The Ideal NSW Schools Comp

[Quick Hands]

Been quiet for a while on this thread.

AAGPS Rugby will not change unless they want to.

CAS Rugby will not change unless they want to.

ISA Rugby seems able to change. They seem to be aligning themselves into :
Div 1 - Big Schools (2+ teams per age group)
Div 2 - Schools with 1 team per age group
Div 3 - Schools that can marshall a rugby team or two

CHS - Huge numbers. Possible for mid week inter school games. Contains many SJRU players. Dominated by Selective Sports High Schools. Seem to focus on Inter zone competition at U16 and U18 level primarily to chose U16 XV and CHS I and CHS II.

CCC - very large numbers. Contains a fair number of SJRU players. Union is poor 3rd cousin to Fivekick in the CCC sports world. Much like CHS the focus is on gala days and the U16 and U18 association rep teams. Player development has largely occurred from Junior Village club experience or transferrable Fivekick skills.

AICES - not much is known about this association. Probably similar to ISA Div 3. The odd school could marshall up a team here or there and could probably compete at ISA Div 3 level. The Dunning Brothers hail from this association. Player development has largely occurred from Junior Village club experience or transferrable Fivekick skills.

NSW Country Schools. The odd one out. AFAIK this primarily geographically based entity will take kids from CCC, CHS and ISA schools outside the metropolitan area. Seems to be a bit of an anomaly.

Other schools. I think that there may be a number of private schools, mostly small, that are not part of CCC, ISA or AICES. The characteristics of these are probably similar to AICES/ISA Div 3.

Sydney Junior Rugby Union. Provides an rugby opportunity for kids who attend a school without a rugby programme. Draws heavily off CAS, GPS and ISA players in the younger age groups. Used by parents to prepare their boys for the GPS/CAS/ISA rugby programme. Used by some parents to gain subsidised entry into the AAGPS/CAS/ISA system.

Rather than try to work out who is the best school, the ideal school competition will focus on increasing participation numbers from within the existing "conferences" or associations.

AAGPS. more or less at saturation point. Leave them alone.
CAS. more or less at saturation point. Leave them alone.
ISA Div 1 seems ok as is. Maybe drop 1 school to Div 2 to get rid of the Bye. 6 teams is not ideal but it works with AAGPS and CAS.
ISA Div 2 seems ok as is. Maybe drop All Saints Bathurst to Div 3 to accommodate School X being dropped from Div 1.
ISA Div 3 Get some development officers into this association to grow player numbers and player skills.
CHS Develop, Develop, Develop. Use 7's are the initial model.
CCC Develop, develop, develop. Use 7's are the initial model.
AICES encourage them to play with ISA 3 on a regular basis, or to enter teams in SJRU run competition. Make it a Friday night or Wednesday afternoon competition or whatever it takes to get these kids playing regular footy. If one school has insufficient numbers then have joint school teams.

Sydney Juniors need to work closer with local Shute shield clubs colts programme and help with the CHS/CCC competitions. Are SJRU still relevant for U15 and above????

Get the non aligned independent schools playing footy similar to the AICES model.

Key Points:

Stop trying to change the AAGPS and CAS model.

Rugby 7's may be the ideal vehicle to introduce the game to the smaller schools.

Get the Girls playing. Use 7's.

Revise SJRU scope to peak at U14's. Colts programmes to run U15 onwards. Introduce a max 85kg weight grade.

Some excellent points here HJ. I'm glad that at least one other person has accepted that it's a waste of time and energy trying to think up blended GPS/CAS models. Leave them be and spend our time and energy where it's needed. Your observations about ISA are also spot on.

The big problem with rugby CHS and CCC schools is that schools and sports masters are generally under-resourced and there aren't that many rugby oriented teachers/coaches to run regular competitions.

With AICES, many parents choose these schools because there is no Saturday sport involved - after school is the way to go there.

District clubs and ARU have a role to play here (where there is a district club). About 10 years ago I had some involvement with the Peninsula Cup, which ran Monday and Wednesday competitions after school for 13s, 15s and opens. A problem that was faced was that state schools refused to play after school and the private schools wouldn't play during school time. More private schools so they went with after school and all participants were CCC or AICES. I think it's still going.

Sydney Juniors seems to have as many factions and sub-factions as the Arab-Israeli dispute, so I'm not going to even go there.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

You'd be surprised how easy it would be to deal with SJRU if there was any genuine leadership from ARU, NSW RU, and SRU.

They were brought into line pretty quickly over the Walla, Mini, Midi model around 2000.

