School sporting scholarships/recruitment

[CTPE]

To any asute Rugby enthusiast, that age group in Kings always had the potential to become a champion team and are now starting to realise that potential because of good coaching and a less recognised factor known as puberty.

I think you may be right with these comments as I'm told that as well as the 16As, Kings 16Cs were undefeated and the U16Bs lost only two games all year.

 

[Man on the hill]

Because they have not bought into sporting scholarships. Because they treat it as a sport and because they don't run the place so the old boys get a stiffy when they win the premiership. Because they adhere to the rules against sporting scholarships.

...The logical way to do this is for a village/club/zone system that takes boys from any school in any system, grades them and has them play against kids of roughly equal ability.
...

As opposed as I am to school sporting scholarships - you need to understand that just because a boy plays in an A comp in club land, does not make him an A player - and the reverse holds true - just because the team is graded in D does not mean that all players in that team are D! So do not be so naive to think that club land is some sort of nirvana!

Have a look at Northern Suburbs under 15 team list from this year's State Championship - very homogenous blend of Mosman club players - curious how so many of these boys used to play in different club sides in prior seasons - many miles away from Mosman!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

As opposed as I am to school sporting scholarships - you need to understand that just because a boy plays in an A comp in club land, does not make him an A player - and the reverse holds true - just because the team is graded in D does not mean that all players in that team are D! So do not be so naive to think that club land is some sort of nirvana!

Have a look at Northern Suburbs under 15 team list from this year's State Championship - very homogenous blend of Mosman club players - curious how so many of these boys used to play in different club sides in prior seasons - many miles away from Mosman!

No - but if the team is an overall D thats where they will generally finish up.
Also some of schools discourage/prohibit club play so the players affected are not out there playing in the clubs: their presence would widen the comp - might make it stronger might make it weaker - but it would help to break down the private school image of the sport.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

What a load of crap! You use Kings as an examples of so called "loading their teams with rugby scholarship kids" to explain their undefeated under 16's team this year. Anyone, and I repeat ANYONE that knows anything about that team will tell you, the standout performers in that team this year were Lucas Bateman, Jamie Greentree, Jack McCalman, Rober Black and Harry Jones. Correct me if I'm wrong, but all of those boys have been at kings since year 7. I'm not sure who the so called "Scolarship holders" in this team are and to be frank with you, who cares ? To any asute Rugby enthusiast, that age group in Kings always had the potential to become a champion team and are now starting to realise that potential because of good coaching and a less recognised factor known as puberty.

You bang on about Newington's so called "scholarship holders" buying titles. I ask you, what have they achieved ? If these "scholarship holders"make such a difference then why wern't Newington or for that matter joeys winning more games this year ? In any case you seem overly concerned with a minority group(scholarship holders) who IMO have a minimum affect on the competition.

You meant to say minimal.
Dont know what your connection to Kings is but i can tell you that one of my sources are the parents of one of the 5 you mention. One of them most certainly did not start in Year 7 at Kings but he isn't on a scholarship. 4 new boys this year. And you dont seem to be denying the turnaround in performance...you're only as good as your weakest link: so if you replace, say, the 4 weakest with 4 ring ins you have the solution.
As a matter of interest: how many boys has Newington added from the u16s rep program this year?
How many boys in their Year 7 played for NSWPSSA last year? How many of them suddenly found themselves with offers to go to Newington after the primary Schools championship? Kings were in on that too...Knox as well
if you accept the premise that you are only as good as your weakest link then it makes a huge difference if you can raise the standard of the weakest link. One of the great things about schoolboy rugby used to be the evenness of the competition: this was largely a product of the weakest links. if you eliminate the weakest links your whole game rises to a new level.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

15-11=?

 

[CTPE]

And you dont seem to be denying the turnaround in performance....

Whilst this comment wasn't to me I don't get the performance turnaround bit? My Kings mate tells me that in the GPS round games last year their 15As played 5 games with the Grammar game washed out and their being no game against High. In those 5 games they lost to Joeys by 2 (not one as stated in my previous post), lost to View by 3, lost to New by 7 (all pretty narrow losses),beat Shore by 2 and Scots by 10.

Whilst their 16As won all their round matches this year I expect that some of those winning margins may have been narrow as well?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The observations concerning the improvement came from both sides of the fence - Kings and Shore parents....is it possible that their pre-season result were better this year than last?
We are getting down into detail that doesn't really impact on the argument that concentrating rugby talent in 1, 2 or 3 schools is not a good thing for anyone -except possibly the boys who get a better education as a result of rugby talent...but I've raised issue with the proposition that they actually get a better education in the past.

 

[lincoln]

I called a Kings dad who has a boy in the U16s age group after reading DD's above post this morning and he tells me that Bateman (LHP) actually started at Kings in Year 3 in the Prep School as did Greentree (2R) and Eddy Jin (THP). McCalman (7), Black (6), Tom Bucknell (winger), Oliver Martin (winger), John Robertson (centre) and Nick Reid (hooker) all started in Year 7. Jones(fullback) and Ben Stacy (8) started there in Year 8.

