Basils Blog

Some reflections on school rugby in 2009.....

Basil Bey — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 07:40:00 GMT

I do believe that the Western Province school rugby season is the last to finish in this country (and I feel that it finishes far too early). In the remainder of the country the season is completed even before that -- long before the end of August. Schools like Grey (Bloemfontein) make up for these shortened seasons by travelling all over the country, seeking out and playing against schools somewhere near their own calibre. However, all schools cannot do this.

You train hard for the rugby season to achieve the fitness the game demands; were I playing I should find it extremely frustrating to play as few games, as most schools do, having prepared for the season as I had done. The first fifteens (as opposed to other teams) of some schools, are fortunate in that they attend tournaments in various parts of the country and thus end up playing many more games than, let us say, the under 15 D do.

What, however, is even more frustrating is that the so-called 'authorities' governing schools rugby in the various provinces choose to interfere with the season by extracting players from the different age groups during the term to practise with the 'provincial age-group' squads, thus totally disrupting school teams. If that is not enough, they throw in the odd 'provincial' match in order to hone their select side in preparation for what used to be called ' Craven Week '.

Now, towards the end of the season, these august officials organise under 18 fixtures for the S. A. Schools' team against the English, the French and even the Namibians - completely ignoring the fact most of our schools play traditional fixtures, a derby fixture, at the close of their season. This is the last game for the school for most of the 1st XV players -- an emotional occasion - but schools are instructed by the provincial officials that their ( S.A.) selected players may not turn out for the school 1st XV match should it conflict with any of the S. A. arranged fixtures. Let me give an example. Bishops on Saturday played Rondebosch in their derby match, as they do at the end of each season. However, players selected for the S. A. Schools' were forbidden to play in any such game. The schools authorities in this case objected to the ruling (and to the S.A.Schools fixture) - but were told that if any of the players disobeyed the instruction not to play for their school side, those players would be ignored in the future when it came to selections for any provincial teams beyond school. This, of course, is nothing more nor less than blackmail.

No body outside the school should have the right to interfere with school sport -- after all, if Bishops wished to play soccer rather than to play rugby, that would be entirely their business and have nothing to do with the Western Province Rugby Football Union whatsoever, or S.A. Schools rugby selectors. They should be made aware of that. Furthermore, it is time for the headmaster's and principals of various schools to make this absolutely clear.

The school has first call on its players, always! In our schools rugby is part of our educational system and we do not want outsiders interfering. What happens after a boy leaves school is of great interest to us but we do not interfere. This non-interference must work both ways!

Surely, it is time to do away with school provincial sides at all age levels -- educationally sound, too!

Three things I have found upsetting in this past schools' rugby season; the first is the behaviour of adult spectators on the field (I should say, on the side of the field but that is not always true). It is shocking, indefensibly shocking! Second is the performance (as in performance of a clown) of school coaches, standing on the rugby field itself, for example, shouting all sorts of abuse at the referee, at their players, gesticulating, shouting instructions, never setting a good example to young schoolboys. Many schools now do not have the teachers who are able to coach rugby and so they find past pupils, university students or someone interested in the game to do the coaching but unless these people understand that rugby coaching at school is part of education, they do more harm than good. Headmasters of schools should have a look at this situation -- it is seriously bad. Third is the attitude of some of the younger players on the field who now believe that tugging jerseys, pushing an opponent, throwing the ball forcefully on to the ground to express disgust with the referee, himself or his opponent is normal practice. If, as I say, sport at school is part of education, then we should make very sure that boys behave themselves but if adult spectators and adult coaches do not set a good example this will not happen - then there is no case for coaching sport at schools.

I do believe that rugby at school level in South Africa is, in the ways I have described ,reaching an all-time low -- perhaps a reflection of a society in a mess.

LIFE SKILLS AND RUGBY

Basil Bey — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:30:00 GMT

Hitting the newspapers this week have been stories covering the violence that has occurred in two of the country’s rugby centres over the weekend – one involving unruly spectators crudely armed with a variety of weapons attacking players, the other, on the field savagery that spread from a couple of players to both teams. As usual, there were racial overtones. As a coach, I was, some years ago, present at the initial inter-race rugby match played at 1st Division club level in Cape Town. It was not pleasant as we became the butt of some pretty foul language from opponents and spectators alike on and off the field (some of our members had been foolish enough to bring their wives and girlfriends to the game, so you can imagine the sort of comments that were made). Since then, most white clubs have become racially mixed but, sadly, they still sometimes have to put up with all sorts of abuse especially in lower rugby divisions. However, this sort of behaviour is not only one-way; we read of an all-white Wanderers team being accused of similar behaviour towards their other race opponents in Johannesburg. In Cape Town, the Western Province Rugby Union has tended to turn a blind eye to the sort of crude thuggery that occurs on some club rugby fields in their union - believe me, there is not just a bit of it. It is time for fierce action from the union and from SARFU.

What, you may ask, has this to do with schools? Schools tend to reflect society, hence the aggression we are experiencing in some of our classrooms. Discipline barely exists in some schools.

For what sort of life are we preparing our children? What sort of example do we set for them?

Recently at a schools’ rugby match, a parent became incensed when a coach remonstrated with him for the sort of derogatory abuse he was hurling at the English-speaking under 14 boys (souties and so on) who were playing at the time (against boys who were predominantly Afrikaans). The result – the parent swung a flat hand at the (coloured) coach’s face; fortunately the coach pulled back and so was struck only a glancing blow. A charge of assault has, I believe, been brought against the assailant but that is by no means enough. What damage is this fellow doing in our society – does he go to every game at his (his son’s) school and shout similar inflammatory remarks at kids? What effect does this have on his son and the other children – and on the school? Is he using rugby to get revenge on society? What about his fellow parents who throng the touchline – do they tolerate this? They seemed to do so; do I then assume that they all share his antipathy towards English speaking South Africans? Rainbow nation? Nation?

In several of the games on that Saturday morning, there were scuffles between players and that is simply just not acceptable and must not be tolerated at any level of the game. We teachers use sport as an educational tool – or do we not? Perhaps we just want to win in order to appease our inferiority feelings and to gain, vicariously, feelings of superiority. “We are the strongest school in the country and have produced 900 Springboks” type-of-thing! So bloody what? Have you educated your children in proper behaviour, in how to respond to pressure in an acceptable way, how to be a sportsman, a gentleman although a competitor? We must develop a proper perspective amongst our children but that will not be easy when we have parents such as I describe (as well as fighting, racial slurs and reprehensible violence from spectators at all levels of the game). If the parents cannot set the example and prepare their children for a decent life and give them wholesome attitudes then we schoolmasters must. There should be an absolute intolerance of any intemperate display by a schoolboy on the rugby field or any sports field. It is more difficult to handle the parents but we cannot have the sort of behaviour I describe. We should ban unpleasant parents from attending matches at our schools.

On the same day as the assault on the side of the field, in the 1st XV game between the same two schools, a try was scored by the visiting team and the black referee (an excellent ref) awarded it but the touch judge (a white adult in the referee’s garb of his province) advised the ref that it was no try, so it was disallowed. Video footage, taken by a professional photographer, shows clearly that the touch-judge was unsighted and that in fact a try was scored. If the decision from the touch-judge was nothing more or less than a guess, then he is not fit to be a referee. The question asked by many is does he have any connection with the home side? If he does, there is even more reason for him not to have given his unsighted ruling, is there not? The points I am making are that we adults are losing proper perspective and are not setting the right example.

It is of the utmost importance that all coaches, referees, spectators involved with schoolboy rugby behave impeccably and see that the youngsters follow that example.

