when it is handled well it enriches every School, – Unfortunately when you take things too far – way way too far – it just ruins it. Newington crowds at Rugby this year were the lowest in living history – unusual when the team is winning. Certainly the 2 round comp, and the ‘absent’ 3rd grade comp did not help – but the reality is MANY people at Newington, both Parents and some boys wanted them to lose. Boys have dropped out of Rugby because they think – ‘I will never make an open Rugby team here’. Clearly the situation is unhealthy.
Consider the following
1. 1. Most Rugby players in year 7 at every GPS School would like to make it into firsts – it is their dream.
2. 2. Parents who are paying full fees and standing on the sidelines watching their sons in the 13a’s and 13b’s are probably thinking and hoping for the same thing.
3. 3. Everybody who attends Scots & New (& Joeys) know that GPS rules say no sporting scholarships – yet they know that their Schools blatantly break the rules – This is saying to the kids – it is ok to break the rules in life – do whatever you need to do to get ahead - it is a very BAD message.
4. 4. 'Somebody' must assume that the Parents at his School are idiots – the Scots parents all know the truth. Scots (& New) will argue – ‘yes they are on Scholarships, but they are not for Rugby – they are ‘all rounder’ Scholarships’ – Please, who are they kidding!!!!
5. 5. Newington and Scots ( re 16A’s) seem to have no desire to improve the boys within – it is just easier in their eyes to buy superstars rather than try and get the best out of the boys. Newington and Scots 6 years ago in the 13 & 14A’s had some very close contests – 9 of those Scots boys made firsts and have improved dramatically – only one Newington boy was given that same opportunity. Scots this year in the 16A’s have given up on trying. It is on the Schools part a dereliction of duty – isn’t a School meant to nurture and improve!
6. 6. I am worried that many of these poorly treated boys will not play Rugby post school – this will not only be their lose, but also Rugby’s lose – for many the treatment and circumstance is just demoralizing.
7. 7. It is better to loose with dignity and honour than to win by cheating.
I played in the 13 & 14a’s and eventually firsts – I would have been absolutely gutted if I had missed out because my School bought in NSW reps in year 9, year 10 and then even more in year 11. As a parent who is paying huge fees your expectations would be for your Son to be treated well – not to be treated appallingly!
Dismantling of the system – and hopefully this action by the 5 heads is the beginning of the end – may in the long term even see the return of Grammar & High to Firsts. As a minimum however it will create a more balanced and more passionate comp and remove some of the duty of care issues that Shore parents and teachers must have been concerned about this year. It will also force Schools like Scots and New to treat their own students much better than they have been.
New have effectively spent $500,000 earning a co-premiership this year (13 boys at say 25K – 6 of whom were borders at say an additional 15K each, more boys on scholarships in 2nds, more top line coaches than the Waratahs etc etc etc). Scots have gone professional (supposedly the main reason that Joeys have joined the gang of 5) – how many schools in Australia have a hyperbaric chamber? Scots next year may challenge Newington’s Scholarship madness for Rugby as well as their current Basketball madness. The whole thing is offensive.
My suggested way forward
1. 1. Unlimited Scholarships – but they can ONLY be given out in year 7. No School can afford to carry 13 or 14 ‘free’ boys for 6 years. A Scholarship boy from year 7 becomes a part of the School – it stops the Scots 16A scenario which is not healthy. It is also much harder sometimes to pick the year 12 stars in year 7 – few boys that make the primary School NSW team(s) also make the under 18’s team – this will deter them from going too berserk.
2. 2. Any exceptions to the above is OK only if agreed to by a majority of the GPS Schools – for eg because of Newington’s demographic and because of boys leaving the sport because of the madness of the last few years, they may have trouble fielding the appropriate numbers in the opens (No 3rds!) – under these circumstances the other Schools may agree to some later additional intake.
3. 3. Adopt the Shore and Iggies game day program approach – they list every team the boys have played in during their time at the School. Providing this information to the host School and printing it in your program on your game days is compulsory. Eg Tom Smith, 13d (Soccer), 14e, 15c, 16a, 2nds. This stops them getting away with anything improper. Any boys that are down as starting in the 15’s or 16’s can be easily researched – just a walk down the sidelines will find out if they are full fee paying or on Scholarship – the beauty of teenagers is that there are no secrets!
