2019 School Rugby
-
They have been saying this for years around schools and poaching. The issue in NZ is the rules and the inconsistency of the application of the rules.
I have been involved in a couple of clangers were schools (outside AKLD) have basically lawyer-ed up and the rugby unions have backed down as has been mentioned in the article.
Again not many of the big schools can say they do not bend the rules, even though they say it publicly (Not necessarily recruiting form other firstXVs).
This has been a build up of miss-management and offloading for decades from a number of organisations from Auckland schools sport (In this case), NZSSC, Local and senior rugby unions all not singing from the same sheet. -
-
Great to see the schools taking a stand. Traditional powerhouses like Kelston and De La Salle might actually have a chance to compete again.
-
-
NZR is trying to get pro rugby players, so for them getting good players into rich schools which run a very pro style 1st XV is a bonus. Principals look at it from a teaching/schooling perspective. Fee paying private schools look at it from a business perspective. Unsurprisingly they disagree what's 'best'
-
@tim said in 2019 School Rugby:
@nepia Didn't see Kings among the signatures?
From the article I posted:
St Kentigern refused to sign the new document. King's have signed the guiding principles document but have not agreed to boycott playing St Kents. -
they interviewed St. Kents Principal on RS about 5.10pm today...claims were that they are doing what other schools are, just better.
Says they dont go actively seeking people, but kids and thier parents go to them wanting to school there, and if they look like a good fit and able to , they can look at sponsorship with only a finitte number of scholarships available.
He quoted a letter from NZR saying they liked what they were offering kids both on and off the park and ensuring they were being educated as well as providing a good rugby program.
Darcy likened it to people wanting to be part of the Crusaders due to thier success.
-
He might say he's not doing anything different, but he'd be lying.
He's not doing anything much worse than the other really bad schools. But he's ripping the best players out of smaller and poorer schools -- a fact he carefully avoids.
The Crusaders do not poach players locked in to other franchises. There'd be an uproar if they took Beauden Barrett when they needed a first five. There was a fair bit of fuss when Rennie took Cruden -- that was considered off.
-
@chester-draws well as he has gone on national radio and said that, I am sure if there is evidence proving he is lying, then he will get found out and you'd expect need to find a new job
-
His board agree with him. Why would they sack him?
That they're ripping off other schools to make themselves look good is a feature, not a bug.
-
@chester-draws if he is proven to be lying, I dont expect it would go down well.
So if a kid does choose to go to them from another school, from where ever, is that still wrong?
As an aside, I dont give a rats about St Kents, I just struggle to believe they are doing things any different to any of these other schools claiming the moral high ground.
-
@taniwharugby Some lies are just ignored. We're not babies -- the world is like that. I can name any number of political lies that are ignored, and so can you.
There's no higher power in this case to enforce honesty, because the St Kent's board are complicit.
Do I think it's wrong that kids are poached? Yes. 100%. I'm pretty hardline on schools being primarily about learning, and sport should be secondary.
Kids taken on sports scholarships are expected to deliver on the field. Woe betide them if they decide that actually they'll use the opportunity and spend their time studying. It's actually detrimental to the education of kids to get a sports scholarship for this reason. (I've taught at a private school and seen this in action -- the kids were often a poor social fit too, and some were downright miserable as a result.)
There are kids whose parents arrange that they attend a good school, and use sport as a leverage to get them in. That's fine, because the sport is being used as a complement.
When sport takes precedence over learning, then a school is out of line.
-
@chester-draws well any of those funding St Kents might (or should) take a different view if he is lying publically.
At the end of the day, I think we have the same view point, just arguing from different points.
-
Yep, at least four viewpoints from schools:
- the school(s) doing the poaching
- the schools having to play the school(s) doing the poaching
- the schools that lose players due to poaching
- the schools playing the schools losing players due to poaching
Then there's the perspective from the poached players & their families; the perspective from players staying behind in the team arguably weakened by poaching; the perspective from the provincial competition the poaching school takes part in; the perspective from the provincial competition the poached school takes part in (if different); the perspective of the sports councils responsible for the respective competitions and the Top Four; and the perspective of NZR.
It's a complex problem with a lot of potential consequences. It needs to be sorted out. No matter how important school rugby is for the development of (professional) rugby in NZ, schools are first and foremost educational institutions that should produce young people with sufficient basic qualifications, because only a small fraction of students will make it in professional sports. That should IMO be the most important consideration. Apart from that, I'm siding with the individual players as well as the poorer/no name schools that lose players due to poaching (and those two sides can have conflicting interests).
By the way, even if Scott's College are guilty of the same kind of poaching as some of the Auckland Schools, it hasn't helped them much in recent years. They can't win the Wellington Premiership, let alone the Hurricanes championship. They get smashed on a regular basis, by schools they possibly poach from.
-
'Poaching' is a technicality. The only way a school can be caught doing this is if a staff member/employee of the school is caught, with evidence i.e. and eye-witness who will testify who witnessed the approach.
If they get another person/kid/friend anyone not employed by the school to say "I think you should contact the school" it is not classified as poaching. Schools can then say that they are not 'actively' recruiting players using this, as long as it can be proved the first contact was made by the parent.
You can see how easy it is to get around the rules. In my time involved in 1st XV rugby I have seen many accusations but only one that has gone even close to being upheld.
I guarantee that all schools do this to some degree but it is 'within' the rules which are incredibly loose and impossible to enforce.
Good watching though! -
@taniwharugby Of course Hodge wouldn't lie, being the principal of a good Presbyterian school.
If a school is poaching a talented rugby player from another school for only year 13 you can't say it's for a better education.
