School sporting scholarships/recruitment

[Braveheart81]

We can be fairly certain that there is noone at High on a sporting scholarship.

SBHS certainly used to have a couple of 'Headmaster's Discretion' places for year 11 and 12 to replace kids that had left along the way. I am certain that in the past they have recruited some pretty good rugby players who wouldn't have made it based on academic results alone.

If the competitions become much more unbalanced in future years they could look at combining the CAS and GPS rugby competitions into a 1st and 2nd division.

1st Div:
Newington
Joeys
Kings
Waverley
Trinity

2nd Div:
High
Grammar
Aloys
Cranbrook
Shore

I'm not sure where the current results sit but you obviously slot in Riverview, Scots, Barker, Knox depending on their strength. You then run a promotion/relegation system.

Whilst it would break with a lot of tradition, it would create two better rugby competitions.

 

[I like to watch]

Why would you just keep it to CAS/GPS?
Oakhill beat nearly the whole CAS comp in trials last year.
St Augustines flog Waverley every year these days,and have touched up both Joeys & Scots in recent years.
Not sure about availability, but the Sports Highs should be considered as well.
If it's about creating the best comp, surely the best teams should compete?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Students like watching winning teams, they like talking about classmates who will be the next big thing, and to some extent many parents do too.

At school rugby is a part of the educative process not an end in itself. Winning teams of which any boy can realistically hope to be a member create the context for goal setting, effort and reward - among many other things. Those are valuable lessons for all children. They are squandered by ring ins who, in a sense, prove what money can buy you that you may not earn by hard work. That's not an approach I would want any child of mine thinking was the answer to life: it is, at best, utterly materialistic to want to win so baldy that you don't care how the members of your 1st XV came to be in that team.

The other problem is, and in a sense this whole of GGR skirts this when discussing school sport, these kids are not, for the most part, going to be "the next big thing". Even with the insular nature of Oz rugby (selecting its future from maybe 8-10 schools in NSW-QLD) the number who can even make a living from the game let alone be the next big thing is miniscule.

It is wrong for people to think that the ring-ins will be ok because they will make a living playing union (or league): most will not. The boys themselves begin to believe the myth and some do not get the education they deserve - and for which they pay by providing a rugby service to the school.

However imperfect the US college sporting scene at least the scholarship athletes have to maintain minimum level academic grades in order to retain sporting eligibility.

 

[Braveheart81]

Why would you just keep it to CAS/GPS?
Oakhill beat nearly the whole CAS comp in trials last year.
St Augustines flog Waverley every year these days,and have touched up both Joeys & Scots in recent years.
Not sure about availability, but the Sports Highs should be considered as well.
If it's about creating the best comp, surely the best teams should compete?

You've got to keep it exclusive.

No one likes mixing with ISA types.

 

[Quick Hands]

At school rugby is a part of the educative process not an end in itself. Winning teams of which any boy can realistically hope to be a member create the context for goal setting, effort and reward - among many other things. Those are valuable lessons for all children. They are squandered by ring ins who, in a sense, prove what money can buy you that you may not earn by hard work. That's not an approach I would want any child of mine thinking was the answer to life: it is, at best, utterly materialistic to want to win so baldy that you don't care how the members of your 1st XV came to be in that team.

The other problem is, and in a sense this whole of GGR skirts this when discussing school sport, these kids are not, for the most part, going to be "the next big thing". Even with the insular nature of Oz rugby (selecting its future from maybe 8-10 schools in NSW-QLD) the number who can even make a living from the game let alone be the next big thing is miniscule.

It is wrong for people to think that the ring-ins will be ok because they will make a living playing union (or league): most will not. The boys themselves begin to believe the myth and some do not get the education they deserve - and for which they pay by providing a rugby service to the school.

However imperfect the US college sporting scene at least the scholarship athletes have to maintain minimum level academic grades in order to retain sporting eligibility.

Particularly when all 8 schools in the competition have agreed not to provide sporting scholarships. The fact that some schools are tip toeing around something which they are bound to uphold teaches their students that you can get around the rules by subterfuge and trickery if it suits your purpose. All of these institutions purport to impart moral and ethical principles to their students, but by their example, some are doing very something different.

