The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
It's a little ironic isn't it that there doesn't seem to be an issue with kids getting academic or arts related scholarships, but sports are considered out of bounds.
School sporting scholarships/recruitment
- Thread starter observer
- Start date
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
What fatuous analogy.
They do not celebrate athletic Scholarships because they are clearly not proud about offering them.
Lesson in life, if you are doing anything you are not proud of.
Stop doing it.
They do not celebrate athletic Scholarships because they are clearly not proud about offering them.
Lesson in life, if you are doing anything you are not proud of.
Stop doing it.
angrydog
Jimmy Flynn (14)
I dont think a specific forum is needed. Simply, if somebody was to ask, either privately or publicly, "Is young Sione on a rugby scholarship"? then I dont see the issue with absolute transparency and honesty by the answer being "Yes. He is." As far as a scholarships arms race occuring, I think that would be unlikely just as music or maths schoalrship arms race is unlikely. Schools need fees to survive and as a result scholarships will only be offered if the school can take the hit.
I am sure all of the fine schools who no doubt espouse teachings about values and character would also promote the old adage that honesty is the best policy. I think it would be great to know exactly who is playing with kids on scholarships and who isnt. I can take a beating, or a hiding from an opponent who I truly know is better than myself much easier than wondering why they are so much more dominant.
Just come out with the truth and et everyone accept the situation for what it is.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
No - but I am glad you asked.
School is for education.
The primary purpose of education is to equip you to be able to function in and contribute to society.
Undoubtedly sport has an important, I would suggest unparalleled, role to play in teaching people to function and contribute.
Giving a free ride to someone who is extremely good at a sport is not the same as having ordinary, average and randomly talented kids run out in their school 1st XV jersey and try to beat another collection of ordinary average randomly talented guys from another school. This contest teaches the participants about overcoming the fact that you may not have the best goalkicker or half back or whatever but by adaptation and teamwork you can still compete and succeed.
In my view it is the felxibility of rugby - as to the size and shape of those who play it and as to the means by which it can be played (dominant set piece or speed to the breakdown or whatever the collection of boys can justify) - which separates it from every other school sport.
I am not sure that the semi-professionalisation of schoolboy sport is a healthy development.
Giving free rides only proves who has the best talent scouts.
angrydog
Jimmy Flynn (14)
ll
Well said IS. Is there any solution to the current situation? Unless teams are willing to be up front about their scholarship situation the divide will grow wider and more bitter between those who do and those who dont. Those who do should just be honest and competitions arranged between similar schools. All this BS about the traditions of the GPS or CAS comps will not be worth a pinch of shit for long if they are reduced to two or three competitve schools. Either be up front about scholarships or do something to enforce them not being used at all. It is pretty simple to me.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
The school I am interested in is so far behind the pack that I can assure you the difference is not scholarships!
Beyond that I am torn: I really think it is great that a kid who can play can go to one of these schools and get, hopefully, an education because the chances of him making a living from this game are slim indeed.
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
Inside Shoulder, I think we are going to end up going around in the same old circle.
You have raised very valid points most of which are hard to disagree with. Could I suggest that in the perfect hypothetical world the ordinariness and randomness should also be extended in the most holistic sense and encompass all aspects of the sports programme, and not just the participants.
Kids on Free/Subsidised rides are only part of the problem of uneven playing fields.
To complete the comparison of the ordinary, average, randomly talented kids playing against ordinary, average, randomly talented kids from another school, perhaps those kids should also be prepared and coached by ordinary, average, randomly talented Teachers (Professionally qualified educators) using ordinary, average and random facilities.
Some schools have the luxury of being able to afford a Rugby Department who do nothing else but rugby. Others have engaged external rugby “consultants” to coach teams to supplement the ordinary, average random teaching staff on the school payroll to educate the students. Gym’s, weights rooms, supervised Long Term Talented Athlete Development programmes, ovals, pools, time and space to train twice or more a week (a large boarding contingent affords an advantage in this regard), access to Wallaby and Tahs Alumni for coaching, mentoring and fundraising etc ….