I was amused to read on the website or blog of one of the English schools recently on a rugby tour in South Africa that they had narrowly failed to beat one of the top schools 1st XV’s in the penultimate game of the tour whereas, in fact, they knew that they were not playing a 1st XV but were playing a side made up of non-first teamers, boys who would be returning to school in the following year. That report (or lie) is another example of losing perspective!

Under 18 Craven Week....(after Tuesday's games)

ClassicClashes — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:09:00 GMT

This was written last week, before Western Province’s victory over Free State – looks at the scoreboard, as they say)

Apologies for my error in writing last week that the Under 16 W.P. provincial team played against Paarl Gym in preparation for their “Craven Week”; in fact they played Paarl Boys – probably just as well for them; we'll see what happens in the Inter Schools'. However, my mistake in no way blunts the point I was making.

Province have every right to be proud and thrilled at ending up as the top side in this competition.

It has been an absolute pleasure to watch the under 18 Craven week teams playing rugby in this past week; quite frankly, the modern rugby game has become something of a drag and I have become more than weary of watching virtually stationary ruck after stationary ruck, as the various teams try to consolidate in order to create a 'platform' from which to launch an attack (forgive all the rugby clichés). I still have to work out why a set scrum, a lineout or a kick-off are not suitable 'platforms' from which to launch attacks but a ruck is; so, we have to watch players running into contact over and over again in order to set up rucks, the first of which leads to many more, and only when 15 or more (a mild exaggeration) rucks have been achieved is it deemed reasonable to pass the ball to anyone other than a close-lining, bashing lump of brainless meat.

The schoolboys have been an absolute delight for they are prepared to attack from any good ball, and that includes what most senior sides would label a 50/50 ball; furthermore, they do so successfully more often than not. It really is quite depressing to watch even Currie Cup teams playing the sort of limited rugby that they do. These Craven Week lads get the ball to the wing more often in one game than the average Currie Cup or even International team does in a season. In senior games, wings are selected now on their ability to catch a high ball and to kick.

These Craven Week schoolboys manage to create far more space than most international sides -- one must ask why. Is it because the defence systems of the boys are inferior to those employed by provincial and national sites? I do not think so; I believe the reason is that the younger lads have a more positive attitude and their free spirits have not yet been made stale by repetitive drilling.

I imagine that most coaches of Craven Week sides are schoolmasters; being such, they are thus more sensitive to the potential within each of their players, whereas coaches of senior national, provincial and even club sides tend to be insensitive, more negative and they drill players in restricted tactics so as not to make mistakes - they limit players rather than encourage them to be expansive, to create something from nothing or even from something!

A sculptor takes a rock and through sensitive and inspired shaping, he can produce a piece of wondrous art; he has the ability to see the potential in the stone and has the talent to make it an actuality. That is what a good coach does with a rugby player. Obviously, the sculptor will, as far as possible, choose his piece of stone to suit his vision whereas a school teacher in the classroom must make do with what he is given as must the Under 14 D rugby coach at school. I know from experience how easy it is to coach talented lads at the top of the school -- one really does not have to be a genius to make them into a good unit; the fellows who have to work hard are those who coach the less talented junior boys. I've often wondered how well some national coaches would do with ordinary club sides. It is easier to coach the Stellenbosch 1st XV than it is to coach the False Bay 1st XV, no insult to False Bay!

I stray. On several occasions the commentators have remarked upon the extraordinarily high standard of play that we have seen in this week, so far. Certainly, South Africa is brimming with rugby talent so there should be no excuse in future years for not to producing outstanding Springbok teams, although of course we cannot discount the damage that politicians do.

Highlights for me, so far: the Natal/Free State game was a real humdinger and Western Province also produced some magic but there is still much to come. Interesting, too, to see the Academy lads playing with such skill and confidence -- what talent! One wonders how some of them did not make their provincial sides. Then, too, let us not forget those other gifted lads who were not fortunate enough to gain selection for Craven Week. Certainly, our cup is running over -- let us try not to knock it over!

Do remember this was written last week - since then Province has beaten the Free State lads in the final in a somewhat disappointing match but one must remember that these lads had played a lot of rugby in a short space of time. Province stuck to their task with commendable guts while I think it fair to say that their opponents failed to make full use of their opportunities

LET US BE HONEST ABOUT CRAVEN WEEK.....

ClassicClashes — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 09:42:00 GMT

Did you know that the Western Province Under 16 “Craven Week” team, before their “week” began this year, played a match against Paarl Gym Under 16’s in order to prepare themselves for the “Craven Week”? Guess who won. Paarl Gym, of course! Now there is nothing wrong with that, nothing at all but I do want understandably enthusiastic parents of those chosen for the provincial (representative?) team and the many disappointed parents of talented rugby youngsters who were not selected to understand that these “Craven Week” age groups teams are not, emphatically not, selected on merit alone (if at all); there is a hefty, compulsory quota system in place that prevents that happening.

There are many unhappy and disillusioned folk who have lost all faith in the concept of under-age provincial teams - parents, schoolmasters and youngsters, and their reaction is not surprising because they believe(d) the squads to be made up of the best in the province. Well, now know they are not! Why, then, is it not made clear to all that these “quota” teams are there as an aid to development of those who haven’t had the privilege of attending schools where rugby coaching is of a decent standard - or are we trying to bluff ourselves? There is no doubt that there are some excellent players who do gain choice but there are as many who do not. The “rugby” universities who offer scholarships to talented rugby players no longer fuss too much over Craven Week – they gain more from keeping an eye on schools’ tournaments, so please do not feel disillusioned if your lad has failed to make it. You would be quite shocked, anyway, to find out how few S.A. Schools players eventually make the Bok team, so cheer up!

The trouble is that from fairly early in the season these age “squads” are expected to turn up for “provincial” practices, so they actually miss out on their school practices; to me, that is just simply unacceptable and I do believe that schools should refuse to release boys for such. What they learn there is pretty much nothing, anyway as sometimes all they do is to run up and down the field, “training” (as though they are not trained by their schools!) – and what about the disrupted school teams who are forced to work at a team game without some important cogs? What is more important, Bishops vs Rondebosch, Paarl Gym vs Boys High or a “Craven Week” practice?

Let us have it all out in the open. What is the quota of white lads that must be in the “Craven” teams? If you work that out on the basis of the number of whites in our population, there should be very few but the truth is that you cannot afford to select that way for at the moment your team would be far too weak! As it happens, there is no such quota where whites are concerned (in the apartheid era there was 100% quota system in favour of whites); but there is a quota for so-called black people. What is it? I am told it is 50%. Can someone corroborate that? Is a quota system imposed upon children who were not even born when apartheid ruled the roost, right and honourable? I think not.

In short, Craven Week is now a “development” week and it is something we need but let’s at least see it for what it is and be proud of it.

The Perfect Rugby Player:

ClassicClashes — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:50:00 GMT

1.Is a gentleman. 2.Is not selfish. 3.Has physical courage 4.allied with good sense. 5.Has initiative and uses it. 6.Is proud 7.but humble. 8.Respects his opponents. 9.Uses his brains as much as or even more than his bulk. 10.Learns from his errors 11.but is not afraid to make them. 12.Is individual enough to be different. 13.Can lead but also knows how and when to follow 14.and thus understands the word “team” 15.but is neither sheep nor puppet. 16.Is passionate 17.but does not allow that to cloud his brain. 18.Has athletic ability 19.and ball sense. 20.Loves rugby for its own sake.

CRAVEN WEEK....