The question has to be asked, where and how is ARU going to get the biggest bang for their buck? Once that is known, the rest is easy.

Review and rebuild "the pathway" from scratch, rather than simply fit the pathway around existing and traditional structures that may not be appropriate, efficient or effective.

The Juniors model is not good at >U14. The Juniors model is good at <U13. Get them to focus on what they are good at: end of story. Get someone else in to do what Juniors are not good at.

 

[Quick Hands]

You'd be surprised how easy it would be to deal with SJRU if there was any genuine leadership from ARU, NSW RU, and SRU.

They were brought into line pretty quickly over the Walla, Mini, Midi model around 2000.

The question has to be asked, where and how is ARU going to get the biggest bang for their buck? Once that is known, the rest is easy.

Review and rebuild "the pathway" from scratch, rather than simply fit the pathway around existing and traditional structures that may not be appropriate, efficient or effective.

The Juniors model is not good at >U14. The Juniors model is good at <U13. Get them to focus on what they are good at: end of story. Get someone else in to do what Juniors are not good at.

I'd probably say juniors run up to and including 14s and district clubs take over from there. They would need to think laterally though - Saturdays won't work in the north where most boys are now playing GPS, CAS or ISA and have school committments on Saturdays.

 

[Hell West & Crooked]

You know - you talk this subject to death - it really has no logical point of completion - and what occurs to me is this;

1. In 99% of these schools, Rugby is not the highest priority.
2. In say - 70% of these schools, Rugby is not a 'high' priority at all (compared to academics, other co-curricular activities).
3. In say 30-40% of these Schools, Rugby is not even the highest Sporting Priority...
4. In 80% of these Schools, the parents would 'arc-up' if they saw Rugby - or any Sport for that matter, being prioritised unreasonably, or if their schools activities or 'memberships' were mooted to be alterd or re-organised in order to effect improved competition.

6. If a group of say, 10 schools tried to break away to form an intense, highly funded and resourced Rugby/Cricket/Aths & Swimming Sports Association, it is most likely the majority of parents would vote it down, simply to avoid seeing Sport dominate their school...

7. It is highly unlikely we will ever see a Westfields or Hills Sports High model in the Private Sector - (look at what happened to St Edmunds - and the discipline problems they also had which came with it)...

8. I doubt you could find 1 parent in 10 who would want their son in Yr 12 farnarkling round with big rugby matches in term 3, when the HSC looms only 'weeks' away... most are happy with the several weeks that currently exist, and then back to what they pay their fees for...

And so, to achieve the kind of high-quality, intense, focussed, and juniors talent-building scenario that everyone speaks of here, the only logical solution would be an organised and deliberate move to pull the kids out of School Rugby and into Clubs (leaving the schools to have a 'social competition' for the unmotivated, perhaps...

And who would have the stomach for that?

It is then, a kind of circular discussion that is ultimately self-defeating.

just the overiding conclusion I come to, reading posts on this subject.

 

[Quick Hands]

You know - you talk this subject to death - it really has no logical point of completion - and what occurs to me is this;

1. In 99% of these schools, Rugby is not the highest priority.
2. In say - 70% of these schools, Rugby is not a 'high' priority at all (compared to academics, other co-curricular activities).
3. In say 30-40% of these Schools, Rugby is not even the highest Sporting Priority.
4. In 80% of these Schools, the parents would 'arc-up' if they saw Rugby - or any Sport for that matter, being prioritised unreasonably, or if their schools activities or 'memberships' were mooted to be alterd or re-organised in order to effect improved competition.

6. If a group of say, 10 schools tried to break away to form an intense, highly funded and resourced Rugby/Cricket/Aths & Swimming Sports Association, it is most likely the majority of parents would vote it down, simply to avoid seeing Sport dominate their school.

7. It is highly unlikely we will ever see a Westfields or Hills Sports High model in the Private Sector - (look at what happened to St Edmunds - and the discipline problems they also had which came with it).

8. I doubt you could find 1 parent in 10 who would want their son in Yr 12 farnarkling round with big rugby matches in term 3, when the HSC looms only 'weeks' away. most are happy with the several weeks that currently exist, and then back to what they pay their fees for.

And so, to achieve the kind of high-quality, intense, focussed, and juniors talent-building scenario that everyone speaks of here, the only logical solution would be an organised and deliberate move to pull the kids out of School Rugby and into Clubs (leaving the schools to have a 'social competition' for the unmotivated, perhaps.

And who would have the stomach for that?

