Paul Keating: "In the race of life, always back self-interest - at least you know it's trying"
When my boys were in Under 9's and Under 10's, there was a lot of debate that larger boys should play Weight for Age grades with many parents calling for these regulations to be implemented. The parents from Team A (with some big boys) seldom agreed that Weight for Age would be useful. The parents from Team B (with no big boys) funnily enough were advocates of Weight For Age.
As this cohort progressed up the age groups and Rep Footy came into the frame, the Team B parents still maintained the rage for Weight for Age, but were the first to ask if Johnny and Henry (Big boys from Team A) were in the Rep team with their precious Oliver's and Sam's. They seemed to be very happy to see Johnny and Henry run rampant over the smaller boys from the other Districts and were not backward in coming forward to say how good Johnny and Henry were. There was no Weight for Age concern for the boys from the other districts. There was a State Championship medal at stake for Oliver and Sam.
This analogy might work if they entered a weight for age comp,and then totally ignored the weight limits and played the bigger boys.Shame on them,for being enthusiastic about having some big boppas to match up against ALL the other teams who also had big boppas.
Fast forward to High School. Newington apparently has some boys in their rugby team that were not there in Year 7. These boys are apparently good rugby players. Newington are in breach of the code of conduct of the AAGPS which states ".no scholarships.." or words to the same general effect. It has been quoted enough that most are familiar with the exact wording and intent of the statement. There is also little point in summarising the arguments for and against as we are all very familiar with them.There you go, you already know the issue!
Come the Inter-association representative season, who are the first boys listed in the keyboard selectors GPS I teams?
Surely not. Not the evil nasty rule-breaking imported boys?
Coming to my point. If AAGPS Principals were serious about compliance with their code of conduct then they would not select any boy in their AAGPS representative team that was at one of the schools, playing 1st XV for their school, who was there under conditions that were in breach of the AAGPS agreement about "scholarships".
Who would compile the list for the selectors,so they know who not to pick?
It is common knowledge that there are boys on sporting scholarships at certain schools. Headmasters from schools that do not offer scholarships are on the public record noting that these exist, and that they are not in the best interests of the association. What do they actually do about it? They clearly know that it exists yet apart from making pious statements in newsletters and on web sites they do NOTHING.
Do they celebrate success of the AAGPS representative rugby team over CAS and CHS in the representative season?
You really think AAGPS competitiveness is a driver in their decision making process to cheat?
Would the principled anti-scholarship parents accept that AAGPS may end up regularly losing Inter-Association games because of a stand on anti-scholarship principles?
When they realise that no imports means more chances for their kids & their friends to represent,they would welcome "the new normal"
Are they the Team B parents from the Under 11's?
As long as we are winning, why should there be any level playing field or why should the rules apply to us?
Are the parents and Principals from the alleged non-scholarship schools first order hypocrites with a healthy case of double standards ?
C'mon Jarse,You are normally better than that.
.