Basil Bey — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:07:00 GMT

When Craven week was first introduced, Western Province schools decided not to take part in it for they felt that provincial colours, even at junior level, for rugby players still at school was not a very good thing. In the end Province capitulated but insisted that their Craven Week team be selected not on merit - they wanted as many schools as possible to be represented in the side. Strangely enough the side that was selected proved to be a very good one probably because schools rugby in that part of the world was, and still is, very strong. Inevitably, however, the schools gave in and teams were (apparently) selected on merit -- I say apparently because I have known very few schoolmasters who are unbiased selectors! Not satisfied with only an under 19 Craven Week, some pushed for a junior schools' Craven Week, a shocking idea, but we now have not only an under 13 Craven Week but also an under 16 provincial team. Anyone who has coached rugby at school knows how quickly youngsters change as they grow older; boys who were big and strong at under 13 level sometimes don't develop and end up a small adults whereas the skinny little fellows grow up to be giants. The idea of these junior provincial sides is apparently to spot talent early on and to nurture it so that brought through to adulthood is a supergroup of rugby players who eventually end up in the senior (adult) provincial team. It does not work.

It has long been my desire to select a team of non-Craven Week players to send on an overseas tour just to prove to everyone how many excellent players have been ignored by schools' provincial selectors. However, as a schoolmaster, I do not have the cash to enable me to do so. At the end of one Craven Week some years ago, the national schools' side was selected as always; Ian Kirkpatrick and Dougie Dyers were asked to select, from the rest, a mixed race side to play against the national side. They did so and their side won handsomely. So much for Craven Week selections! Many school teachers have commented on the fact that players returning from Craven Week to ordinary school rugby are often found to be somewhat arrogant and do not fit in well with the rest of the team.
No doubt you have gathered that I'm wholly opposed to schoolboy provincial sides. In this country there are certain great rugby schools; their coaches are good so, year after year, they produce outstanding players. These youngsters do not need a Craven Week for development because their schools have already developed them. Were Craven week to be used only for development of non-developed players, I should support it wholeheartedly.
Sadly, internal school tours have become fewer and fewer mainly because schools holidays have been standardised throughout the country, so we all go on holiday together, or pretty much so. In the old days, for example, Western Province schools had holidays while Natal schools were in term time and so they were able to host touring teams from Province. One of the most marvellous tours you could undertake in those days was to Zimbabwe (Rhodesia); those would last up to 3 weeks! These tours used to take place in June at the same time as Craven Week. If schools undertook to tour during that time, either they did so without their Craven Week players or their players made themselves unavailable for Craven Week. Very seldom indeed did a boy choose the possibility of Craven Week selection above his school tour. Quite right, too.
The universities' tournament sponsored by First National Bank has become a much more fertile field in which to spot talent than Craven Week, mainly because those playing for the universities have gained their places in the team purely on merit and that is certainly not true of Craven Week players. I do believe that talent scouts would do better to watch schoolboy tournaments such as the ones run by St Stithians, St John's, Grey (P.E.) and so on. These school tournaments are much more fun and so much more enjoyable to watch -- there is a spirit involved which cannot be matched in Craven Week.
Time to get rid of Craven Week!

David and Goliath.....

Basil Bey — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 07:39:00 GMT

I believe that the sides that consistently produce the finest rugby are those that have had to struggle against some considerable obstacle – such as the Wallabies who do not have nearly the numbers of such countries as South Africa, New Zealand, England, Scotland Ireland and Wales.

When there is a problem, either you find a solution to it or you give up; if there is no problem you keep going the same old way – think of the American cliché, “If it aint bust don’t fix it!” In times of stress, either you fold up or you fight by coming up with a solution. It is not for nothing that horrible wars have produced so many world-changing inventions – inventions originally intended to help to destroy but which, ironically, have in the end been used for the betterment of mankind (unlike most wars).

If you are not under pressure, you tend to coast, to stagnate (psychologists call this state of being, homeostasis – you are too comfortable for your own good); you need a pin stuck in your backside to make you jump. This certainly applies to rugby. New Zealand rugby has in the last couple of years had just such a pin darted into its nether regions, so we had better watch out. South Africa also suffered greatly after isolation – that was a large, blunt needle rather than a pin! England complacently thunder (blunder?) on with their incessant rolling mauls (but do remember their magnificent performance in two world wars and so do not underrate them) – they seem impervious to mere pinpricks as well as to harpoons. How much will they suffer before they change their approach? South Africa are at the crossroads, I believe; they have the tight players to enable them to get away with a fairly defensive approach as well as the loose forwards and backs which can make them devastating in attack; it seems that we cannot always combine the two to produce the perfect game (the Blue Bulls can!).

What has this to do with schools’ rugby? Well, as a wise old man instructed me a couple of days ago, schools reflect the behaviour of adult society so, I suppose, schools’ rugby should mirror adult rugby. Schools that play dirty rugby then should have parents who reflect their children’s unpleasant attributes. Certainly, the schools with large rugby-playing numbers tend to produce the sort of rugby that the Boks traditionally play – somewhat safety-first and based on forward power.

The point at which I am so painfully arriving is that so often the smaller schools, those with fewer numbers, are the ones inventive enough to produce a style of their own, a style that suits their particular strengths only because, to stay alive in top competition, they must do so or else sink. I know I am painting with a broad brush for not all big schools play conservative rugby nor do all small schools play daring or inventive rugby, but generally speaking they do. I think of such fine rugby schools as St Andrews, Grahamstown, a relatively small school that for many, many years has turned out competitive teams playing an exciting brand of rugby. I glance at the weekend’s results and see Selborne 28, St Andrews 25 – close stuff (always is between those two). I look at Boland Landbou’s result against Paarl Boys High – Boland 23 Paarl 19! What a wonderful victory for a school that has only about 350 pupils (if that) – and they produce the goods year after year. I do remember what tremendous opposition the small Catholic School St Aidan’s used to give much larger schools - and Woodridge still does. There is something so heartening about schools like that as opposed to the “big bully boys”.

Some rugby schools are very nearly professional now (with all that being professional means); no longer does the 1^st XV have one or maybe two coaches; no! it has four or five plus a medical team, a fitness expert and so on. I do feel that many of those schools are losing their character as they are being suffocated by “the professional approach”. The game in many parts of the world is standing still as we all copy one another in the subdue and penetrate, patient game of retaining possession through phase after phase (I cheered yesterday when, in the Lions match in Eastern Province, after eleven successive phases, the Lions lost the ball in going for the twelfth – that’s what “patience” gets you!).

Changes occur only when there is discomfort, so guess who goes beserk with joy every time a big school loses to a small one! Why do I cheer like this – because rugby is becoming boring; the big schools seldom lose and therefore seldom change their approach - nine times out of ten a very negative one! Hats off to Boland Landbou who beat Paarl Boys High last week!

My money is on Paarl Gym for their big inter-schools derby with Boys High later this season.

Leadership....

Basil Bey — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:55:00 GMT

What is your opinion on leadership? We keep stressing at schools that leadership skills can be taught – but can they? It is, of course, sensible to point out that there are many kinds of leadership: the leader on a battlefield will not necessarily have or need the same qualities as the headmaster of a school; the president of a country will have need of aptitudes and abilities different from those possessed and required by the Pope … and so on. Of course we do have many who are in positions of leadership who just do not have the talent required - they should not be where they are but get there through ambition, bias, politics, someone else’s bad judgement, wealth or sometimes a committee’s poor assessment.

In recent weeks while watching school rugby matches, I have tried to focus on team captains, leaders. I stand behind the posts to hear what they say to their teams when a try has been scored against them; it has been most interesting. The truth of the matter is that the coach normally manages to get in amongst the players while they wait for the conversion to be taken and so any influence the captain might have is to a large extent nullified. Do you become as impatient as I do with these bloody coaches who want so badly to win that they forget that this game that is being played is part of boys’ education? The score against them puts them all under pressure, the very game puts them under duress; our job as coach is to watch them react to this pressure, so that we can guide them in the right ways but we must first allow them to respond to the situation. The worst thing that has happened to schoolboy rugby has been to allow coaches on to the field at half time – indeed, at any time! Let the captain and the vice-captain, the players make the decisions.