It is then, a kind of circular discussion that is ultimately self-defeating.

just the overiding conclusion I come to, reading posts on this subject.

Your 1st 8 points are correct, however, no-one is talking about pulling people out of existing school competitions. What we do need is to have a vibrant, club based competition specifically for boys who don't go to a rugby playing school. This is where rugby falls down compared to other sports - we rely on the private school systems to develop our talent and boys who aren't in that system live off the scraps. It wasn't always like this - yes there has always been a strong private school sector, but there used to be a strong junior club sector as well. However as Sydney expanded and demographics changed, no-one in authority thought to expand and change with the population. So we are left for example with Parramatta having 5 junior clubs (less than they had 30 years ago) and Penrith having 3, one of which is in the Blue Mountains and another at Windsor - both small semi-rural areas, while in the huge greater Penrith urban area there is ONE the Rooty Hill Raptors, competing against 20 or so junior league clubs, not to mention other sports.

The sport development model which works in Australia is club-based.

 

[I like to watch]

You know - you talk this subject to death - it really has no logical point of completion - and what occurs to me is this;

1. In 99% of these schools, Rugby is not the highest priority.
2. In say - 70% of these schools, Rugby is not a 'high' priority at all (compared to academics, other co-curricular activities).
3. In say 30-40% of these Schools, Rugby is not even the highest Sporting Priority.
4. In 80% of these Schools, the parents would 'arc-up' if they saw Rugby - or any Sport for that matter, being prioritised unreasonably, or if their schools activities or 'memberships' were mooted to be alterd or re-organised in order to effect improved competition.

6. If a group of say, 10 schools tried to break away to form an intense, highly funded and resourced Rugby/Cricket/Aths & Swimming Sports Association, it is most likely the majority of parents would vote it down, simply to avoid seeing Sport dominate their school.

7. It is highly unlikely we will ever see a Westfields or Hills Sports High model in the Private Sector - (look at what happened to St Edmunds - and the discipline problems they also had which came with it).

8. I doubt you could find 1 parent in 10 who would want their son in Yr 12 farnarkling round with big rugby matches in term 3, when the HSC looms only 'weeks' away. most are happy with the several weeks that currently exist, and then back to what they pay their fees for.

And so, to achieve the kind of high-quality, intense, focussed, and juniors talent-building scenario that everyone speaks of here, the only logical solution would be an organised and deliberate move to pull the kids out of School Rugby and into Clubs (leaving the schools to have a 'social competition' for the unmotivated, perhaps.

And who would have the stomach for that?

It is then, a kind of circular discussion that is ultimately self-defeating.

just the overiding conclusion I come to, reading posts on this subject.

Let's take a GPS School as an example.
ATM they start with 3 or 4 week trial program,and a 10 week season,playing against 5 Schools.
The ARU can promote a Super Schools comp across the 3 Associations with 3? divisions
It would allow the GPS Schools to conduct a 1 round GPS competition(their first game substituting the trials) then continue in a competition for a further 8 or 9 games.
This does not impinge on other sports, the School participates in,and does not run any longer than the current season.
It would provide a much better competition for all involved.
It might require the ARU to devote some resources to manage it,and for "The boys" to take a stick to their old alma maters, to convince them to come on board.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Why do we need to establish which school is the best in the Land or the State?

Two associations with very strong rugby programmes continue to show disinterest in any footy beyond their association. In many respects they have little to gain and a lot to lose at the individual school level if the Keebra Parks and Matto Sports types end up consistently beating them.

NZ have a Champion Rugby School concept but that is flawed IMHO. Put simply the "best" School from Blues area, Chiefs Area, Hurricanes area, and the South Island have a knockout tournament to decide the "Top 4" Winning School which is then dubbed by most as the Best Rugby School in NZ for that year.

Given the population distribution in NZ, it is highly likely that the 3 best schools in Blues area (about 2 million pop) could be "better" than the Best South Island School (1/2 million pop) or best Hurricanes School (1/2 million pop), yet only 1 school from Auckland Blues area can compete.
Wikipedia tells us that that the Top 4 has been won plenty of times by schools from outside Auckland - This annoying little fact undermines my argument to a degree.

Look at the "de-facto" world Schools Championship at the Sanix tournament in Japan. Only 1 School from each of NZ, Aust, SAF, UK and others is invited. I'd wager that there would be 4 or 5 schools in Safferland or NZ that would be as good as or better than the team that participates at Sanix, and would also probably beat the AUS entry (the "Champion School" status of many of the recent AUS entries is rather debatable).

