I’m a sucker for those soppy American sports movies in which the team of no-hopers are taken over by an inspirational coach and eventually become champions.
And one of the best of those is called We are Marshall, which is based on a true story about a college football team, and its coaching staff, that is wiped out in a plane crash and how a new coach rebuilds them, literally from the ashes.
A central theme of the film is the struggle that Marshall University had to get the NCAAA - the body that controls college sport - to allow them to play freshmen in their team, for that year.
The ‘no freshmen’ rule in US college sport prohibits the playing of first-year students in the collegiate leagues. It’s aimed at preventing the recruiting of players from other institutions. They can change colleges, but they can’t play for the new one in their first year there.
The rule was eventually waived for Marshall and they completed the season and went on to become champions the next year.
It’s a variation of the freshman rule that has got the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN), and now the Pukke, into trouble in our Varsity Cup rugby competition this year.
The Varsity Cup’s inspiration was the college sport system, but the local organisers never introduced the no freshmen rule initially. So, you got top young players, on contracts with their unions, signing up for a course or two and turning out for their university in February and March - then disappearing back to the union to be full-time rugby players again.
That’s what happened at Tuks a few years ago, before the rules were changed.
Now it’s a case of you can only be a first year once in the local competition. If a player changes universities he can only play for the new one if he has passed at least one full year at the previous institution.
UKZN were docked 12 league points for fielding a first-year player who had played as a first year somewhere else and, allegedly, Pukke have done the same.
At the time of writing, there hasn’t been a decision on the complaint against Pukke who, of course, are the Varsity Cup champions. If they are found guilty the precedent set with UKZN would have to be followed which would cost them the title, although a 12-point deduction would relegate them to fifth spot in the league standings which means Free State University should have played in the semi-finals and they have grounds for a complaint too.
It’s a mess, and it will take cool, wise heads to sort it all out.
I’ve been going on for the past few years about the introduction of a sort of no freshmen rule in schools rugby as a way to stop the practice of recruitment and school-hopping plaguing the sport at this level.
It’s true, of course, that sometimes the family of a star rugby player moves town, so he has to change schools. And I agree that a father has a constitutional right to move his son if he wants to.
I suspect, however, that those sorts of decisions are often influenced by bursaries and other financial incentives, and the winning of rugby matches is always lurking in the background.
My argument is, fine - change schools, but you can’t play rugby in your first year there. There are club rugby leagues in the junior age groups, and an under-19 interprovincial competition. Let him go play there for the first year.
And before the educational value of sport card is played: there are many other activities that, arguably, can teach more and better lessons than playing in a win-at-all costs rugby team.
For example, use the senior players as assistant coaches for the juniors, make them team managers, or let them learn the lessons of commitment, camaraderie and discipline in another team sport like hockey. There could even be a movie in it somewhere. - Independent Media