How can ordinary, average, randomly talented kids from Battlersville High School 1st XV with no dedicated ovals, no gym, one teacher in the PE department, no old boys rugby association, one training session per fortnight, only 5 kids who have any sort of rugby background from village clubs and 3 of those never made any State Championship age group side, no scrum machine, no crash pads, no etc compete with ordinary, average, randomly talented kids from schools which have all the above?
It would take a bit more than “adaptation and teamwork” for Battlersville High 1sts to “compete and succeed”. Yes - Matto High did so in the 70’s/80’s, but that is not the exception that proves the rule. The bulk of the cattle in that team went on to Wobs, Kangaroos, or 1st grade Mungo or Shute Shield clubs. That was also 30+ years ago. How many examples since?
Little wonder parents with extraordinary, above average, talented athletes seek out opportunities for that athlete to be educated about functioning and contributing to society from a school that values athletic talent. Some of these parents can afford to pay full fare from Yrs 7 to 12. Some can not, and some chose to pay full fare for only one or two years. Some could be fiscally encouraged to stay at a particular school they have been at paying full fare at since Yr 7, when they make a particular representative team. Several other scenarios possible that I won’t bore readers with.
When asked the question previously on this thread, “Would you refuse to accept a full or part scholarship if offered?”, I can’t recall too many correspondents saying that they would do so.
The Free/Subsidised rides (Good Talent Scouts) needs to still be backed up with good coaching, facilities, programmes, training, and most importantly an awesome game day BBQ.
Your final point in post #1009 is particularly pertinent. As I have posted elsewhere, I have been told that there is a greater chance of a kid becoming an orthopaedic surgeon than a professional athlete (and the pay is better). How much time and effort do kids put into the possibility of becoming a professional footballer as opposed a medical professional? Hmmmm.
You have raised very valid points most of which are hard to disagree with. Could I suggest that in the perfect hypothetical world the ordinariness and randomness should also be extended in the most holistic sense and encompass all aspects of the sports programme, and not just the participants.
Kids on Free/Subsidised rides are only part of the problem of uneven playing fields.
To complete the comparison of the ordinary, average, randomly talented kids playing against ordinary, average, randomly talented kids from another school, perhaps those kids should also be prepared and coached by ordinary, average, randomly talented Teachers (Professionally qualified educators) using ordinary, average and random facilities.
Some schools have the luxury of being able to afford a Rugby Department who do nothing else but rugby. Others have engaged external rugby “consultants” to coach teams to supplement the ordinary, average random teaching staff on the school payroll to educate the students. Gym’s, weights rooms, supervised Long Term Talented Athlete Development programmes, ovals, pools, time and space to train twice or more a week (a large boarding contingent affords an advantage in this regard), access to Wallaby and Tahs Alumni for coaching, mentoring and fundraising etc ….
How can ordinary, average, randomly talented kids from Battlersville High School 1st XV with no dedicated ovals, no gym, one teacher in the PE department, no old boys rugby association, one training session per fortnight, only 5 kids who have any sort of rugby background from village clubs and 3 of those never made any State Championship age group side, no scrum machine, no crash pads, no etc compete with ordinary, average, randomly talented kids from schools which have all the above?
It would take a bit more than “adaptation and teamwork” for Battlersville High 1sts to “compete and succeed”. Yes - Matto High did so in the 70’s/80’s, but that is not the exception that proves the rule. The bulk of the cattle in that team went on to Wobs, Kangaroos, or 1st grade Mungo or Shute Shield clubs. That was also 30+ years ago. How many examples since?
