Blackrock College Clash with Leinster Academy

monkey 456

Terenure will beat blackrock in the first round of senior cup.... Just putting it out there

MLC61

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Not really, the State is broke but still propping up private schools by paying their teachers wages. If the same school can then afford complex sports programmes I think it's perfectly fair to say they are overfunded.

You are deliberately, I assume, over simplifying to make a point that isn't relevant to this thread - hence bit of a leap.

Amazotheamazing

MLC61 wrote: »

You are deliberately, I assume, over simplifying to make a point that isn't relevant to this thread - hence bit of a leap.

Well, I think it does go to the point of the thread, the Leinster branch should train the future pros from an earlier age and the heat, so to speak, should be taken out of the Senior Cup. Same applies to Munster etc.

anonymous_joe

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Not really, the State is broke but still propping up private schools by paying their teachers wages. If the same school can then afford complex sports programmes I think it's perfectly fair to say they are overfunded.

The State doesn't fund the sports stuff.

Superbus

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Well, I think it does go to the point of the thread, the Leinster branch should train the future pros from an earlier age and the heat, so to speak, should be taken out of the Senior Cup. Same applies to Munster etc.

Fair point, but pretty much unrelated to your original one.

Amazotheamazing

anonymous_joe wrote: »

The State doesn't fund the sports stuff.

Course it does, indirectly.

anonymous_joe

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Course it does, indirectly.

Nah, the fees pay for facilities and coaching.

CIARAN_BOYLE

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Nah, the fees pay for facilities and coaching.

Thats why he said indirectly.

If the state stopped paying teachers wages in private schools the schools game would collapse and club rugby would have a massive influx

Amazotheamazing

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Nah, the fees pay for facilities and coaching.

Drinking on a tuesday night, for shame. (even)

anonymous_joe

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Thats why he said indirectly.

If the state stopped paying teachers wages in private schools the schools game would collapse and club rugby would have a massive influx

Which couldn't really happen.

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Drinking on a tuesday night, for shame. (even)

Hmmm?

RMD

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Haha! A schools cup over a world cup!?

I went to a rugby school and I find that ludicrous. I'd prefer to win the AIL than the senior cup! I wonder what our world cup winners like BOD would think about that.

I remember Ollie Campbell in an interview saying his proudest achievement in Rugby is his SC medal, a pretty big claim considering his role in the Triple Crown win.

Just out of curiosity was it a big 6 Rugby school with a history of SC success, or a rugby which hasn't achieved much. That's where I've noticed the main difference in attitude to it is. Personally, I've played only game 1 in Donnybrook, but it was bloody amazing.

Amazotheamazing

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Which couldn't really happen.


Hmmm?

Do you think that the State should close nursing homes but continue to pay teachers in private schools? Surely it's time for private schools to pay for their own teachers, given the state of the economy?

I'd be amazed if anyone prioritised things like rugby programmes ahead of things like rural Garda stations etc.

anonymous_joe

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Do you think that the State should close nursing homes but continue to pay teachers in private schools? Surely it's time for private schools to pay for their own teachers, given the state of the economy?

I'd be amazed if anyone prioritised things like rugby programmes ahead of things like rural Garda stations etc.

The rugby forum isn't the place for this, so I'll be brief;

The government has always paid for teachers. It guarantees a certain number of teachers per pupils, a ratio which is more beneficial for public schools, meaning private schools generally have some non-state teachers.

So the number of teachers paid for in Blackrock or Michaels or whatever is lower than the number paid for in a non-private school.

So in that regard, I don't have any objection with private schools spending some of their own money on facilities, money generated from their clients.

That money was never going to be spent on rural Garda stations in the first place.

Amazotheamazing

anonymous_joe wrote: »

The rugby forum isn't the place for this, so I'll be brief;

The government has always paid for teachers. It guarantees a certain number of teachers per pupils, a ratio which is more beneficial for public schools, meaning private schools generally have some non-state teachers.

So the number of teachers paid for in Blackrock or Michaels or whatever is lower than the number paid for in a non-private school.

So in that regard, I don't have any objection with private schools spending some of their own money on facilities, money generated from their clients.

That money was never going to be spent on rural Garda stations in the first place.

Weak argument, just because something was always the case doesn't mean it should always be the case. If we can't afford to keep hospitals and Garda stations open, these funds should be redirected to that and let the schools muddle through somehow. I'd apply the same logic to a private GAA school or whatever, we're broke, time to cut back on the luxuries.

[Jackass]

Succch a weak and irrelivant argument from Amazon...you want to stop funding to private schools because they have professional academy style rugby programme, or you just think it's unfair that a lot of people send kids to fee paying schools around Leinster and hence Leinster have a number of top quality rugby schools and produce the best players in the country by a margin...

If it's not a rugby point you're making, then politics forum is that way >>>>>>

Blut2

Getting a bit offtopic but just to clear this up definitively - currently, students in private schools cost the state less per head than students in free schools. If the government subsidy for private schools was removed then they would have to drastically increase their fees (to something in line with Public Schools in the UK - think 30k p/a). This would lead to a large number of students going to free schools here instead of private schools. This would increase the cost of their education for the Irish taxpayer.