Then, too, there will always be others in the team who are also leaders, others who, with a quiet word here and another there, can keep fellow players motivated, calm, controlled and pointed in the right direction – that is precisely what teamwork is about but the coach nowadays tends, crudely, to burst through all this fine network with his hoarse exhortations and loud rhetoric; surely he should leave the problems on the field to those playing the game. Most of education is about learning through one’s mistakes is it not? If in maths you mismanage a calculation, your effort is marked with a cross and you are shown where you erred, so you learn! The rugby field for a youngster is an open-air classroom; let him learn through his miscalculations and then educate him by showing him the right way. If you as a coach are going to shout instructions at the team throughout the game, how are players ever going to learn to make their own decisions and how does a leader ever learn about leadership?

At many schools we have leadership courses, some of which are quite ineffective. The one place you can learn to lead is on a sportsfield, because it involves real leadership in real situations - they are not artificially created. We all realise, I think, that “C’mon boys” is not more than mere sound waves – it means absolutely nothing. We should like to hear a captain say something meaningful, like, “Line a bit deeper and don’t run until the flyhalf touches the ball. Harry, watch that blindside! Peter, good scrumming, keep it up.” But if the coach is going to take over completely and utterly as most coaches of schoolboys tend to do, then the boys are missing out on most valuable opportunities to learn essential life lessons.

My plea to the coaches is please shut up and let the boys play the game; you can talk to them afterwards, off the field, if you don’t mind and for heaven’s sake keep out of their tactile half-time and end of game huddles. Remember who and what you are! At the moment you are spoiling something that could be wonderful.

Text Book Rugby

Basil Bey — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:25:00 GMT

A wise, and now old, referee, many years ago remarked to me that the referee is the law book. How true. Once you are on the field, the law book takes second place to the ref and if you do not play to his idiosyncrasies, then you are a fool, so don’t complain about the ref but learn to read him! I do recall playing with an extraordinarily talented scrumhalf, Des Christian. We were involved in a vital club game and Des was penalised in our first three scrums for putting the ball in under our feet. When I remonstrated with him, he said, “Don’t worry skipper, in the end the ref will become embarrassed at penalisng me all the time and he will let it go.” Des was right, and we won all our own ball with ease for the rest of the game (not easy in the Eighteen Hundreds!). Des read the referee beautifully well.

The trouble with modern rugby is the tackled ball; the ball on the ground after the tackle results in the most number of penalties and free kicks awarded; there are so many (more than a few of them seemingly haphazardly awarded) that continuity goes out of the window and the game becomes a ragged affair. The IRB, instead of fiddling with trivial law changes really should do something about the laws governing ruck ball and tackled ball but they seem strangely reluctant to grasp the nettle! One can hardly blame the players for their transgressions in these phases as so many of the decisions are based on interpretations rather than on the letter of the law. How often do we see the ball lying like a newly laid egg outside the ruck with the scrumhalf (looking so bloody stupid) hanging over it like a vulture, delaying his pass (the theory is that if a ball emerges slowly, then no. 9 must take his time in order that the inevitable drive on the fringe can be set up); the scrumhalf knows he is safe for, although the ball is palpably out of the ruck, the interpretation is that the ruck is not over until the scrummy touches the ball, or so it seems. Some of the more enlightened referees do sometimes shout, “The ball is out,” and I could kiss them, but fortunately for them I cannot reach them!

My answer to this problem is to tell the players to stay on their feet, pass before contact and thus keep the ball off the ground – and be there to support! There are far too many rucks in rugby because the blueprint insists that you take contact and take the ball to ground to ensure possession in order to create a thousand bloody phases! I love first phase ball! By the way, does the modern coach consider a pass to be a phase?

Do you remember, some of you, the days when the offside line from scrum, lineout, loose scrum, ran through the ball? That meant that the half backs had to be quick; on attack, to gain space, the backs lined to the corner flag! Lovely days! No place for a scrumhalf or flyhalf who was slow-moving or slow-thinking in those days because fractions of a second counted (I believe they still do if you are going to play an attacking game).

Too often the modern game is played to a rigid blueprint and, frankly, it becomes a bore. It is my belief, too, that it is the easiest way to coach; if you coach and play by the book, then neither coach nor player needs to think much. It is laughable to see in some under-age schoolboy games, a skinny little fellow trying to “take the ball up” and losing the ball in the contact which he was seeking!

I read in the Cape Argus, that Rondebosch Boys High 1^st XV in playing Paarl Boys, to whom they just lost, (Paarl, always a good side) erred in “their decision to run with the ball in hand on the limited occasions they got it late in the second half”. If you are not getting much of the ball, you certainly don’t want to kick it away! Yes, it was wet and that can limit the scope of the game you play but I do not believe that it necessarily does that any more than I believe that you cannot pass the ball on a wet field. What do you do if you are losing and because you are not getting plentiful ball, you are forced to play much of the game in your own half? Kick the ball and have it kicked back or kick for touch and lose the lineout because it is the opponents’ ball after all? The Rondebosch coaches are not foolish men; both are very experienced and both played top-class rugby; they do know what they are doing.

Even on a dry day it is much more difficult to play an expansive game than it is to play a restricted or constipated one – both require structure but the former requires infinitely more skill than the latter. It is brave (some say foolish) to move the ball in wet conditions but it can be done effectively, as we saw in the Universities’ Tournament. Rugby is becoming a “negative” game; we should applaud Rondebosch for their positivity.

What those who coach schoolboys must quickly learn is to cut their coats according to their cloth – the game plan must suit the talent – we can’t all play as the Sprinboks do if we do not have a powerful pack of forwards; so what do you do? Send a message to your opponents saying, sorry, can’t play on Saturday; it’s raining. Or do you become clever, play wide, speed the game up, force the opponents to run more than they want to run, avoid contact, pass early and support and so on. The tactics used by too many school sides do not in any way cater for strengths and weaknesses of that particular bunch. The way some of us are going suggests to me that before we play we should weigh each side and then award the victory to the heavier team and thus avoid the necessity of playing a rough game on a wet field! Alternatively we could award the game to the team that bench-presses the most weight. Certainly most teams, and I do not mean only school boy teams, are playing to a common blueprint that suits a big, unimaginative, physically strong, kicking side that enjoys contact more than skill. The game has become too predictable – it is in a rut! A slough of despond!

Bless Rondebosch for running from inside its own half and daring to pass the ball!

Fire in Your Belly but Ice in Your Veins...

Basil Bey — Mon, 25 May 2009 10:54:00 GMT

I don’t know who coined this phrase; I do know he was a rugby man and he was, I believe, describing what should be one’s ideal emotional state before a game.

Very early, in the murky light of a Cape Town Saturday morning, I stood on a wet field watching the boys from two “opposing” schools warming up before the first games of the day and was somewhat bemused by all the shouting that was going on. It seems to be very much the style nowadays. Common to both lots as they ran through their routines was the oft repeated exhortation: “C’mon bhoys!” – definitely ‘bhoys’ and not ‘boys’. Perhaps it was too early for me for I found myself becoming profoundly irritated by all this, especially because the coaches were leading the choirs. It reminded me of a modern cricket game. Has any of you watched a school cricket match recently? The field noise is indescribable and, like most of the rugby babble, pretty much empty of any real meaning (“c’mon bhoys” is very popular here, too). No wonder the expression “It’s not cricket” has been dropped from common English - cricket is certainly not what it was, and nor is rugby what it was!