That's 11 players who were there at Year 8 or much earlier.

Thanks CTPE - certainly a deep and long Kings' history here with some multiple generational names in the mix. In the interest of completeness could you share with us 15 - 11 = 4 boys not mentioned and where they were in the U15s - both school and team.

 

[CTPE]

Thanks CTPE - certainly a deep and long Kings' history here with some multiple generational names in the mix. In the interest of completeness could you share with us 15 - 11 = 4 boys not mentioned and where they were in the U15s - both school and team.

Lincoln I think you'll find the answer to this in this years U16s thread. Out of interest who are the multi generational names?

 

[CTPE]

The observations concerning the improvement came from both sides of the fence - Kings and Shore parents....is it possible that their pre-season result were better this year than last?
We are getting down into detail that doesn't really impact on the argument that concentrating rugby talent in 1, 2 or 3 schools is not a good thing for anyone -except possibly the boys who get a better education as a result of rugby talent...but I've raised issue with the proposition that they actually get a better education in the past.

Don't know the answer to that but will find out. There is perhaps one other issue that may have assisted Kings 16As purported "turnaround" this year other than the suggestion of an influx of new players and that is unlike Scots, New, Shore, View and particularly Joeys - Kings apparently have a blanket rule which prohibits any of their U16s playing opens rugby. Given Kings firsts and seconds results this year it seems the could have used a few of them. It makes you wonder though what the 16As GPS results would have been this year if the other GPS schools had a similar policy. As they'll all meet in the 2012 GPS competition the answer will no doubt lay there.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Don't know the answer to that but will find out. There is perhaps one other issue that may have assisted Kings 16As purported "turnaround" this year other than the suggestion of an influx of new players and that is unlike Scots, New, Shore, View and particularly Joeys - Kings apparently have a blanket rule which prohibits any of their U16s playing opens rugby. Given Kings firsts and seconds results this year it seems the could have used a few of them. It makes you wonder though what the 16As GPS results would have been this year if the other GPS schools had a similar policy. As they'll all meet in the 2012 GPS competition the answer will no doubt lay there.

and/or 2013
my source on the 4 coming to school for u16s was inside the tent, I just cannot remember now if it was inside the team, and claimed that similar stuff was going on in athletics (off topic I know)
whats the rationale for the blanket rule? protection of the child/giving the older kids a go or something else?

 

[CTPE]

and/or 2013
my source on the 4 coming to school for u16s was inside the tent, I just cannot remember now if it was inside the team, and claimed that similar stuff was going on in athletics (off topic I know)
whats the rationale for the blanket rule? protection of the child/giving the older kids a go or something else?

Don't know the rationale on their "no U16s in Opens" policy but it was discussed in either the U16s thread or GPS 2011 thread earlier in the year. From what I hear Joeys have had the strongest team in the current U16s age group since U13s but because so many of their U16 played Opens this year it weakened their 16As team. It may benefit them long term though as players such as Sandell, Pennisi, Deegan etc all got exposure to Opens rugby this year which will no doubt benefit them next year.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Bit of a pity in a way because it is a mark of a pretty special kid to play 3 years

 

[lincoln]

Lincoln I think you'll find the answer to this in this years U16s thread. Out of interest who are the multi generational names?

Greentree, Bucknell, Reid are old time names but may not be related.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Greentree, Bucknell, Reid are old time names but may not be related.

Tally ho

 

[Dingdong]

hmmm... getting a fair insight in to some of your issues !

 

[Inside Shoulder]

hmmm... getting a fair insight in to some of your issues !

[video=youtube;SazBzvQ0ZAM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SazBzvQ0ZAM[/video]

 

[International Badboy]

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

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Mate. when it comes to Inside Shoulder, everything New' does is wrong.
The buggers have won 8 premierships since 1896, and 1 in the last 30 years ... they're hardly silvertailing the competition.

What crap. I will take credit for denying them one, however, by beating them in the final game of the season, at New, many moons ago.
I know how poor Newington's pedigree is in all sports.
I bear them no ill will - I was prepared to send both my children there (i.e. booked in!!) so fairly obviously i think its a pretty good school. i know some tremendous blokes who went there.
I am bitterly opposed to sporting scholarships unless every body agrees they are ok or, if the majority says they're ok, the others can make their choices.
As for being blamed etc. it was merely an observation - I cant remember what I heard but I remember thinking this is pretty basic stuff he seems doubtful of. I don't blame him...its only school boy rugby after all.

 

[Finland Fella]

What crap. I will take credit for denying them one, however, by beating them in the final game of the season, at New, many moons ago.

That's interesting - so you're saying you had something to do with View 96 - perhaps ?