School sporting scholarships/recruitment

[Inside Shoulder]

Nope

 

[Inside Shoulder]

So your just saying Newington lads are bred hopeless.
Kind of boys from brazil in reverse.

No - not at all
They've become obsessed with something that doesn't matter
I mean m Morgan got told he kids weren't as keen as he was this year from what I hear
Play the hand youre dealt then wen the school wins it really means something for the whole school cos the team is of the school not a team brought in to win

 

[Joe Mac]

We have had our disagreements Inside Shoulder but you are on the money here.

Anyway- enough talk about scholarships. We have heard a potential team from Joey's and Newington. How about 1 and 2 from 2011. What are the likely teams from Scots and View? Any predictions?

 

[Dingdong]

It's easy to walk around gps rugby as a coach with your head in the clouds- new recruit big time taane Milne and Anthony vasiliis have both been recruited from RBHS both coached at Nsw 16 schools by brad gill- scots are even worse and target the 15 and 16 JGS kids- jonnhy walker ccc 15s this year watch this Space- if u look at the combined states team this year most boys were NGS not picked by papa and than they beat NZ schools-

I do agree with most of what you say, however Jonny Walker told me himself that a wealthy Scone Business man was paying "full freight" for him to go to View next year. He is a great kid who will do well at View. Good luck to him.

 

[CTPE]

Jones came from grammar, Carter from somewhere, Davis from somewhere, Greentree repeated so he can be there for 2013, Stacy from somewhere?

All boys come from somewhere....I think the suggestion was that the majority of King's 16As players came to that school this year = turnaround in performance. That clearly doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

All boys come from somewhere....I think the suggestion was that the majority of King's 16As players came to that school this year = turnaround in performance. That clearly doesn't seem to be the case.

Read what I wrote: I said 4. read my posts again and quote where I said majority.
"majority" is something you make up to avoid conceding the you were wrong: completely and utterly wrong
The capacity of people to misrepresent what is said by others in this forum is staggering, particularly when the thrust of what I had to say concerned the team's weakest link.
Misrepresentation like this makes it virtually impossible to have a civilized, let alone intelligent, debate.

 

[Man on the hill]

All boys come from somewhere....I think the suggestion was that the majority of King's 16As players came to that school this year = turnaround in performance. That clearly doesn't seem to be the case.

No - the observance i think was that with the inclusion of a few more talented boys - ie above the team's existing average, put it over the tipping point to counter (and likely reverse) close defeats.

 

[CTPE]

Read what I wrote: I said 4. read my posts again and quote where I said majority.
"majority" is something you make up to avoid conceding the you were wrong: completely and utterly wrong
The capacity of people to misrepresent what is said by others in this forum is staggering, particularly when the thrust of what I had to say concerned the team's weakest link.
Misrepresentation like this makes it virtually impossible to have a civilized, let alone intelligent, debate.

A fairly paranoid response there Inside Shoulder. My comments were not made in response to anything you had stated but about the recent general commentary in the thread. Firstly you'll note that my comments were in direct response to another contributors comments and not your yours. Secondly the word "suggest" does not equate to directly attributing a statement to one person but rather to anothers understanding of it or a series of statements.

Go back and objectively read the recent comments in this thread including those prior to you mathematically concluding that the right number was 4.

 

[CTPE]

No - the observance i think was that with the inclusion of a few more talented boys - ie above the team's existing average, put it over the tipping point to counter (and likely reverse) close defeats.

The initial observance was this:

"But this is the very thin end of the wedge: Shore dont give sporting scholarships and parents there are noting how one year the Kings U15s dont win a game and the next they're undefeated."

 

[Inside Shoulder]

A fairly paranoid response there Inside Shoulder. My comments were not made in response to anything you had stated but about the recent general commentary in the thread. Firstly you'll note that my comments were in direct response to another contributors comments and not your yours. Secondly the word "suggest" does equate to directly attributing a statement to one person but rather to anothers understanding of it or a series of statements.

Go back and objectively read the recent comments in this thread including those prior to you mathematically concluding that the right number was 4.

I'll give you marks for trying to deny the undeniable.
Where did anyone suggest that the majority had been rung in?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The initial observance was this:

"But this is the very thin end of the wedge: Shore dont give sporting scholarships and parents there are noting how one year the Kings U15s dont win a game and the next they're undefeated."

the number mentioned from the get go was 4.
4 is less than half and therefore cannot be a majority.
Christ, I even gave you the formula to help you work it out.
And FFS its an observation, an observance is a religious event.