Surely, to prepare yourself properly for any sport that demands physical commitment as well as cold, calculating judgement you need quiet – or am I wrong? In the old days when you leaped into battle whirling your broadsword around your head, painted your face ferocious colours and hacked at anything that moved, you yelled loudly and coarsely in order to terrify your enemy but there really was little science in battle in those days and you were horribly vulnerable to serious damage so, to give yourself courage (really to bluff yourself and your opponent), you bellowed like a bull being castrated as you rushed headlong into the fray; hence the term “war-cry”. But rugby is not a war and as much as I should want to dominate my opponent physically, I also want to out-think him: all this grunting, hugging, singing and war-crying before a game does not make for a cool head!

I believe the best advice you can give to any rugby player is, “Think through your game before you play it!” By that I mean face the facts, don’t fantasise; whatever is your job in the game, steel yourself to do it well. If your opponents are bigger, stronger, quicker than you are, the only way you can beat them is by being clever – so, be clever! Shouting, hugging, singing (and dancing if you are a politician or objecting to something) are all very well for a short time, for the courage that these engender, the enthusiasm for combat that is fired, the wild passion, are all too short-lived. Your game should be calculated carefully, paced, controlled and manipulated. You can’t do that if you are seeing red. I used to tell my sides to keep calm especially in the first ten minutes of the contest as, after that, the artificial courage and steam engendered by war-cries etc will have dissipated and the “enemy”, having had no effect on their stoical opponents, will be beginning to feel more than just a little flat.

I have nothing against emotion as long as it is controlled. I do remember when Palmade, the French referee who spent some time refereeing in South Africa, reprimanded a player for giving a congratulatory hug to his fellow who had just scored a try. He said,” Hey! None of that here!” That is what rugby used to be like; controlled emotion becomes strength, expressed emotion (on the rugby field), is weakness, like tears. Many people won’t like what I say.

Well, I watched much of this sort of thing on Saturday and saw some passionate mistakes being made because boys were “worked-up”. One player stormed about the field muttering, “I’m going to kill him, I’m going to kill him!” because he felt he had been man-handled by an opponent. He would have been much better off putting his strong feelings into legitimate physical action in the game and his team would have benfited, too! Rugby does arouse strong feelings amongst players and that is why we coach it at schools - so that we can teach boys how to control their strong feelings. If they are not put into such situations which arouse passion how can we teach them how to handle it?

So what?

So, I believe many coaches of schoolboys have the wrong approach and overdo what they call “motivation”; motivation is good only if of the right sort. Self-control is the thing but a coach has little chance of inculcating that in his players if he cannot control his big mouth during, before or after the game. Team war cries on the field before or after the contests should be banned. Let’s have some decorum, some modesty, some self-control.

I think I am getting old!

STORM IN A TEACUP.....

Basil Bey — Tue, 19 May 2009 10:16:00 GMT

The Sharks Bull’s game produced quite the finest rugby I have seen since I watched my last schoolboy match – talking of which recalls the disappointment of all of us rugger buggers at having so many inter-school matches in Cape Town cancelled on Saturday because of the rain. However, despite the dire predictions of the weather-man, here in Cape Town it was a beautiful day for rugby! There was, indeed, some heavy early morning rain, but as these were the first real winter rains, the fields soaked up the water and remained firm enough for each to host a number of matches. Perhaps, though, it was not quite the same for those closer to the mountains.

The weather-man did us no favours and as a result of his dark threats of violent storms a few thousand youngsters were left feeling flat at the anti-climax of being told on their arrival at the fields, which looked great, “Sorry, all games cancelled!” In this part of the Cape we have been told to expect a very wet winter, so, if we are going to continue to cancel at the first brush of rain, it is doubtful that we shall have much schools’ rugby this year. After all, the game was made for wet weather originating as it did in England! As it is, our season has been somewhat truncated in the last couple of years. Last year I was told that that was done to enable boys to play a bit of soccer at the end of the season – but why on earth should we want to do that amongst the rugby schools? This season I see that the season closes on the penultimate Saturday of August. Why not on the last Saturday as we have done for so many years? The lads train hard to get fit for this rigorous sport but if they do not play for the 1^st XV they get so little of it. I have always felt that in Natal and the Transvaal the season’s span is ridiculously short and I have been pleased that we have not succumbed to sharing our rugby season in the Cape with other sports - it seems we are giving in (or are the schoolmasters just lazy?). The average number of games per season for all age groups ten or so years ago was sixteen (excluding tours), 10 in the first rugby term and 6 in the second. That is 4 months of rugby (out 6 but subtract one for the holidays). Now you are fortunate if you manage to fit in 13.

A glance at the SACS rugby website a minute ago brought home to me just how upset the players were at the cancellation of the 20 or so matches that would have been played between the school and Bishops on Saturday. Even if the coaches do manage to play them mid-week, there is in such games never quite the same atmosphere that one enjoys on a Saturday morning when 19 curtain-raisers build up to the 1^st XV climax.

Returning to the Sharks/Bulls game, I should like to comment on the most positive way both sides played the game (apart for some stupid foul play from men who should know better). Because the Sharks had to score four tries to stay in the competition they did! Yet in their previous 3 or so games they struggled to score any. What was the difference? It was their attitude, their approach to the game, not the laws, the ELV’s or even the referee! It was the attitude of both teams – both teams played rugby the way schoolboys play it – and that is a compliment not an insult; they were creative, used the width of the field, passed more often than they kicked, supported well, moved the ball in contact as well as before it and they rucked the ball back quickly – the defences were excellent!

So much modern rugby is negative and that, as I maintain, is the fault of the coach(es). We are told time and again that the modern defence methods are so effective that it is impossible to score tries from set pieces; therefore we have this repetitive boredom of watching the ball being taken up and to ground apparently in order to get rid of the set piece but what is produced is, in fact, a mega set-piece that is so slow it becomes a tableau in the sense of being still, motionless! Would it not be wonderful if all rugby were played in the exciting, attacking way that this was?

A compliment to the Grey Bloemfontein rugby players who destroyed Affies over the weekend – earlier in the season, they were involved in one of their usual journeys somewhere to play rugby and were put up overnight by the local folk; just where and exactly by whom I am not sure for, while I was listening to this story, I was trying to watch a game of rugby and so was lending only half an ear. However, the gist of the tale was that the Grey rugby players were perfect guests, wonderfully behaved and, above all, extremely humble in attitude. This, all you parents who think all your geese are swans and coaches who coach for your own ego, this is why we coach rugby at schools – not to win at all costs nor for your ego’s sake but to teach youngsters the right attitudes, the sort that go to making the world a lot better than it is most of the time! I don’t know where Bakkies Botha went to school; please don’t tell me it was Grey!!

The Good and the Bad....

Basil Bey — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:59:00 GMT

Why do people watch rugby? Some because they love it, others because they fanatically support some particular side for whatever reason -- perhaps because they find it vicariously satisfying to see the side with which they identify beating up their opponents. They feel as though they are doing the beating and in that way they get rid of some nasty hangups. Judging from all the booing that we get at Newlands nowadays, I should say that there are many, many people with some terrible hangups. Traditionally, that sort of person used to watch soccer rather than rugby but really should rather watch neither.

