Continued decline in Sydney Junior Rugby

[Gary Owen III]

how do we fix it, who do we go to ?

I have been on Sydney Juniors and they're not interested. A good man in NSWJRU is Gus Gutterage ( don't know if I spelt surname right).
I fear a lot of the hirarchy might not care because of their allegences.

FC - I found this comment very interesting that you say that SJRU are not interested in the development of the game and that you were a part of that committee. Doesn't that meant that you were partly responsible for that stance if true?

I admit that i don't know the time-frame when you were on SJRU - but i sense it was a while ago as you mention Gus whom left SJRU 2 years ago and left NSWJRU last year.

I've spoken to a number of the current SJRU guys and they seem to have the right interests in mind. They are trying to address such issues at the drop off rate in the teens - and they were against the ARU levy.

I am not here to defend them - but what would are these allegiances you make reference to?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I sense (based on feedback re numbers) that the abolition of the grandfather clause in U16's is going to lessen the significance of that comp with potentially dire consequences for u16 reps and beyond

 

[Brainstrust]

Agree IS, I know what SJRU are trying to achieve by abolishing the grandfather rule, but the actual result will be a further disinterest from potential players. The SJRU over the last few years have made it increasingly difficult for boys to play where and with who, and within what comp level they want, all to avoid having "super teams". What is being achieved is a huge drop off in teams in total. When the club comp and it's rep teams become weak as a result, it will no longer be a realistic pathway. The ARU will not be inclined to support a weak SJRU team in the national 16's , and will most likely push for the NSW 1 & 2 format as is the case in the opens.

 

[S'UP]

if the ARU are going to rely on the private schools to do their development work this is the only outcome they want i.e. one pathway. But then you have the problem as we currently have that there is no depth in australian rugby. It's like the TV rights for pay TV and free to air, if you have pay only you don't get as much money. If you want player strength you need the big public school network, but the ARU doesn't have the $$ to fight in that area.

 

[Druid]

What they are trying to achieve is to actually have the boys playing in that competition represent that competition. I could only imagine the protests if somebody from a non-private school was able to be selected into the Private Schoolboys rep team or an All Black selected in the Australian team . Why should a boy who plays in a competition have his spot taken away by somebody who does not play in that competition anymore?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

into the Private Schoolboys rep team

What team is that?
The u16 rep teams have been propped up by the grandfather clause they will now be exposed to the reality that many of their kids are at private schools that will not let them play club rugby.
It will actually widen the gap between the private school kids and the non-private school kids.
Funnily enough I am told that this change was actually driven by Gordon Juniors who I would have thought stand to suffer as much as anyone.

 

[S'UP]

You only have to look at the 17's championship to see what the outcome will look like. The CHS team gets flogged by AAGPS, as most of the CHS boys if not all play league. Until the ARU actually look at the real problem the problem will still exist and nothing will change.

 

[S'UP]

What team is that?
Funnily enough I am told that this change was actually driven by Gordon Juniors who I would have thought stand to suffer as much as anyone.

Gordon juniors would suffer most definately, but if you look at the big picture maybe Gordon seniors might actually start to field a decent team in colts, etc, etc.
This maybe unlikely until the ARU (again), stand up to Sydney Uni and stop them buying any decent player that comes out of juniors. But that's a whole different story.

 

[Druid]

OK, I admit my example was extreme however what is the answer for the players who do not attend a Private School, do we tell them there is no point playing Rugby as there are no pathways and they will never be as good as anyone who went to a Private school. They then drop out of Rugby and play League and everybody here complains of the teenage drop out rate and the lack of depth in Australian Rugby. It is a circular argument, let's not develop or give opportunities to any player not in a Private school, hence about 60% of the population, then we'll complain about lack of depth, then we'll continue to ignore and neglect all non Private school kids. How do we broaden the base of Australian rugby if we never develop or give opportunities to non Private school kids? The JGC is only the beginning of doing this..

 

[Brainstrust]

What team is that?
The u16 rep teams have been propped up by the grandfather clause they will now be exposed to the reality that many of their kids are at private schools that will not let them play club rugby.
It will actually widen the gap between the private school kids and the non-private school kids.
Funnily enough I am told that this change was actually driven by Gordon Juniors who I would have thought stand to suffer as much as anyone.