 

[CTPE]

the number mentioned from the get go was 4.
4 is less than half and therefore cannot be a majority.
Christ, I even gave you the formula to help you work it out.
And FFS its an observation, an observance is a religious event.

Thanks for the grammatical correction.....I see a theme and you see numbers...but then again there's numbers in "don't win a game" and actual results.

 

[CTPE]

I'll give you marks for trying to deny the undeniable.
Where did anyone suggest that the majority had been rung in?

I've only just noticed the quote at the bottom of all your posts: "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there aren't people out to get you."

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Pays to read all things carefully

 

[Karl]

Bottom Line - All Scholarships, Bursaries, Concessional Entry, Merits Entry, Sibling Preferential Entry etc - any enrolment that isn't based on your chronological date of entry on a waiting list - should be absolutely TRANSPARENT as to who got it and what entitlements or concessions/benefits attach. I think schools SHOULD offer scholarships - for excellence in academics, artistic, cultural and sport. They should be balanced across all endeavours so you don't unduly weight Rugby over other sports, or Sport over Academics or treat “sports” as Rugby, Rowing Swimming, Track and Field, Cricket etc and allocate places to every variant while only offering a general “academics” category. This would be subject to merit and quality of applicants of course. If they want to means test them they can.

That should create a level playing field and lets schools compete based on the quality of their teachers and other staff and their programs, rather than creating this secretive culture of financial manipulation. It’s just not healthy for the kids to be dragged into and indoctrinated on the way things seem to be getting done at the moment. Undisclosed financial benefits, dutch auctions by parents, all the manoeuvring and wheeling and dealing. It all sends the wrong messages on so many levels it’s difficult to know where to start. I would have thought that professional educators with integrity would never allow this sort of conduct, but apparently the influence of a particular type of alumni can over-bear anyone.

 

[random2]

I do agree with most of what you say, however Jonny Walker told me himself that a wealthy Scone Business man was paying "full freight" for him to go to View next year. He is a great kid who will do well at View. Good luck to him.

Ive heard about this kid, apperently his been offered scholarships to Newington and Scots, enrolled at Joeys and thinking about going to Riverview

 

[Done that]

Ive heard about this kid, apperently his been offered scholarships to Newington and Scots, enrolled at Joeys and thinking about going to Riverview

Hey I.S. help me out , which school is "cheating" here ?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Hey I.S. help me out , which school is "cheating" here ?

not allowed to - there's a scholarship thread have a look at it

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Bottom Line - All Scholarships, Bursaries, Concessional Entry, Merits Entry, Sibling Preferential Entry etc - any enrolment that isn't based on your chronological date of entry on a waiting list - should be absolutely TRANSPARENT as to who got it and what entitlements or concessions/benefits attach. I think schools SHOULD offer scholarships - for excellence in academics, artistic, cultural and sport. They should be balanced across all endeavours so you don't unduly weight Rugby over other sports, or Sport over Academics or treat “sports” as Rugby, Rowing Swimming, Track and Field, Cricket etc and allocate places to every variant while only offering a general “academics” category. This would be subject to merit and quality of applicants of course. If they want to means test them they can.

That should create a level playing field and lets schools compete based on the quality of their teachers and other staff and their programs, rather than creating this secretive culture of financial manipulation. It’s just not healthy for the kids to be dragged into and indoctrinated on the way things seem to be getting done at the moment. Undisclosed financial benefits, dutch auctions by parents, all the manoeuvring and wheeling and dealing. It all sends the wrong messages on so many levels it’s difficult to know where to start. I would have thought that professional educators with integrity would never allow this sort of conduct, but apparently the influence of a particular type of alumni can over-bear anyone.

Some good and interesting points here. I particularly endorse your comment about the undue influence of a "particular type of alumni".
I don't disagree with scholarships per se: the problem is that the various school systems in NSW prohibit sporting scholarships. Some schools do not appear to be adhering to the rules.
The result is that it is not a level playing field.
I have no problem with the various school systems coming to a formal decision that sporting scholarships are OK - but it needs to be done in the open so that everyone can make their decisions based on the known rules and so that those schools which do not offer such scholarships can know why it is that they are no longer competitive with the schools that do.

 

[Dingdong]

Even with 220 in a year there's room for 1 more......if he can play

What ?..... now you have a problem with how many kids are at the schoiol. Give it a break mate. Doesn't being negative all the time wear you out !