On Saturday morning I was privileged to observe some fine games of schoolboy rugby played in magnificent surroundings on a beautiful field. The grandstand was full and spectators surrounded the field. Support for both sides was hearty but what was most impressive was the fact that when either side kicked for the posts, there was absolutely dead silence. It was, in fact, quite an emotional experience to be there at those moments in that large, absolutely silent crowd. Of course, that silence used to be traditional all over the rugby playing world. How different it was at Newlands on Saturday evening! What has happened to us that we no longer observe the principles or sportsmanship, sometimes both on and off the field? I have recently met a number of people who will not go to watch any rugby at Newlands although they have tickets; they all say pretty much the same thing -- they can no longer take the boorish behaviour of many of the spectators. I should be pleased to see the price of tickets to go up substantially, as perhaps that would dissuade some of those with the terrible hang-ups to remain at home or stay in the pub and watch it there on the box ; then they will be able to boo to their hearts content and drink heavily at the same time without offending anyone (maybe)!

Last week I did say how important I felt it was that the people who had anything to do with teaching, and that includes coaching, schoolboys should be above reproach. Well, this Saturday morning I was pleased to be at an educational institution where this is so obviously the case. It is most heartening to spend a morning watching schoolboy rugby in such environs. The games were of a very high standard, like the behaviour of the boys playing and those watching; sadly, Newlands really was an anticlimax despite the home side's splendid win. The morning's rugby had left me stimulated; it was not only the rugby, in fact, but also the wholesomeness of the environment, the spirit of it all, the celebration of sport between two fine schools. Newlands left me feeling mildly soiled and that was not only because I had sunk a few beers in the box!

It is not only the spectators at Newlands that worry me but also the rather wooden character of the modern game of rugby. The ELV's were brought into the game in an effort to find ways of making rugby more attractive for the spectator and easier for the referee. Because the game is now a professional one players must be paid. In order to garner money with which to pay them, those who run our game must persuade the public that they have something worthwhile to sell. But do they? Surely, we have never seen so much kicking in the game of rugby as we are seeing presently! Soon those who fiddle with the laws of rugby will discard some of the ELV's and retain others. I believe you will see that there is no profound change, in fact; the tackle and ruck will remain the biggest problems in the game. The rolling maul will again be inviolate and, ridiculously, the only ELV's that will remain will be those that do not count for much at all!

I do long for the days when the game did not allow for coaches on the field or teams off the field at half-time; I preferred it when the captain ran his own side and the coach was unable to make contact with him until after the game. The American idea of having a bench of replacements leaves me stone cold. Rugby Union is now much more like American football or rather a combination of American football and league rugby and so has become quite predictable. The initiative has been taken away from the players and rests solely with the coach, or should I say coaches -- all 10 of them! Talk about analysis by analysis -- we have it!

I also worry because some of the school sides are beginning to play American football/league rugby rugby but, fortunately, very few and so generally speaking the schoolboy game has much more spark to it than the 'senior' game. I always laugh when I hear commentators suggesting that schoolboys should follow the example of some particular senior player because I know that it should be the other way around.

THERE’S MORE TO IT ALL....

Basil Bey — Tue, 05 May 2009 07:45:00 GMT

I thought you might enjoy this observation by G.K.Chesterton;

'Humility is the mother of giants. One sees great things from the valley; only small things from the peak.'

Do you think schoolboys are being taught humility in amongst their studies and out on the sportsfields, in their school societies, their school boarding houses and their homes? To judge from some of the behaviour prevalent in South African society, I should suggest that it in many cases it is most unlikely. I do believe that the child truly is the father of the man, as the cliché confidently avers, thus education must begin with the young.

However, let me move to other related matter.

At the recent schoolboy rugby tournament so well organised by Wynberg Boys’ High School, it was for me comforting to see that all schools rugby teams have not as yet entirely sold their souls to the rather wooden, mechanical rugby being dished up by many brain-washed Super 14 and northern hemisphere teams; some have, however, made the sale. One can predict pretty accurately the method of play, the tactics of these sides. For example, from a set piece the flyhalf or centre is likely to switch pass to another flat-lining back, fullback or blindside wing, who, usually, will run through straight, right into contact, quite deliberately, in order to force a ruck (the destroyer of the fluent game); from that ruck the attacker will hope, among other things, to have given his team more space on the blindside, though, as often as not his action leads to a free kick or a penalty. Should the ball be recycled slowly, the receiving side will marshal its forces on the ruck’s edge and manfully charge forward once again, quite deliberately making contact and going to ground. It is called “taking the ball up”. This manoeuvre (if you can call something so simple a manoeuvre) can be repeated many times (and that is called “having patience”, a procedure highly rated by too many coaches and some commentators in the boredom of the modern game). Having been taken up several times with small advance, the ball will then most probably be kicked - but not into touch - and the opponents will not counter-attack, not with ball in hand, anyway (those days are going fast), but with a copy-cat speculative kick downfield, awaiting a fumbled catch or a poor kick in reply to justify the initial mind-bending decision (instruction) to kick into the opponents’ territory.

Oh God! It is so dull!

What is happening is that we are all losing our identities in this game; we used to build our game around our players but now we are doing the opposite and so many very talented individuals are being suffocated, smothered and converted into masses by the humdrum, ordinary, unimaginative game visited upon them by their coaches who lack the initiative or the know-how to teach “total” rugby, as Greenwood called it, and can, because of their own limitations, only follow the lead of others. This is a terribly negative comment to make but it cannot be denied – if you doubt it, go to watch the warm-ups before schoolboy games and there you will see drill after drill being directed by insistent and loud-mouthed coaches shouting such inanities as : “Hold, hold, press!” and then, perhaps, you will understand why some games would appear to be played by automatons. Part of what has always made rugby such an exciting game for both player and spectator has been the varying tactics employed by different teams to suit each team’s different talents. Now, we all wear khaki (a drab, useful but unexciting colour), go to ground and kick the hell out of the ball. All the players fit into someone else’s pattern, no one is allowed his own. The same piece of music played over and over loses its magic and charm – so does rugby when it repeats its tired pattern.

Many of the older coaches would seem to have a somewhat wider approach than a few of the younger fellows, some of whom are still actively playing, bringing to the schoolboys the rigid, worn approach of their own club coaches.

One of the more experienced coaches at the Wynberg festival spoke most approvingly of the standard of rugby played by some of the Western Province schools’ Under 14 and Under 15 players; hailing from Johannesburg, where boys do not play rugby until they attend high school, he was bound to see a gap between the rugby his lads played and the local lads’ game, especially at Under 14 level. Nonetheless, it was pleasing to hear his remarks regarding the Province youngsters. What happens to them when they leave school or are some of them destroyed before that?

What was so pleasing was that he was able to see beyond his own school teams and was capable of watching and appreciating the rugby played by the others, too. That is the sort of coach we need for schoolboys (and adults!) – he is not one-eyed, unlike those young men who stand on the tryline bellowing such nothings as : “Tackle, tackle!” at their teams. In conversation I found that what is important to him is not only the quality of rugby played by all schoolboys but also the educational value the boys derive from the game. We tend, these days, to forget the many, manly virtues that were once considered to be so important in life – those of humility, courage, the right sort of pride, honour, decency, considerateness, discipline. Ideally, of course, we should find them all in the game of rugby. That is why we teach the sport in schools.

Clichés abound in rugby and in life but they are nonetheless poignant. Consider the following: win as though you have lost, lose as though you have won; the team with real courage is the one that has something to lose and yet is prepared to take risks; everyone should be prepared to risk defeat in the pursuit of victory; a kite rises against the wind but never with it; to win without risk is to triumph without glory; rugby is a great character-builder; a man’s worth is no greater than his ambitions; rugby is a great character revealer!

Stop, stop, you cry – but I don’t want to because there is so much more wisdom here!