I think you're right about Gordon Juniors driving the change. However the Gordon juniors committee is under going change and is seemingly being influenced by the 2 smallest clubs in their district. Those clubs see rep rugby purely as a reward for playing club. I suspect that as they get their way Gordon will begin to have less success at the state championships. Maybe that's a god thing, but it will definitely see the stronger players exit the rep seen after the 15's, not the 16's. So it will only serve to diminish the overall quality at the state champs.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

<snip> . Why should a boy who plays in a competition have his spot taken away by somebody who does not play in that competition anymore?

Very good point, and for many seasons, large numbers of the kids playing as the Sydney Junior Rugby Union Under 16 team at National U16's have not player in Sydney Junior Rugby Union competitions. I support the removal of the "grandfather" clause for NSW Junior State Champs.

When a player moves from a school in the AAGPS association to attend a school in the CAS association, then that player is no longer eligible to represent AAGPS. Somehow the powers that be within NSW JRU (and SJRU) allowed this farcical situation to arise for SJRU U16's. Possibly because the influx of the "grandfather clause" players made the SJRU rep team more competitive at Nationals.

 

[Runner]

I would suspect, as aired here before, that most gov't school will not have a viable rugby ( competitive sport in geneal) program to match the private or sports highs. Those kids to get skills either move to a private school if talented enough or try to play weekend competition.

The private schools all have mixed levels of competition with most being between 5 to 10 teams, have 2 to 3 that dominate in each association. They may cross over associations only in trial matches or the Waratah shield. This lowers the numbers available for village teams as they also play on a Saturday.

In some areas, like in NZ, some parents get concerned at that 16 year group as larger polynesian players reach a physical peak that does come to caucasians till 20. So mum says lets have a break and focus on say the HSC.
Look at the NRL

Thus kids are lost as the pool shrinks. AFL / soccer are seen as having no scrum, no gang tackles and catering to a wider range of physical types also makes inroads. In NZ some school now have significantly more soccer teams that rugby.

I don't have a solution but am just trying to summarize what I feel is going on somewhat looking in from the outside. The more kids that play the better for all.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I think you're right about Gordon Juniors driving the change. However the Gordon juniors committee is under going change and is seemingly being influenced by the 2 smallest clubs in their district. Those clubs see rep rugby purely as a reward for playing club. I suspect that as they get their way Gordon will begin to have less success at the state championships. Maybe that's a god thing, but it will definitely see the stronger players exit the rep seen after the 15's, not the 16's. So it will only serve to diminish the overall quality at the state champs.

Isn't that what the ARU are trying to do with the JGC at U15 and U17's?

Establish one pathway - whether the boys play schools or club, they compete on level playing fields for selection into the JGC programme. The talented kids get a chance to impress the scouts and snouts regardless of their schooling background, or dual code reputations, at least in theory.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I think you're right about Gordon Juniors driving the change. However the Gordon juniors committee is under going change and is seemingly being influenced by the 2 smallest clubs in their district. Those clubs see rep rugby purely as a reward for playing club. I suspect that as they get their way Gordon will begin to have less success at the state championships. Maybe that's a god thing, but it will definitely see the stronger players exit the rep seen after the 15's, not the 16's. So it will only serve to diminish the overall quality at the state champs.

That mirrors precisely the story I heard - with a bit of bloodletting on the Gordon Juniors committee thrown in

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Well the previous model of using ghost players in the U16's State champs has been so successful for Gordon that in 2013 they were unable to field more than one team in the Colts programme.

Something had to change. Is it more important to have your name on the NSW JRU State championship Roll of Honour, or to have a full and vibrant Colts programme to feed into Grade?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Isn't that what the ARU are trying to do with the JGC at U15 and U17's?

Establish one pathway - whether the boys play schools or club, they compete on level playing fields for selection into the JGC programme. The talented kids get a chance to impress the scouts and snouts regardless of their schooling background, or dual code reputations, at least in theory.