Little wonder parents with extraordinary, above average, talented athletes seek out opportunities for that athlete to be educated about functioning and contributing to society from a school that values athletic talent. Some of these parents can afford to pay full fare from Yrs 7 to 12. Some can not, and some chose to pay full fare for only one or two years. Some could be fiscally encouraged to stay at a particular school they have been at paying full fare at since Yr 7, when they make a particular representative team. Several other scenarios possible that I won’t bore readers with.
When asked the question previously on this thread, “Would you refuse to accept a full or part scholarship if offered?”, I can’t recall too many correspondents saying that they would do so.
The Free/Subsidised rides (Good Talent Scouts) needs to still be backed up with good coaching, facilities, programmes, training, and most importantly an awesome game day BBQ.
Your final point in post #1009 is particularly pertinent. As I have posted elsewhere, I have been told that there is a greater chance of a kid becoming an orthopaedic surgeon than a professional athlete (and the pay is better). How much time and effort do kids put into the possibility of becoming a professional footballer as opposed a medical professional? Hmmmm.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
HJ - I'd be happy if every school had professional rugby coaches at all levels in all ages. I'd be happy if summer was only used for off season skills development and, when appropriate, strength training.
Matraville High played in a final in the last 10 (?) years against Eddies with some Faiinga boys in the Eddies team.
Matraville High played in a final in the last 10 (?) years against Eddies with some Faiinga boys in the Eddies team.
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
Points well made. I have no problem with scholarships for academic purposes, BTW. Quite the contrary, I think they're a great tool for giving talented kids without the means a chance to realise their potential. I also agree that school is about education. I just find it odd that arts scholarships are given out and there's not much is said, but as soon as sport comes into it people go berko. I just find it a little hypocritical that's all. There's also the practical side of it in that this kind of thing is almost impossible to police.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
That is the whole issue to me, Arts and Academic Scholarships
are handed out transperantlty and it's all above board.
Sporting scholarships are not handled in an open, honest and transparent manner.
If they don't list them on their website for all to apply, then they should not offer them.
Freddo Frog
Ward Prentice (10)
1. If young Sione or Xavier is on a scholarship, it's no-one's business but his and his parents. Why do you think it's your right to know who pays his school fees?
2. If you take a beating or a hiding from an opponent, I guarantee that he IS better than you, at least on the day. He is not dominant because his parents got some fee relief, he is dominant because he works his arse off to play better than you and every other opponent he faces.
Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
Last time I looked, there were very few kids NOT on a scholarship of sorts. Nearly all of them do not pay for their own fees. Someone or some other party pays their fees in a form of scholarship.
Most private school kids have their fees paid for by their parents. A Family Scholarship.
Some kids have some or all of their fees paid for by other parents. A School funded Sports scholarship (Sometimes called Bursary or Fees Relief)
Some kids have some or all of their fees paid for by Grandparents. A Nana Scholarship.
Some kids have some or all of their fees paid for by an Old Boys Association (or equivalent). A Third Party or Memorial Scholarship.
Some kids have some or all of their fees paid for by a Religious Group. A Church Scholarship.
and so on.
Not naming names, but are there any kids who actually pay their own school fees?
This debate should not be about which families are receiving fee relief. They have broken no laws, they have just been either lucky or shrewd purchasers of educational services at a discount rate. Bit like filling the car up at the bottom of the price cycle, but on a much grander scale.
Association Rules of AAGPS preclude inducements.
This is the hypocracy that needs changing because it is an open secret that this is being breached by some schools.
The same code of AAGPS also precludes foul language on the sporting field. It is also an open secret that some of the boys have been known to use foul language on occasions.
Most private school kids have their fees paid for by their parents. A Family Scholarship.
Some kids have some or all of their fees paid for by other parents. A School funded Sports scholarship (Sometimes called Bursary or Fees Relief)
Some kids have some or all of their fees paid for by Grandparents. A Nana Scholarship.
Some kids have some or all of their fees paid for by an Old Boys Association (or equivalent). A Third Party or Memorial Scholarship.
Some kids have some or all of their fees paid for by a Religious Group. A Church Scholarship.
and so on.
