• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

NSW AAGPS 2024

Rudderless

Ron Walden (29)
Austin Durbidge (Yr 12 2023) has been chosen in the run on team tomorrow

1700716882263.png
 

LuckOfTheIrish101

Stan Wickham (3)
Palmasn?! crazy to not include him in the conversation after his game winning boot against Kings in the final game for the 2XV this season. Looking like Joeys will have a many great choices.
-Professor
Not sure if Palmisani gets a spot in the 1st XV based on the fact Hart, Gough, Tombs and Sleeman were chosen over him this season during the plague of outside back injuries at Joeys.
 

bullocks

Ward Prentice (10)
Can I wake up the elephant ( or dragon ) in the room ?

What is going to happen to Newington Rugby if it goes Co-Ed ?
Barker's overall program is not great as an example.

This is a gps rugby forum therefore the drastic changes to the demographic of a gps school can and probably will drastically change it's involvement ( competitiveness ) in gps sports. That is why I posted this.
 

KentwellCup>ShuteShield

Jimmy Flynn (14)
I was pondering the same bullocks. However all is not lost.

Oakhill still have a decent rugby program with decent depth and so do Kinross Wolaroi.

Barker also has been co-ed for awhile and the depth of their rugby program has only taken a hit in the last 5-6 years.
 

Backintheolddays

Jimmy Flynn (14)
Can I wake up the elephant ( or dragon ) in the room ?

What is going to happen to Newington Rugby if it goes Co-Ed ?
Barker's overall program is not great as an example.

This is a gps rugby forum therefore the drastic changes to the demographic of a gps school can and probably will drastically change it's involvement ( competitiveness ) in gps sports. That is why I posted this.
Have a friend as a New ex student who’s on their consulting committee. They still have some core unanswered questions re their building program and land availability which will ultimately impact enrolment numbers. I think the original concept was no reduction in male enrolment but my view is that will be unlikely.
New will then likely need to make some choices on the breadth of their sporting program, either wide and shallow (similar to Barker) or narrower with more depth.
Personally I think will likely weaken their rugby program in the long run, but produce better, more rounded human beings.
They may struggle to win future GPS 1st grade premierships but I’m sure will have secured full enrolments into the next century.
 

The Ghost of Raelene

Mark Ella (57)
A lot to happen before we can even speculate. Haven't read into it but will the number remain per year? Hence some boys won't be in the year or is it extra enrolments on top of current number in which they would have the same depth as current.

Might be some resource shifting but Girls play Rugby at Barker as well. Barker are an easy comparison to reach for but they run a Rugby program with a clear focus at the top and not the whole from what it seems anyway. Not sure if Co-Ed has had much to do with it. Not sure on the gender split at Barker but they have over 2,500 total students and Riverview has 1,500. Don't think they girls are the issue.
 

DaSchmooze

Johnnie Wallace (23)
Can I wake up the elephant ( or dragon ) in the room ?

What is going to happen to Newington Rugby if it goes Co-Ed ?
Barker's overall program is not great as an example.

This is a gps rugby forum therefore the drastic changes to the demographic of a gps school can and probably will drastically change it's involvement ( competitiveness ) in gps sports. That is why I posted this.

If you use Barker as the example, then you'd have to think they're not going to enjoy the outcome. Fewer boys means less depth. Less depth means fielding competitive A grade teams becomes more difficult (and prone to fluctuations based upon injury). And of course fewer teams has a flow on effect to the rest of the competition when larger schools have to scramble each week to find someone to play. Joeys 8th playing Riverview 6th every second week :(

This sudden rush to create co-ed schools from Independant boys schools is short sighted and wreaks of trendy-ness. It seems everyone has forgotten that boys and girls learn differently and you've now made it significantly harder for your classroom teachers to now have to cater for this. It also seems to ignore that there is a mountain of evidence that supports the efficacy of single sex schools.

Whilst I agree that having a socially well adjusted child is a good thing, I dont think I'm willing to pay $40k plus for the privilege AND at the expense of their education and co-curricular ambitions.

Also interesting to note that there isn't any independent girls schools rushing to open the doors to boys. I wonder why that is? :)
 
Last edited:

AroundTheAnkles

Dave Cowper (27)
If you use Barker as the example, then you'd have to think they're not going to enjoy the outcome. Fewer boys means less depth. Less depth means fielding competitive A grade teams becomes more difficult (and prone to fluctuations based upon injury). And of course fewer teams has a flow on effect to the rest of the competition when larger schools have to scramble each week to find someone to play. Joeys 8th playing Riverview 6th every second week :(

This sudden rush to create co-ed schools from Independant boys schools is short sighted and wreaks of trendy-ness. It seems everyone has forgotten that boys and girls learn differently and you've now made it significantly harder for your classroom teachers to now have to cater for this. It also seems to ignore that there is a mountain of evidence that supports the efficacy of single sex schools.

Whilst I agree that having a socially well adjusted child is a good thing, I dont think I'm willing to pay $40k plus for the privilege AND at the expense of their education and co-curricular ambitions.

Also interesting to note that there isn't any independent girls schools rushing to open the doors to boys. I wonder why that is? :)
c'mon the reason Barker doesn't have depth is they don't encourage it. By that, I mean they don't develop it, they just don't bother. Late in the piece they solve the problem by harvesting depth from other paddocks.
 

Goosestep

Syd Malcolm (24)
If you use Barker as the example, then you'd have to think they're not going to enjoy the outcome. Fewer boys means less depth. Less depth means fielding competitive A grade teams becomes more difficult (and prone to fluctuations based upon injury). And of course fewer teams has a flow on effect to the rest of the competition when larger schools have to scramble each week to find someone to play. Joeys 8th playing Riverview 6th every second week :(

This sudden rush to create co-ed schools from Independant boys schools is short sighted and wreaks of trendy-ness. It seems everyone has forgotten that boys and girls learn differently and you've now made it significantly harder for your classroom teachers to now have to cater for this. It also seems to ignore that there is a mountain of evidence that supports the efficacy of single sex schools.

Whilst I agree that having a socially well adjusted child is a good thing, I dont think I'm willing to pay $40k plus for the privilege AND at the expense of their education and co-curricular ambitions.

Also interesting to note that there isn't any independent girls schools rushing to open the doors to boys. I wonder why that is? :)
Exactly the schools that buck the trend will become even MORE in demand and therefore (unfortunately) more expensive and exclusive ..

Also it’s funny you don’t see any of the single sex state selective schools that dominate the hsc in a rush to go coed
 

Crashy

Nev Cottrell (35)
c'mon the reason Barker doesn't have depth is they don't encourage it. By that, I mean they don't develop it, they just don't bother. Late in the piece they solve the problem by harvesting depth from other paddocks.
yep having gone to Barker in the 90s the depth has def fallen away - though in some years the 16s would have 2 (very average) teams. I think a big way they fill the gap now is that I understand boarding starts in year 10 and they subsidise boarding fees with partial scollies. Saying that they do that with Basketball - girls rugby and a lot of other sports. Heard it first hand. Just the way it is these days.
In the 90s I dont recall any schollies. could be wrong though.
Shore seems to do that as well - rely on new boarders who surprisingly are very good at rugby!
 

dusk

Cyril Towers (30)
Whilst I agree that having a socially well adjusted child is a good thing, I dont think I'm willing to pay $40k plus for the privilege AND at the expense of their education and co-curricular ambitions.
Then don't. Thousands of parents would have the social aspect of high school to a higher importance over academics and co-curricular activities. Not to mention that you can still get both to a high degree even with co-education...
 
Top