Finally – I am not the parent of a child who has been negatively impacted by ‘Scholarship’ stupidity, nor am I a current student – though I have stood on many sidelines and heard parents and boys complain – it is easy to feel, and understand their pain.
And as quoted in today’s SMH – I could not have said it better.
The King's School headmaster Tim Hawkes, who declined to comment on Scots, said the use of such inducements killed ''off meaningful competition … Do we play sport to develop character, resilience and teamwork, or do we play sport to build enrolments, prestige and provide the gift of bragging rights?''
My advice to New & Scots – apologise and admit you went too far – agree to follow the current GPS rules OR assist in the creation of a new set of rules which you WILL adhere to - anything else may create long term problems within the GPS.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Alas no, my techno skills don't extend that far.
Probably because the association is based on old fashioned gentlemanly values of honour, respect and trust.
Wikipedia tells us that the AAGPS share common interests, ethics, educational philosophy and contest sporting events among themselves.
An open review may discover that the schools no longer share common interests, ethics, and educational philosophies.
Sometimes it is best not to ask certain questions, because knowledge of the answer may not be a pleasant finding.
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Your post is excellent and I agree with 99% of it. I haven't copied it all due to space.
On your last point, one assumes that conversations have taken place between school heads and I suspect that New might have done as you suggested above and Scots didn't.
Buster
Chris McKivat (8)
That is a solid post fsrugby. Agree with 96% of it too, and agree that Scots have done the "wrong thing" by way of the GPS code of conduct.
What is the glaring issue for me, isn't that Scots or New have broken the code (which they obviously have, Scots should at least admit this much), but it is the seeming arorgance of the other 4 (shore not so much included, however their rowing program has been awfuly strong), in claiming to be so hard done by.
Given Dr L's hard line stance, get ready for everyones dirty laundry to come flying into the public eye. I dare say the paper will be over it, but those on this thread should be ready for the mother of all slanging matches, as Scots are now backed into a position where fighting looks to be the only way out, and either the good Doc or the other school heads are going to be publicly shamed and called liars!
It isn't going to be a pretty outcome i dare say.
On a side note, is there any major issue with having recovery chambers, or high tech testing? Especially if the testing improves the recovery of the boys, and prevents (or helps to detect and prevent) early injuries? Im not saying i so much agree with the use of the money, but everyone is making out professionalism to be a massive negative on the "Sports Science" front, but is it really such a bad thing?
What is the glaring issue for me, isn't that Scots or New have broken the code (which they obviously have, Scots should at least admit this much), but it is the seeming arorgance of the other 4 (shore not so much included, however their rowing program has been awfuly strong), in claiming to be so hard done by.
Given Dr L's hard line stance, get ready for everyones dirty laundry to come flying into the public eye. I dare say the paper will be over it, but those on this thread should be ready for the mother of all slanging matches, as Scots are now backed into a position where fighting looks to be the only way out, and either the good Doc or the other school heads are going to be publicly shamed and called liars!
It isn't going to be a pretty outcome i dare say.
On a side note, is there any major issue with having recovery chambers, or high tech testing? Especially if the testing improves the recovery of the boys, and prevents (or helps to detect and prevent) early injuries? Im not saying i so much agree with the use of the money, but everyone is making out professionalism to be a massive negative on the "Sports Science" front, but is it really such a bad thing?
My advice to New & Scots – apologise and admit you went too far – agree to follow the current GPS rules OR assist in the creation of a new set of rules which you WILL adhere to - anything else may create long term problems within the GPS.
[/quote]
very good post, agree on many points.
I personally believe that both new and Scots have gone way too far with importation, and scots has stepped over the line with the level of professionalism with this new sports centre. It's schoolboy sport, not a professional career.
An interesting question to raise (and I'm not sure if it's been asked yet) is whether Old Boys' sons are included on the scholarship or importation discussion. eg. A father leaving in '81 and having a very talented son who comes in year 9/10 on a scholarship or bursary... does this boy count as an 'import' or do the previous family connections contradict this notion?
I believe that if the boy has had previous family connections, whether that be father, uncle or older brother, and is on a scholarship or bursary, whatever his talent may be, then he should not be considered an 'import.' anybody who knows the GPS system will recognise that every school attracts Old Boys to send their sons to the same school, and family history in some boys can be as rich as 6 or 7 generations.