Well JGC isn't producing any team to play at U16 Nationals - which has been suggested is quite deliberate.
Before you get too carried away with this "pathway" you may want to have a look at who is on it.
It appears that many serious rugby private schools have not allowed participation. Thats not necessarily a bad thing.
I cant see how it is going to produce non-private school u16s to jump into the vacant rep spots.
Further, my understanding is that SJRU are planning to split the comp to before and after state champs. I know why they're doing it but it hardly sends a consistent message.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Well the previous model of using ghost players in the U16's State champs has been so successful for Gordon that in 2013 they were unable to field more than one team in the Colts programme.

Something had to change. Is it more important to have your name on the NSW JRU State championship Roll of Honour, or to have a full and vibrant Colts programme to feed into Grade?

Thats not fair.
You know that had SFA to do with the juniors: that was a stuff up in the Seniors in not sending out letters to prospective colts.

 

[Druid]

Well JGC isn't producing any team to play at U16 Nationals - which has been suggested is quite deliberate.
Before you get too carried away with this "pathway" you may want to have a look at who is on it.
It appears that many serious rugby private schools have not allowed participation. Thats not necessarily a bad thing.
I cant see how it is going to produce non-private school u16s to jump into the vacant rep spots.
Further, my understanding is that SJRU are planning to split the comp to before and after state champs. I know why they're doing it but it hardly sends a consistent message.

If you are saying the JGC is not a great "pathway" then what would be ideal. An example I am involved in a Western Sydney club which has grown it's mini's from 40 players 5 years ago to > 100 players last year (let's say 100 players for this example). In all likelihood, in this area, 80% of these children will not attend a Rugby playing high school. What is the "pathway" for them. Do we tell these children if they aspire to Rep footy, unless you have a Private school scholarship by 15 give the game away. Can the game afford to send this message to 80 kids. In this club in the U13s out of 23 players, only 4 are going to a Rugby playing High School (which is about 80% just to prove these are realistic numbers), what is the pathway for the other 19 players should any one of them aspire/be talented enough to play rep rugby?

 

[Gary Owen III]

Well JGC isn't producing any team to play at U16 Nationals - which has been suggested is quite deliberate.
Before you get too carried away with this "pathway" you may want to have a look at who is on it.
It appears that many serious rugby private schools have not allowed participation. Thats not necessarily a bad thing.
I cant see how it is going to produce non-private school u16s to jump into the vacant rep spots.
Further, my understanding is that SJRU are planning to split the comp to before and after state champs. I know why they're doing it but it hardly sends a consistent message.

IS - to my understanding the JGC is not doing u16 and u18 as league does those years and they wanted to try to capture some of the players that do both.

And my mail is the SJRU only canvassed the clubs re the u16's and possibly changing the comp - it will remain a 14 round comp (but feedback was 50/50 from those that replied)

 

[Inside Shoulder]

If you are saying the JGC is not a great "pathway" then what would be ideal. An example I am involved in a Western Sydney club which has grown it's mini's from 40 players 5 years ago to > 100 players last year (let's say 100 players for this example). In all likelihood, in this area, 80% of these children will not attend a Rugby playing high school. What is the "pathway" for them. Do we tell these children if they aspire to Rep footy, unless you have a Private school scholarship by 15 give the game away. Can the game afford to send this message to 80 kids. In this club in the U13s out of 23 players, only 4 are going to a Rugby playing High School (which is about 80% just to prove these are realistic numbers), what is the pathway for the other 19 players should any one of them aspire/be talented enough to play rep rugby?

You won't keep those kids if the reps is rendered meaningless by a disparity between NSW schools and Sydney Juniors. Before this year what did these kids do in 15, 16 and 17?

IS - to my understanding the JGC is not doing u16 and u18 as league does those years and they wanted to try to capture some of the players that do both.

And my mail is the SJRU only canvassed the clubs re the u16's and possibly changing the comp - it will remain a 14 round comp (but feedback was 50/50 from those that replied)

It's already being sold to 16s by some clubs on the basis that the comp will be split with no obligation to play after the state champs.

An interesting development I have witnessed is that kids at private schools who are not being stopped from playing but have no (perceived) chance of making reps have lost interest in club. SJru, nswjru and ARU need to conduct an exit survey on all u15s who do not play club having played last year to work out what the triggers and issues are.