What happens on the sportsfield is every bit as important as what happens in the classroom; each reinforces the other, as good schoolmasters and particularly good headmasters know. Sadly, fewer and fewer sportsmen take to teaching and even fewer teachers involve themselves in or know the value and power of sport in educating young people. Most important though is that those to whom we entrust the education of our young people academically, athletically or indeed in any way whatsoever must be above reproach. As schoolmasters, teachers, coaches it is incumbent upon us to be idealists, then we shall be able to teach the future of this country something worthwhile. There is no place in our sport or our classrooms for expediency, foul play, poor sportsmanship, arrogance, smugness, self-praise, selfishness or any other of those dirty words. School rugby coaches should set a fine example on the side of the field and, indeed, throughout their coaching contact with their players; it is important to remember that they set the standard which the lads will follow. If they behave with dignity, so will their players; they are not so much coaches as they are educators. Don’t forget it!

THE IDEAL

Basil Bey — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 15:10:00 GMT

Standing on the edge of a rugby field the other afternoon watching a prep schoolmaster/coach teaching his boys (under eleven) some of the arts of rugby, I happened to overhear two young ladies chatting, the one primly announcing to the other, “I can’t wait for this school to start playing soccer!” She then gestured with disgust at the youngsters, now at the close of the practice, valiantly trying to do ten press-ups for their coach as he cajoled and bullied them in a kindly way to get their knees off the ground. “Press-ups!” she spat out in disbelief, not understanding that the exercise was done as much for fun and discipline as for body building - in fact the coach has been around a long time and is fully aware that his chances of building ten-year-old bodies into Charles Atlas look-alikes are nil! The small boys were enormously proud of their efforts, however, and flopped down, apparently exhausted as the coach blew on his whistle indicating the end of the practice; within minutes, they were on their feet chasing one another around the pitch, full of energy and looking as though they could begin the practice all over again.

About a week prior to this, I had happened to meet a senior coach who hailed from England but was doing some coaching and teaching in the Eastern Province. We chatted a while about the state of Eastern Province rugby before touching on English schoolboy rugby. He told me that the numbers of players amongst schoolboys was dropping quite alarmingly mainly because schools (apart from public – or what we should call private – schools) are reluctant to play the sport; the reason for this is, according to him, that parents in England are nowadays only too quick to sue the school for any injury suffered by a boy playing any sport (at the school). The result is that these institutions, not wanting to risk injury and thus lawsuits and resultant costs, no longer offer the rough game of rugby as a school activity. Although some clubs do have excellent rugby academies for youngsters, they cannot altogether compensate for the schools’ not playing the game. Rugby loses.

The young lady’s words at the practice brought to mind this situation that pertains in some of England’s schools and I wondered how long it will be before we have the same sort of situation here in South Africa.

The modern parent has something of a penchant for interfering in school affairs (perhaps “intruding” is a better word to use); all their (the parents’) geese are swans and so we even have complaints from them about team selections! My son is a much better centre than Hippocrates; he proved it last year when he played against Rondebosch and put over five penalties! Gone are the days when children fight their own battles! After all, if every parent had his or her way, we should have no one playing in anything other than A teams. Having to accept the rough with the smooth is very much part of education; teachers are preparing pupils for what we like to call “real” life where you cannot expect mother to take up the cudgels on your behalf, if you do not get the job for which you applied because someone better also applied and was given it. Yes, sometimes selections are unfair, or appear so, and that is when you grit your teeth and mutter under your breath, I’ll show them! That is one of the reasons we play sport at school – to teach you grit, determination and balance! Do you know that we have becomes such “bunny-huggers” that in some schools examination results are not pinned to boards any more so as not to open those who do not perform too well to public notice! (Not that I have ever known anyone to be jeered at for being stupid in the classroom but this is what the B-H’s fear!) Where are we going in education? I speak the truth when I tell you that there are schools in England that do not have graded sports teams – that would be unfair. Boys who want to play in the cricket team that weekend append their names to the list on the board and the eleven who are the first to do so represent the school that Saturday.

Oh for the days of the Spartans when newborn babes were left on the rooftops for the night; those that died were considered just not suitable for the rigours of life - ridiculous, of course, but so is not recognising and rewarding merit.

I am quite sure that 2010 soccer will dent rugby at school level as some parents will push for this game to replace the more rugged rugby; what I fear is the soft headmaster who will take the easy way out and pander to the parents by giving in. Why do we play the physical game rugby at schools? I was asked to write something about this last year, for a well-known preparatory (rugby) school. I think that what I wrote then bears repeating now, at the start of a new season:

“WHY RUGBY AT SCHOOLS, ESPECIALLY AT PREP SCHOOLS”

J.E. Kane, in1978 (he was Principal, West London Institute of Higher Education at the time) wrote in the foreword of Jim Greenwood’s famous book, “Total Rugby”: “Play and games are socially and specially rooted in our (British) culture. Our national philosophy has recognised, much more than most other nations, the contribution of play and games both to the balanced development of the young and to the sensible integrated lifestyle of adults. Our educationalists have consistently pointed to the cognitive, social and cultural values of play and games in child development, and our psychologists and philosophers, seeking a formula for a satisfying, integrated adult lifestyle, recommend a balance or harmony between aspects of our life which may be described as intellectual (homo sapiens), work (homo laborans) and play (homo ludeus). The balance and harmony to be sought is not simply a matter of investing an equal amount of time to each of those aspects of life, but rather a problem of integrating the three appropriately in every human activity. This would mean, for example, that the play aspect of our lives must not only be an opportunity for spontaneous exuberant recreative activity, but, if it is properly to serve its purpose, it must (also) offer challenges to man the intellectual and man the worker.

In his book, Jim Greenwood has set out, as one might expect of a man with his pedigree in rugby football, a thoroughly enlightened prospectus for the “second generation” coaches. But for me he has also produced something of equal value – a sound and sensitive philosophy for the athletic sports which is firmly based on the total needs of the athlete towards becoming an integrated, capable, stable and fulfilled person. Playing football is thus revealed as an ideal environment for those suitably endowed with ability to satisfy at the same time the integrating needs of man as a thinker, as a worker and as a player…

Jim Greenwood, in is turn, wrote that his (Greenwood’s) purpose was: to help the player to become a complete player in so far as his physical, mental and emotional limitations allow. My job is to encourage him to enjoy and extend his abilities…I specifically do not want him to feel that his chief cause for self-esteem is his rugby or that a bad game diminishes him as a person.” Kane suggests he could well have added in support of his philosophy something he had heard Greenwood often repeating to his players…”but you’ve got to work hard and intelligently if you want to be a good player.”

Norman MacFarland in his book, My Kind of Rugby has this to say about the game:

To me rugby is an adventure without equal, for it can touch the very souls of men young and old alike.

People climb mountains because they are there. What is it about rugby that makes thousands of men all over the world chase an oval leather ball about a field, which often resembles a ploughed vegetable patch covered with miniature brackenish lakes, from Cardiff Arms to Newlands or Lansdowne Road to Eden Park? The answer to a rugby player is simple: it is the chal¬lenge. However, I feel it goes far beyond that; it is much more. Rugby is about people, and it is this human factor which is its fas¬cination. Friendships are made which last a lifetime. Countries come together because of it. Contact is made and with this con¬tact comes an understanding of different ways of life. Disap¬pointments can be overcome and broken spirits mended. The thrill of victory for fifteen weary, mud-bespattered men on a cold, misty winter's day can never really be appreciated by those who have never experienced it. Rugby is about the practising of discipline, not only on a Saturday for eighty minutes, but during the course of a week, extending throughout a long season of per¬haps nine months. It is about a way of life.

It is about physical challenge. Take the strange mixture of a midget at scrum-half weighing 45 kilos and standing 1.57 m in height having the impertinence to oppose a giant of 2.03 m weighing 136 kilos - and winning!