Any opposition to this?
[/quote]
very good post, agree on many points.
I personally believe that both new and Scots have gone way too far with importation, and scots has stepped over the line with the level of professionalism with this new sports centre. It's schoolboy sport, not a professional career.
An interesting question to raise (and I'm not sure if it's been asked yet) is whether Old Boys' sons are included on the scholarship or importation discussion. eg. A father leaving in '81 and having a very talented son who comes in year 9/10 on a scholarship or bursary... does this boy count as an 'import' or do the previous family connections contradict this notion?
I believe that if the boy has had previous family connections, whether that be father, uncle or older brother, and is on a scholarship or bursary, whatever his talent may be, then he should not be considered an 'import.' anybody who knows the GPS system will recognise that every school attracts Old Boys to send their sons to the same school, and family history in some boys can be as rich as 6 or 7 generations.
Any opposition to this?
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
Grammar and Shore are entitled to claim the moral high ground, but without condoning the activities of New and Scots, I think that at least in part Joeys, View and Kings are now experiencing what the scholarship/recruiting/importing issue feels like when you're on the receiving end. And it's not much fun being on the receiving end is it?
MrRugby37, as the good Dr Hawke has stated, there are many ways and weasel words used to get around the AAGPS Code of Conduct, which is actually reasonable explicit.
Some of our fellow Gaggerlanders more skilled in the legal use of the English language may beg to differ, but the intent of the Code of Conduct seems to be rather clear. No inducements for talented sportsmen.
I can't see an exclusion clause for sons, grandsons, nephews, friends, stepsons, or products of long forgotten one night stands of Old Boys in the Code, however this is often used to explain why kids sometimes show up late in the piece. Each to their own.
Like Sir Ritchie GOAT's breakdown work, it is human nature to adopt a rather liberal interpretation of the code of conduct when applied to their own circumstances and affiliated school, and look rather dimly on the practices of those cheating rorting dishonest so and so's at <insert school name>.
This will be more evident when those cheating rorting dishonest so and so's at <insert school name> are doing well on the scoreboard.
Quick Hands. Perfect summation - "it's not much fun being on the receiving end is it?"
Some of our fellow Gaggerlanders more skilled in the legal use of the English language may beg to differ, but the intent of the Code of Conduct seems to be rather clear. No inducements for talented sportsmen.
I can't see an exclusion clause for sons, grandsons, nephews, friends, stepsons, or products of long forgotten one night stands of Old Boys in the Code, however this is often used to explain why kids sometimes show up late in the piece. Each to their own.
Like Sir Ritchie GOAT's breakdown work, it is human nature to adopt a rather liberal interpretation of the code of conduct when applied to their own circumstances and affiliated school, and look rather dimly on the practices of those cheating rorting dishonest so and so's at <insert school name>.
This will be more evident when those cheating rorting dishonest so and so's at <insert school name> are doing well on the scoreboard.
Quick Hands. Perfect summation - "it's not much fun being on the receiving end is it?"
Stan Pilecki's Left Nut
Bob McCowan (2)
FSRugby Said >>>"I played in the 13 & 14a’s and eventually firsts – I would have been absolutely gutted if I had missed out because my School bought in NSW reps in year 9, year 10 and then even more in year 11.">>>You sound like a punce FSRugby. Surely a real man (boy) would have stepped up to prove himself better than the ring ins? What's wrong with you man?
Stan Pilecki's Left Nut, like the AAGPS, we have rules on this forum.
You would do well advised to read them, and comply if you intend to have a long time with us here. The mods here tend to monitor the rules a little more vigourously than it would appear is the case in AAGPS.
Probably a good idea to get your post count up and get known around here a little bit before launching into what could either be a little light hearted banter, or an outright personal insult of another newbie.
http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/community/threads/rules-of-the-schoolboy-forum.5407/
You would do well advised to read them, and comply if you intend to have a long time with us here. The mods here tend to monitor the rules a little more vigourously than it would appear is the case in AAGPS.