I was also disappointed to read earlier that TSC are still out recruiting, despite the fact that in the younger age groups their teams have been outstanding for the past couple of years. (last year's 13s in particular) And I'm not suggesting that they are the only school doing it, I just question why, when their development seems to be going so well.

 

[Braveheart81]

If sporting scholarships are so bad, why aren't academic scholarships viewed in the same light?

You're taking away the 'right' of a kid to be in the top maths class or whatever because another kid who would not have otherwise been at the school is being given an opportunity without paying for it.

Why should TSC stop offering sporting scholarships because they have strong young age group teams? Presumably the 'mission statement' behind them is that they are providing opportunities to people to attend the school who wouldn't have otherwise had that opportunity on the basis that they are good at xxx activity (whether it is rugby, academic, music, whatever). If they only offer the scholarships when they are weak at a sport it would show the scholarships to be something of a farce.

 

[Quick Hands]

If sporting scholarships are so bad, why aren't academic scholarships viewed in the same light?

.

Because all 8 schools have agreed not to offer sporting scholarships.

 

[Braveheart81]

Because all 8 schools have agreed not to offer sporting scholarships.

I have lifted some text from the Newington website as they seem to be at the centre of discussions regarding scholarships.

5. Are scholarships available?

Yes. The principal categories are:

• Academic
• Halse Rogers for All-Round Achievement
• Boarding
• Music

There are further provisions with:

• The Robert Walter Storr Music Scholarships (not available until 2014)
• Old Newingtonians’ Union Bursaries
• Inner-Western Sydney Bursaries
• Boarding Bursaries
• Chris Wild Indigenous Bursary
• The ONU Indigenous Residents of Tonga Bursaries

From the above it is pretty clear that you could be offered a scholarship if, amongst other things you are good at sport and are an inner west local, an Indigenous student, Tongan, from the country (boarding) or liked by the Old Boys association.

If someone is a good all-rounder (as in good at lots of things, not talking about cricket) and excells at sport then I don't see it is a bad thing that they are offered a scholarship. When handing out scholarships that fall under a broad definition, a school would be crazy not to look at their sporting ability as part of the picture.

 

[lincoln]

I have lifted some text from the Newington website as they seem to be at the centre of discussions regarding scholarships.

5. Are scholarships available?

Yes. The principal categories are:

• Academic
• Halse Rogers for All-Round Achievement
• Boarding
• Music

There are further provisions with:

• The Robert Walter Storr Music Scholarships (not available until 2014)
• Old Newingtonians’ Union Bursaries
• Inner-Western Sydney Bursaries
• Boarding Bursaries
• Chris Wild Indigenous Bursary
• The ONU Indigenous Residents of Tonga Bursaries

From the above it is pretty clear that you could be offered a scholarship if, amongst other things you are good at sport and are an inner west local, an Indigenous student, Tongan, from the country (boarding) or liked by the Old Boys association.

If someone is a good all-rounder (as in good at lots of things, not talking about cricket) and excells at sport then I don't see it is a bad thing that they are offered a scholarship. When handing out scholarships that fall under a broad definition, a school would be crazy not to look at their sporting ability as part of the picture.

Agree - now if only Newington would publish ATARs for the collective "All-rounders" in year 12, as I would assume an all-rounder is also bright. No names, just something along the lines of - we had 20/30/40 allrounders and 2 achieved over 90.

 

[I like to watch]

If sporting scholarships are so bad, why aren't academic scholarships viewed in the same light?

You're taking away the 'right' of a kid to be in the top maths class or whatever because another kid who would not have otherwise been at the school is being given an opportunity without paying for it.

Why should TSC stop offering sporting scholarships because they have strong young age group teams? Presumably the 'mission statement' behind them is that they are providing opportunities to people to attend the school who wouldn't have otherwise had that opportunity on the basis that they are good at xxx activity (whether it is rugby, academic, music, whatever). If they only offer the scholarships when they are weak at a sport it would show the scholarships to be something of a farce.

If the School enters into Math's contests with other Schools and agrees not to upgrade their stocks with imports, then that would be the same.
But they don't.
TSC should stop because they agreed not to!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

If sporting scholarships are so bad, why aren't academic scholarships viewed in the same light?