If the two big players in NSW show little interest in wanting to play winner takes all games outside their "conference", why should we try to convince them otherwise?

Spending time, effort and passion establishing who is the "Best School 1st XV" will do nothing to grow participation numbers, and would possibly ratchet up the Arms Race to further reduce the base of the pyramid.

If increasing participation numbers and broadening the base of the Rugby pyramid is the aim, then the solution about where money, resourses and energy is directed is obvious, and it isn't towards the AAGPS, or CAS system, nor establishing which of the existing powerhouses is the best.

 

[Hell West & Crooked]

Your 1st 8 points are correct, however, no-one is talking about pulling people out of existing school competitions. What we do need is to have a vibrant, club based competition specifically for boys who don't go to a rugby playing school.

The sport development model which works in Australia is club-based.

Quick Hands, two quick things;

1. That is exactly my point - the logical solution to all this talk about making schools rugby more competitive / higher quality, IS to take it out of schools - and we all know that no one would want that - so the whole discussion is pointless. Schools are not the correct vehicle for this kind of thing.

2. You have hit the nail on the head - what we need are more Schools playing Rugby, that currently play mungo ball. and more junior clubs. The two are hard to mix though - due to depth of numbers.

What I would like to see, is the NSWRU openly target 2 schools every 3 years - they may be by necessity, private schools, as the issues with sport in high schools are complicated... Every three years they lobby 2 new schools out of say the CCC or another Comp, to convert to Rugby - using the example of say, St. Gregs recently, and St Patrick's in the 1960s... They utilised the ISA Competition as a model to include them - firstly perhaps in the lower divisions, and build that competition into 8 or 10 strong teams...

There is no easy fix to building juniors clubs - its just hard grind. What the ARU would do well to do, is spend a couple of hundred thousand dollars (1 platyers salary) to investigate a large number of failed juniors clubs, and identify what has ultimately been the killer - they might unearth some surprising - and other unsurprising - facts. But at least it would get them speaking with the people who put in their time.

It would be interesting to know if St Gregs recent foray into Rugby is being looked at terribly seriously by any other schools... A savvy NSWRU would be all over that like white on rice - but they are not. They never are.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Lets grab HW&C's bull by the horns.

Which Schools should be targetted by ARU/NSW RU for converting in the first two/three year block?

CCC
1.
2.

CHS
1. Homebush Boys High - They still support Waratah Shield
2. Randwick Boys High - They still sort of support Waratah Shield

Private Schools
1. Hills Grammar - They have a nice field and U16 trials are run there.
2. Northholm Grammar - The Dunning Bros came from here

NSW Country Schools
1. Alstonville High - They seem to produce a few players for NSW Schools
2.

 

[I like to watch]

Why do we need to establish which school is the best in the Land or the State?

Two associations with very strong rugby programmes continue to show disinterest in any footy beyond their association. In many respects they have little to gain and a lot to lose at the individual school level if the Keebra Parks and Matto Sports types end up consistently beating them.

We don't need to do it to establish which School is best,we need it to provide ALL Rugby playing Schools with a competition that provides competition AT THEIR LEVEL,
Typically in each of the associations there are two or three Schools that are substantially stronger than the rest of the competition.

We have three School competitions where in each competition 2 or 3 Schools cruise to a win, in more than half their games.
Last night St Augustines won a competition game by 65 to Nil, who wins there?
An environment where they need to play at their best each week, is how players improve,at every level.
It's practical,and not much needs to change to bring it to fruition.It is more realistic than dreaming about changing the entire culture of currently non participating Schools and their students and families.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I agree that blow out scores serve little purpose.

I disagree that an environment where players need to play at their best each week is how they improve. They also need to have some"easy" games every so often where they can "experiment" with different aspects of their game. However in general it is ultimately better for kids to play with others at a similar level.

The thing about AAGPS and CAS is that those associations are not just about playing rugby, although it is a very important part of their culture. It is also not just about the 1st XV, and 16A's, which again are important but not an end in their own right.

Change to AAGPS and CAS will only come from within, and will only occur when they see that there is benefit in if for themselves.

I think that we will not be able to convince each other of the relative benefits of taking on the Juggernauts or encouraging the minnows.

Ultimately and sadly we may be both right and Rugby will slowly wither in Australia contracting into the stronghold bastions of the Defence Force, Universities and Elite Private schools.

Internationally the opposite seems to be the case.

 

[Hell West & Crooked]

Lets grab HW&C's bull by the horns.