Probably a good idea to get your post count up and get known around here a little bit before launching into what could either be a little light hearted banter, or an outright personal insult of another newbie.
http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/community/threads/rules-of-the-schoolboy-forum.5407/
Stan Pilecki's Left Nut
Bob McCowan (2)
What if I replace Punce with Softie? Would that help Hugh?
A smiling
or winking emoticon helps and can make a fair bit of difference on how your message is read by the recipient.
Unfortunately there is no sarcasm font.
or winking emoticon helps and can make a fair bit of difference on how your message is read by the recipient.Unfortunately there is no sarcasm font.
Stewart Hancock
Frank Row (1)
totally agree if a school wants to win or stack the gps team , bring in a points system and ensure they educate boys from year 7 , and be upfront with parents about it so all boys know exactly what the deal is . Its soul destroying to a boy who has played all the way through school from under 11s hoping to play opens , to find that his place has been taken by an import from the school campus in the mid pacific !!!!!!
GTPIH
Ted Thorn (20)
2. 2. Scots however are a big recruiter – their 16A’s team this year was heckled by Scots own supporters – I have been told that many Scots full fee paying parents are disgusted by what has happened – some have told me 8 new boys this year, others have said 10!! All because historically that year has not been winning. Scots Basketball 1sts is almost all Scholarship (since when is Basketball important?).
I watched all Scots 16A games except Joeys at Joeys. At no time did I hear heckling of the team by Scots or opposition supporters. This team has been historically strong (undefeated in 13A and even very successful in the 15A Glengarry affected year). The Scots 16A 2013 Team photo has 18 players - of those 12 were at the school in 2010 (13's) and 14 were at the school in 2012 (15's and Glengarry year) Clearly 8-10 is way off the mark and 4 this year could be explained by parents only being able to afford a few years fees etc as other posters have posited.
3. 3. The Newington 1stXV this year however broke all GPS records for rorting the system - 13 or 14 of the boys were on Scholarships. Only one boy started at the School in Year 7 – Lachlan Anderson – everybody else arrived in year 9 or later. Yes 14, year 9 or after in the 1stXV – not 14 as stated in an earlier post for both 1sts and 2nds.
LA may have started in Yr 7, but strong rumours have circulated for years that he too was not full fee paying
I am a big supporter of balanced scholarship programs and intake. I think when it is handled well it enriches every School, – Unfortunately when you take things too far – way way too far – it just ruins it. Newington crowds at Rugby this year were the lowest in living history – unusual when the team is winning. Certainly the 2 round comp, and the ‘absent’ 3rd grade comp did not help – but the reality is MANY people at Newington, both Parents and some boys wanted them to lose. Boys have dropped out of Rugby because they think – ‘I will never make an open Rugby team here’. Clearly the situation is unhealthy.
Newington's problem is the school's changing demographic with more and more families brought up on soccer. Newington has more soccer teams than rugby teams. That could have been part of the crowd problem.
3. 3. Everybody who attends Scots & New (& Joeys) know that GPS rules say no sporting scholarships – yet they know that their Schools blatantly break the rules – This is saying to the kids – it is ok to break the rules in life – do whatever you need to do to get ahead - it is a very BAD message.
4. 4. 'Somebody' must assume that the Parents at his School are idiots – the Scots parents all know the truth. Scots (& New) will argue – ‘yes they are on Scholarships, but they are not for Rugby – they are ‘all rounder’ Scholarships’ – Please, who are they kidding!!!!
I am certainly no idiot. All I have heard is rumours. I have not asked any parent of a suspect boy how the boy's fees are being paid and it is none of my business. I suspect that 99% of posters on this site are in the same boat - peddling hearsay.
5. 5. Newington and Scots ( re 16A’s) seem to have no desire to improve the boys within – it is just easier in their eyes to buy superstars rather than try and get the best out of the boys. Newington and Scots 6 years ago in the 13 & 14A’s had some very close contests – 9 of those Scots boys made firsts and have improved dramatically – only one Newington boy was given that same opportunity. Scots this year in the 16A’s have given up on trying. It is on the Schools part a dereliction of duty – isn’t a School meant to nurture and improve!
See point 2 above. The majority of the Scots 16A have been at Scots since at least Yr7 and clearly showed the benefit of the overall rugby programme.