You're taking away the 'right' of a kid to be in the top maths class or whatever because another kid who would not have otherwise been at the school is being given an opportunity without paying for it.

Why should TSC stop offering sporting scholarships because they have strong young age group teams? Presumably the 'mission statement' behind them is that they are providing opportunities to people to attend the school who wouldn't have otherwise had that opportunity on the basis that they are good at xxx activity (whether it is rugby, academic, music, whatever). If they only offer the scholarships when they are weak at a sport it would show the scholarships to be something of a farce.

Funnily enough if a school were to do that it would be immediately apparent that the school was failing as an educator - just as the need to import rugby players bespeaks a failure in the endeavour.

 

[Quick Hands]

An intersting point that I noted on the GPS thread was that last year Scots 13 ABC put 300 points on their New counterparts. I wonder how many of those 13s players will be playing 1st XV for New in 5 years time?

If they were fair dinkum, that's where they would be focussing all their time and energy.

The fact that almost all of their 2013 1st XV (info GPSrow) have come to the school fairly recently would indicate that if those boys are are scholarships, then NC are using their scholarships to get around the rules. It's a bit much to believe that 12 or 13 of them could qualify as "All rounders" etc.

I believe that 3 of last year's 1st XV (Lussick, Morris and Abrahams) all came to NC via St Augustines and all 3 are back this year. This highlights the other aspect of this practice, that is it is denuding the rugby programmes of non GPS schools. I know that NC aren't the only ones, just that those 3 are northern beaches boys and people have pointed it out to me. (Jim Stewart also to TSC from Augustines)

 

[The Rant]

SCOTS (6)
1948*-49*, 1959, 1978*, 1987, 1993

This isn't a brand new practice. SBHS came a very close 2nd in 1993 to a scots team where only Tom Bowman started in year 7... (coincidentally there centenary year...don't think they wanted to lose).

High has been going downhill since the start of the 2000s. One factor was shifting to 100% academic selections which wasnt always the case until late 90s.
When i started there we were the opens soccer,basketball,cricket and waterpolo champions and 2nd in rugby. Just never had the depth with non-compulsory sport which only got worse as the percentage of new australians increased who's parents were not keen to allow there kids to use time on sports (don't get all upset...thats what my friends told me).

Hopefully it gets better but I fully support a 2nd tier comp so their 1sts can get a good game that means something.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

This isn't a brand new practice. SBHS came a very close 2nd in 1993 to a scots team where only Tom Bowman started in year 7. (coincidentally there centenary year.don't think they wanted to lose).

and Stu Pinkerton - the scholarship apparently confirmed here:
http://newsstore.fairfax.com.au/app...s&cls=15&clsPage=1&docID=NCH100116164PVL9A8L3

Make of it what you will:
"The Scots College in Bellevue Hill, Sydney, was looking for basketball talent. The only problem was there were no more sports scholarships on offer. Yet, there was a place for a French horn student. Did Stuart fit the bill? Not quite, although his 1988 attendance at Newcastle Workers Club to catch Iggy Pop in concert had been enough of a life-altering experience for him to take up guitar. The following year he was boarding at Scots, playing basketball and rugby. The school had selected well. In his final year, Pinkerton was awarded the Scots Honour Cap for the student bringing the most honour to the school, and named in the Australian Schoolboys rugby squad to tour the UK and Ireland."
A good story anyway.

 

[Quick Hands]

This isn't a brand new practice. SBHS came a very close 2nd in 1993 to a scots team where only Tom Bowman started in year 7. (coincidentally there centenary year.don't think they wanted to lose).

High has been going downhill since the start of the 2000s. One factor was shifting to 100% academic selections which wasnt always the case until late 90s.
When i started there we were the opens soccer,basketball,cricket and waterpolo champions and 2nd in rugby. Just never had the depth with non-compulsory sport which only got worse as the percentage of new australians increased who's parents were not keen to allow there kids to use time on sports (don't get all upset.thats what my friends told me).

Hopefully it gets better but I fully support a 2nd tier comp so their 1sts can get a good game that means something.

