I think there are many frustrating things about our game here in Oz right now. However the structure of Junior rugby is quite different here to NZ. Speaking with someone over there recently he explained that pretty much all the talent in NZ comes through the school system and club in juniors is seen as a pretty weak part of the game, at a junior level. The argument of the ARU having any directive over private schools just will never happen. In fact given the status of the game the ARU should feel blessed that the private system supports the game to the extent they do, as it is just one of 25-35 co-curricular opportunities they offer. Schools on the whole are not cotton wooling boys up to the 15's. The landscape dose however change a lot in the opens where the stronger players are playing 1's and 2's. The demand for the athlete over the ARU's time period for the JGC comes more as a result of boys playing summer sport. It is very common for good rugby players to also be good at summer sports. So when it comes to prioritizing boys time and interest across summer, most families and boys just want to do something different with there time, which frankly is healthy. But to your point about the JGC, my view is that it is absolutely the best outcome for many of the so called better players not to participate in the 17's JGC. It opens up opportunity for so many boys that may not have had that chance to play and be screened by the ARU. The ARU obviously watch the school competition games, and that the allows them to watch boys across both pathways. If we are honest about offering as many boys as possible a pathway and exposure, then really isn't it better that there exists 2 perceived pathways allowing a greater number of boys that opportunity?