Which Schools should be targetted by ARU/NSW RU for converting in the first two/three year block?

CCC
1.
2.

CHS
1. Homebush Boys High - They still support Waratah Shield
2. Randwick Boys High - They still sort of support Waratah Shield


Private Schools
1. Hills Grammar - They have a nice field and U16 trials are run there.
2. Northholm Grammar - The Dunning Bros came from here
3

NSW Country Schools
1. Alstonville High - They seem to produce a few players for NSW Schools
2.

I am not particularly ofey on the competitions but;

Matraville Boys Sports High. (Waratah Shield Winners)
Patrician Brothers Fairfield.
Holy Cross College, North Ryde.
Fort Street High School.
Christian Brothers, Lewisham.
Marist High, Parramatta.
Marist North Shore.
Patrician Brothers Blacktown.

Working Class Rugger may have a more informed opinion on likely candidate than I - and who would have the right 'culture' to bring across...

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Add Epping Boys High School to the target list for development within the CHS system.

Some pretty impressive results from them in the Waratah Shield and Cup competition this year.

Also they will be rather close to the future Australian Rugby Development centre to be built after the election at TG Millner field.

 

[Quick Hands]

I am not particularly ofey on the competitions but;

Matraville Boys Sports High. (Waratah Shield Winners)
Patrician Brothers Fairfield.
Holy Cross College, North Ryde.
Fort Street High School.
Christian Brothers, Lewisham.
Marist High, Parramatta.
Marist North Shore.
Patrician Brothers Blacktown.

Working Class Rugger may have a more informed opinion on likely candidate than I - and who would have the right 'culture' to bring across.

Matraville are still a rugby school and Fort Street High used to be strong but they are a selective high school, which has led to the same demographic issues faced by Sydney Boys and North Sydney Boys. All the others have a ongoing rugby league tradition which roughly equates to the rugby tradition in AAGPS - and equally unlikely to allow the other code to infiltrate.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

The usually toxic Schoolarship thread has started to postulate about reorganisation of NSW Schoolboy Rugby on the back of recent revalations within the AAGPS.

Timely to bump this thread, which is the "proper" place for that discussion, albeit that the recent palavar over scholarships may be the catalyst to reorganise aspects of NSW Schoolboy rugby.

We should to try to keep the scholarship thread free for decent poisonous harrumphing, chest thumping, accusation and denials on scholarships.

 

[S'UP]

Forget about a combined schools comp, someone needs to take control of everything and combine school and clubs into one competition.
Have a competition that finishes in time for the schools to go back and compete for their traditional title against their tradition opponents. Clubs go back and play a shortened competition while the schools are playing their traditional games. Structure the competition so the boarding schools don't have to travel to suburban grounds, they only travel when playing their traditional opponents. This approach allows for the perception to be that Rugby is a strong sport with strong participation, therefore hopefully attracting new players, which is poles apart from what we have now, a relatively small club competition and a school competition that no one other than those involved gets to see. Unfortunately we need to show Rugby as a game for the people not a game for the elite private schools. Perception is reality.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Bruntcliffe was chosen from the 104 schools taking part in the first year of the Rugby Football Union’s ‘All Schools’ programme, the aim of which is to get more secondary state schools playing rugby union, as well as encouraging new players to join local clubs.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...-on-tradition-and-shows-his-true-colours.html

 

[Hugh Jarse]

This was the best bit IMHO

It began last year and in total will involve 750 schools, hopefully accessing one million children and costing £10 million.
Crucially, last year alone 150 teachers were trained as rugby coaches, half of the schools included a girls programme and all 104 schools engaged with local clubs.
Bruntcliffe demonstrated better than any other school so far how enthusiastically they had taken to rugby union, under the keen supervision of PE teacher Heidi Fairbrother, and how the game had already transformed the behaviour and values of many of their pupils. And all this in rugby league territory.

1 million kids at about £10 each, with 1/2 the schools including a girls programme, and linkages to local village clubs. 150 school teaches trained as coaches.

Fairly simple stuff really. Make it happen here Mr Pulveriser.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

This was the best bit IMHO





1 million kids at about £10 each, with 1/2 the schools including a girls programme, and linkages to local village clubs. 150 school teaches trained as coaches.

Fairly simple stuff really. Make it happen here Mr Pulveriser.

I agree. The only issue is they need to find the money to do so. But yes, there's no shame in copying a good initiative.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Maybe we should only target 100,000 kids for $1m in the first year instead of 1 million kids for $10m.