I watched all Scots 16A games except Joeys at Joeys. At no time did I hear heckling of the team by Scots or opposition supporters. This team has been historically strong (undefeated in 13A and even very successful in the 15A Glengarry affected year). The Scots 16A 2013 Team photo has 18 players - of those 12 were at the school in 2010 (13's) and 14 were at the school in 2012 (15's and Glengarry year) Clearly 8-10 is way off the mark and 4 this year could be explained by parents only being able to afford a few years fees etc as other posters have posited.
3. 3. The Newington 1stXV this year however broke all GPS records for rorting the system - 13 or 14 of the boys were on Scholarships. Only one boy started at the School in Year 7 – Lachlan Anderson – everybody else arrived in year 9 or later. Yes 14, year 9 or after in the 1stXV – not 14 as stated in an earlier post for both 1sts and 2nds.
LA may have started in Yr 7, but strong rumours have circulated for years that he too was not full fee paying
I am a big supporter of balanced scholarship programs and intake. I think when it is handled well it enriches every School, – Unfortunately when you take things too far – way way too far – it just ruins it. Newington crowds at Rugby this year were the lowest in living history – unusual when the team is winning. Certainly the 2 round comp, and the ‘absent’ 3rd grade comp did not help – but the reality is MANY people at Newington, both Parents and some boys wanted them to lose. Boys have dropped out of Rugby because they think – ‘I will never make an open Rugby team here’. Clearly the situation is unhealthy.
Newington's problem is the school's changing demographic with more and more families brought up on soccer. Newington has more soccer teams than rugby teams. That could have been part of the crowd problem.
3. 3. Everybody who attends Scots & New (& Joeys) know that GPS rules say no sporting scholarships – yet they know that their Schools blatantly break the rules – This is saying to the kids – it is ok to break the rules in life – do whatever you need to do to get ahead - it is a very BAD message.
4. 4. 'Somebody' must assume that the Parents at his School are idiots – the Scots parents all know the truth. Scots (& New) will argue – ‘yes they are on Scholarships, but they are not for Rugby – they are ‘all rounder’ Scholarships’ – Please, who are they kidding!!!!
I am certainly no idiot. All I have heard is rumours. I have not asked any parent of a suspect boy how the boy's fees are being paid and it is none of my business. I suspect that 99% of posters on this site are in the same boat - peddling hearsay.
5. 5. Newington and Scots ( re 16A’s) seem to have no desire to improve the boys within – it is just easier in their eyes to buy superstars rather than try and get the best out of the boys. Newington and Scots 6 years ago in the 13 & 14A’s had some very close contests – 9 of those Scots boys made firsts and have improved dramatically – only one Newington boy was given that same opportunity. Scots this year in the 16A’s have given up on trying. It is on the Schools part a dereliction of duty – isn’t a School meant to nurture and improve!
See point 2 above. The majority of the Scots 16A have been at Scots since at least Yr7 and clearly showed the benefit of the overall rugby programme.
Whale berry
Larry Dwyer (12)
It is not only the GPS schools playing the scholarship game, St Aug in the ISA hav been buying in numbers of players for a while
Spieber
Bob Loudon (25)
Agree Scots have been somewhat unfairly targetted in rugby and are comparable to some other schools.
Are you able to provide the same clarity (numbers only), for the non-Scots people here, as to the origins of the last 2-3 1st V's, the sport at the centre of present controversy?
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Doesn't seem to be against the ISA rules: http://www.isa.nsw.edu.au/2007ISACodeOfConduct-Final-Public.pdf
The Spectator
Herbert Moran (7)
GTPIH, you might want to reassess the Scots 16As team background. Loose interpretation of "majority" - except those recruited to backfill 4/5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12/13 positions (even if from Yr 7). Maybe 7 boys on a quick count (all the boys actually talk so they know who is on scholarships even if others deny it).
Hopefully this will be part of the review and put the issue to rest.
Newport and the Warringah Rats should also take some credit for their fine rugby program - the Northern beaches campus of Scots. Hope someone is picking up some time in the hyperbaric chamber or a free beer or two at the Newport Arms as a spotters fee.
Hopefully this will be part of the review and put the issue to rest.
Newport and the Warringah Rats should also take some credit for their fine rugby program - the Northern beaches campus of Scots. Hope someone is picking up some time in the hyperbaric chamber or a free beer or two at the Newport Arms as a spotters fee.