Not naming names, but are there any kids who actually pay their own school fees?
This debate should not be about which families are receiving fee relief. They have broken no laws, they have just been either lucky or shrewd purchasers of educational services at a discount rate. Bit like filling the car up at the bottom of the price cycle, but on a much grander scale.
Association Rules of AAGPS preclude inducements.
This is the hypocracy that needs changing because it is an open secret that this is being breached by some schools.
The same code of AAGPS also precludes foul language on the sporting field. It is also an open secret that some of the boys have been known to use foul language on occasions.
It is what it is
John Solomon (38)
Nup don't agree.
Some associations have rules forbidding scholarships for rugby.
If the school or player break these rules then their rights to privacy are lost.
Your last point is ridiculous. If 'he' hadn't received an illegitimate scholarship, he wouldn't be at that school in the first place and wouldn't be beating that opponent no matter how hard he worked his arse off.
It is what it is
John Solomon (38)
What are you smoking HJ or are you sniffing some of that discount fuel you bought on a grander scale?
Freddo Frog
Ward Prentice (10)
Angrydog stated that he could take a beating much easier if he knew that the kid was genuinely better than himself. My point was, the kid has whipped his arse, so he has proven himself to be genuinely better.
Finances don't come in to that equation.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
angrydog
Jimmy Flynn (14)
Freddo, sorry but if the rules of association say scholarships for rugby are not permitted then it is other peoples business. This gets back to what Iam saying whereby if scholarships are being offered then it should be transparent so that when scholarship laden sides flog the others then people know exactly whay there is such an inbalance between the two sides.
On the second point, yes if I got a flogging from a better opponent then yes he clearly IS better than me. The point is that sides and individuals who run out and play against other sides who pose as being within the rules and not offering rugby scholarships should be able to do so knowing that should they be flogged then it is by a legitimately better side put together by that oppostion schools fee paying students rather than one assembled by virtue of scholarships. It comes down to ensuring that to have a good comp that is competive and enjoyable for players and spectators then all things should be equal. Any inbalance is destructive in the long run, case in point is the GPS which is slowly eroding away to three or four schools being truly competitive.
providence
Herbert Moran (7)
Angrydog, the reality though is that the last few years have seen 5 / 6 very strong teams contesting in a GPS competition that has ended up being very even and excellent to watch for the independent observer. As several posters have previously said surely this is better than only having Kings and Joeys competing each year?
If all things were 'equal' as per your post above, then all schools would have to have the same number of kids, and all schools would focus equally in all sports. This is simply not the case, never has been and never will be.
Lots of things can hold back or alternatively enhance a school and their commitment to certain sports / academic achievement. Most obviously a new headmaster, or perhaps one past his prime? Scholarships in the GPS system have always been around. What is clear is that old boys / rectors who claim their schools don't give scholarships are getting more and more bitter when they lose. I'm sure this has happened before and is fully understandable if they are still living so vicariously through their school.
In recent times, such as the Riverview Rectors outburst, it seems more likely the 'out bursting' is trying to deflect away other negative attention / reviews the school has received over the past few years.
Interestingly the current 'wave' of scholarship debate seems to have originated around 2007 / 2008, the same time as the GFC. Perhaps some of the schools may have seen their enrollments dropping, or alternatively perhaps the BER cash diverted too much attention at some schools towards the building of classrooms and not the rugby field?!
S
Scare Crow
Guest
I'm just surprised nobody has commented on the $$$ schools are parting with on this front. Previous posts have confirmed King's is supporting 12 kids in their 1sts and 2nds and that's without looking at the 16's. With fees of $28k and boarding at $20k plus extras Kings has got to be flushing over $350,000 down this toilet. Given the Headmasters email this week to parents to go after pollies and stop the cut in Governement funding maybe the school can support fee paying parents and stop wasting their hard earned money in this area.
Just a thought
Did you pay their school fees? if not then _____