It is about sheer speed and awesome power. It is about subtlety and beauty.

It is learning about oneself and one's fellow human beings.

It is about a thousand other things and it happens every Satur¬day in winter to thousands of people wherever rugby is played.

Mainly, however, it is about people, with all their strengths and weaknesses, with all their idiosyncrasies and diverse back¬grounds, from the rugged coal miner to the university don. It knows no bounds, it asks no favours other than a muddy field, a ball, and people to experience its challenges.

That's rugby for you. Once it has touched you it will never let you go, long after your playing days are over and the final whistle has blown.

My kind of rugby is fifteen dedicated players who have a burning desire to win, a fierce pride in themselves and their team, winning with style and grace or suffering the pangs of defeat… it is about giving credit where credit is due. It is learning from defeat…My kind of rugby demands discipline, dedication and caring from the players…To meet the challenge of the game and to discover its infinite pleasures, a high level of fitness is demanded and discipline , dedication and caring are its foundations. Allied to this high standard of physical fitness must come skill.

In another book, “Think Rugby” that Greenwood wrote for the Japanese rugby players (interestingly, more people play rugby in Japan than play it in England), he makes this observation: …my student teams (he also coached at Loughborough) have always needed to make the most of limited possession against older, bigger, more experienced club sides. It is also part of the central and most intriguing coaching problem: how to make skill prevail against power. It is relevant to every team in rugby; it makes unsuccessful teams into successful teams, and successful teams into great teams.
Yes, I can hear you say, but all this applies to all sports, not only rugby. Does it really? I don’t believe that. The physical contact is what makes the difference as does the teamwork; there is physical contact in boxing, Judo, wrestling and one or two other sports but then you miss the teamwork. There is teamwork in soccer but where is the physical contact?

Why must we have physical contact, especially at preparatory school level? Perhaps this story will help to explain.
Some considerable number of years ago I was in charge of the 2nd XI cricket side; it was playing against the 1st XI of a big, well-known Afrikaans school from the Boland area. My side was chasing a hefty total and the last pair was batting. We were fighting for a draw with only five or six overs to go. My captain was batting at ten – he was no batsman but an excellent left-arm spinner. The opposing quickies were devastatingly fast and getting a lot of bounce. My skipper lacked the skill to enable him to get out of the way, so he was hit in the chest, on the head, in the stomach, on the hands and arms ball after ball but at the end of each over he would manage to scuttle across the wicket for a run so that he could take the battering in the next over rather than the last man’s having to take it. I have never seen a boy take such a physical beating. He was crying, not from fear but from pain but he just would not give up.

We drew the game, and his team, and I, honoured and loved him. I learned more about that lad in half-an-hour on that day than I had learned in 4 years of teaching him. I believe that he, too, learned about himself … and taught twenty-one other boys something about life. I need not tell you that he has made a name for himself in his career in Australia and is, in fact, often in South Africa for consultations for he is highly respected throughout the world in his line of work.

At school he was a slight fellow, not a bad scrumhalf, of medium height. But, of course, when it comes to courage (or rugby), size does not matter. Courage is a virtue to be encouraged, is it not?

“Where the rewards of valour are the greatest, there you will find also the best and the bravest spirits among the people.”

The Ancient Greeks were wise people indeed. Physical courage is a virtue that can be taught.

Why then rugby at prep-school level? That is easy to answer. The child is father of the man. What you are as a child determines what you will become as a man. It is easier to educate the young effectively than it is to educate the adult. (Look at our crime-ridden country to understand how true this is!)

Watch small boys at play – they are always wrestling, rough-and-tumbling all over the show; they need to be in contact and it does them so much good! Red Rover is a favourite game.

I can become philosophical here and talk about man being gregarious, needing company and physical contact with others – look how we greet one another: a kiss, rubbing noses, touching cheek to cheek, clasping hands, hugging, slapping hands together and even a friendly punch on the shoulder; you touch your friends; two boxers embrace after beating the living hell out of one another – that speaks of respect and affection - two men have pushed each other to limits (and not only physical limits); it is only when you face yourself in this way that you know who you really are – and who the other fellow is. Furthermore, you become stronger within yourself as a result. If you have never had to face yourself, you remain undeveloped potential; you hide from your own reality. Kazantzakis, the Greek poet wrote:

I am but a bow in Thy hands, Lord;
Use me or I will rot
Do not bend me beyond my strength
For I will break
But bend me beyond my endurance
And let me break.

This poem encapsulates my philosophy entirely: don’t hide, use yourself; expose yourself to difficult tasks; be sensible enough to realise what is absolutely impossible to achieve but don’t run away from a difficult challenge; take it on and if at that time it proves too much for you, be reassured for you will inevitably be stronger for having tried and will thus be better prepared and more likely to succeed the next time you are faced with what seems impossible.

The Ancient Greeks regarded sport as part of education; they spoke of the rounded man. “Our love of the things of the mind does not make us soft.” We should not exclude sport from our education any more than we should disregard academic pursuits for the sake of sport. To the Greeks culture was an even mix of both. Throughout the ages, we have admired physical courage and we still do. Rugby demands physical courage but it also insists upon your working in very close rapport with others. When we are physically pressurised is often where we tend to give up most easily; if you want information from a man you pull out his finger nails with a pair of pliers. Giving him a difficult maths problem would not get you the information you require from him. Confidence in our physical selves is terribly important, hugely affecting our self-respect which, in turn, determines how we react to others and to all life situations. Rugby, through physical contact, gives you that confidence.

Rugby, especially at preparatory school level, involves boys of all shapes and sizes, possessed of all sorts of different skills; each one on the field has his job which demands something different from another’s but each has also to fit in to the general plan, be part of the team structure. The boy is going to be knocked down and has to knock down others; he will have to compete physically with others and/or be clever enough to use his skill to outwit others but he will never be able wholly to escape physical contact, especially if he is a forward. In this game the small can beat the big, brain can baffle brawn but brawn does put you under great physical pressure that can prevent your using brain. As a player, you cannot let that happen. It is a game that demands that you look after your team mates: you are absolutely inter-dependent.

Physical contact of the rough sort that occurs in rugby can lead to loss of temper but the discipline of rugby demands that you keep a tight control over such reactions not only so that you do not lose focus but also because you cannot afford to let your team down in any way at all, certainly not by giving penalties away. In rugby you face enormous pressure of all sorts, not only physical, and the game demands that you to respond to it in the best way – you cannot escape! What other game puts you under such pressures while demanding a cool head, physical courage, intelligent decision-making?

The other virtue of rugby is that it teaches you humility for, as I said, you cannot hide and are soon found out. As a friend of mine once remarked: “Rugby may be a character builder but I believe it is even more a character revealer!”

It is my firm belief that you teach a boy more about life and himself while you are coaching him on the rugby field than you do in the classroom teaching academic subjects; both, of course, are a very necessary part of education and, the Greeks would say, of culture. In this age, we tend to molly-coddle our children, to become over-protective – it is important to push them out of their comfort zones, to make life even just a little bit tougher for them than it is in the sometimes over-protective comfort of home.

Our “culture” of crime in this country would not be what it is if our systems had allowed the downtrodden an education that included rugby in its syllabus. Need I say, though, that strict adherence to the spirit of the game would have had to have been an essential.

The British Barbarian motto has become something of a cliché, but for those who represent bad rugby clubs in the Western Province, clubs whose members do not comprehend what “spirit of the game” signifies, I finish this article quoting that motto:

“Rugby-football is a game for gentlemen of all classes but for bad sportsmen of none.”

(That is another reason why we teach rugby at schools.)