The big upside of the new GPS rugby format is that High and Grammar 1sts are now in a competition in which they'll be competitive. In fact in many ways the 3rds competition will be a better reflection of school sport than the 1sts.

I don't think there's much doubt that Scots 1993 side were assembled to win in their centenary year. About 4 or 5 came from over on the northern beaches at the start of Year 11. It's also interesting to note that 2013 is Newington's 150th anniversary - read into that what you will.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think the underlying issue here is the changing nature of the exclusive private schools in Sydney and the desire to hang on to traditions.

As the demographics of who has money in Sydney changes, so do the demographics of the students at all these schools.

As the predominance of white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants decreases, things such as the rugby tradition also slip. Droughts etc. also mean that there are less wealthy farming families sending their children to boarding school in Sydney.

Old Boys networks in particular are trying to keep the traditions alive and doing so in the form of Old Boys scholarships which to an extent seem to be being utilised for boys who just happen to be good at sport. Schools have also found other ways to tap into rugby talent through Indigenous and PI scholarships.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

As the predominance of white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants decreases, things such as the rugby tradition also slip.

Not sure the Jo boys fit into this description:
The point is a a good one, however.

 

[Quick Hands]

I think the underlying issue here is the changing nature of the exclusive private schools in Sydney and the desire to hang on to traditions.

As the demographics of who has money in Sydney changes, so do the demographics of the students at all these schools.

As the predominance of white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants decreases, things such as the rugby tradition also slip. Droughts etc. also mean that there are less wealthy farming families sending their children to boarding school in Sydney.

Old Boys networks in particular are trying to keep the traditions alive and doing so in the form of Old Boys scholarships which to an extent seem to be being utilised for boys who just happen to be good at sport. Schools have also found other ways to tap into rugby talent through Indigenous and PI scholarships.

Yoy're probably right with most of what you say, the only point that I would make is that if by tradition they mean winning rugby premierships, then this is more myth than tradition. (from post 1156 on page 58)

Incidentially, I wonder what "golden age" of rugby some old boys hark back to. As the table below indicates, with the exception of Grammar in the 1920s, none of these 6 schools have ever experienced a rugby golden age which needs to be relived through sporting scholarhips.

NEWINGTON (9)1896, 1900, 1911-12, 1953, 1961*, 1979, 2010, 2012
SCOTS (6)
1948*-49*, 1959, 1978*, 1987, 1993
SHORE (8)
1908-09, 1933*, 1969, 1970*, 1977*, 1998*, 2006*
ST IGNATIUS (9)
1964, 1972*, 1975, 1980, 1996, 2003, 2006*, 2008*-09*, 2011
GRAMMAR (14)1897-98-99, 1915-16, 1919-20-21-22, 1924*, 1929, 1949*, 1966-67
HIGH (5)1946*, 1963, 1971-72*73

 

[Braveheart81]

Yoy're probably right with most of what you say, the only point that I would make is that if by tradition they mean winning rugby premierships, then this is more myth than tradition. (from post 1156 on page 58)

The tradition is being rugby focused. Historical results aren't actually that important. It's the history of the First XV being revered amongst the rest of the school and a large portion of the school turning up to watch the first XV on Saturday whether it is compulsory or not.

As more and more students enrolled in private schools come from families without a rugby history, it is harder and harder to hold onto that tradition of the rugby players being revered and the school body caring heavily about rugby.

I would be interested to know how the percentage of students that are sons of old boys has changed over the years.

 

[Freddo Frog]

The old adage that success breeds success is really important in a school boy environment. The excitement that having strong athletes (and a chance of winning) is so vital to build school spirit. I suspect that NC and TSC, which have done pretty poorly until the last few years and change of leadership, are attracting boys with talent in one or more given areas to their school in order to bulk up the squads while their new rugby etc programs work their magic on the younger age groups.
As has been pointed out above, NC and particularly TSC have some very very good talent coming through in their 13,14 and 15's so the new programs (implemented after the change in leadership) are showing results. Questionable whether they would need to find players from outside as the years progress, but time will tell. From what I understand, the numbers at both schools are very strong and growing, so there will also be more talent to develop and choose from as time goes on.