Providing a subsidy to private schools actually saves the exchequer significant amounts of money. Dont let the actual facts get in the way of your "WE R PAYING FOR RICH KIDS RUGBY!!" hyperbole though.

Quint2010

No 'Rock players in the Ireland U18 schools squad either...

Amazotheamazing

Blut2 wrote: »

Getting a bit offtopic but just to clear this up definitively - currently, students in private schools cost the state less per head than students in free schools. If the government subsidy for private schools was removed then they would have to drastically increase their fees (to something in line with Public Schools in the UK - think 30k p/a). This would lead to a large number of students going to free schools here instead of private schools. This would increase the cost of their education for the Irish taxpayer.

Providing a subsidy to private schools actually saves the exchequer significant amounts of money. Dont let the actual facts get in the way of your "WE R PAYING FOR RICH KIDS RUGBY!!" hyperbole though.

All that is supposition, what we do know is the schools are overfunded by the State as is. You have no idea, nor can you have any idea, of how many students would have to find alternative schools if the current, frankly bizarre, system was changed.

In an era when we're closing nursing homes, I find the insistence we keep funding private schools of any hue (again, not just rugby, I'd lump the GAA ones in there too) outrageous.

The Aussie

Dudes, its a Rugby forum here, there are other forums for crap, such as Humanities, Infrastructure, Debate, Irish Economy, Expand your Horizons and if your really frothing at the mouth go for a stroll over to Conspiracy Theories.

I look forward to your replies:D:D:D

DeDoc

They're kids and they're in school for an education and to develop them as people. Rugby is, or should be, a small part (for those who want it) of that

For all that Blackrock are saying (and I don't want to pick on them - I think the whole system needs a big overhaul on every side), what it largely boils down to (in my eyes) is Rock (the school) not wanting their chance of winning trophies compromised by the Leinster academy.

Now I'm not saying that is totally illegitimate, but there has to be a sense of perspective and balance in terms of the welfare of the individual - I think there are lots of unhealthy aspects to the whole 'SCT' scene. Not that Leinster are perfect either, but I do think they are putting the player first here. There has to be a sensible compromise here, that can see the ambitious kids helped and facilitated, and the schools getting something without the kids being squeezed too hard in the middle.

Anyone who watches the schools/underage internationals couldn't but agree that the English (in particular) players are typically far better conditioned/built than the Irish players (occasionally to the detriment of skills!). They have some pretty serious rugby schools there (e.g. Colstons) so how do they manage?

Blut2

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

All that is supposition, what we do know is the schools are overfunded by the State as is. You have no idea, nor can you have any idea, of how many students would have to find alternative schools if the current, frankly bizarre, system was changed.

In an era when we're closing nursing homes, I find the insistence we keep funding private schools of any hue (again, not just rugby, I'd lump the GAA ones in there too) outrageous.

Getting wildly off topic but this does relate to the general perception of rugby schools so I feel it really should be cleared up....

Actually, none of what I posted is supposition. Both the government and opposition parties have carried out research on this issue and come to the same conclusion based on the facts. You can be damn certain that if subsidies for private schools werent saving the exchequer money that Sinn Fein and People Before Profit TDs, in particular, would be using it as a point against the government supporting the elites. But they arent. Because theyve done their research on the issue. Feel free to contact your local TD about this and have them explain it to you in more detail, might be of more use than dragging threads on Rugby forums off topic!

S. Goodspeed

Just a quick addition to the Off topic topic, the principal of Castleknock quoted some study in the Irish Times a while back which estimated the closing of all private schools (which would happen if subsidies were withdrawn) would cost the exchequer c. e100million more than the total subs it currently gives. Also some of the posters on this thread seem to think the schools' rugby programmes are being run with huge budgets which is complete nonsense. What facilities do they have? Basically pitches which they have owned for years and a weights room that might be refurbished every 5/10 years. The vast majority of coaches that I came across is my time were teachers, priests, ex pupils or parents of pupils all of whom were volunteers or earning less than the cost of travel to the school. Yes some schools have professional 'directors' of rugby now but these are in the minority and again the costs are relatively small.

Quint2010

DeDoc wrote: »

They're kids and they're in school for an education and to develop them as people. Rugby is, or should be, a small part (for those who want it) of that

For all that Blackrock are saying (and I don't want to pick on them - I think the whole system needs a big overhaul on every side), what it largely boils down to (in my eyes) is Rock (the school) not wanting their chance of winning trophies compromised by the Leinster academy.

Now I'm not saying that is totally illegitimate, but there has to be a sense of perspective and balance in terms of the welfare of the individual - I think there are lots of unhealthy aspects to the whole 'SCT' scene. Not that Leinster are perfect either, but I do think they are putting the player first here. There has to be a sensible compromise here, that can see the ambitious kids helped and facilitated, and the schools getting something without the kids being squeezed too hard in the middle.

Anyone who watches the schools/underage internationals couldn't but agree that the English (in particular) players are typically far better conditioned/built than the Irish players (occasionally to the detriment of skills!). They have some pretty serious rugby schools there (e.g. Colstons) so how do they manage?

Gone are the days when 'Rock get the most players every year called up by Leinster so that arguement doesnt stand up to be honest. They are no more or less affected in an average year then Clongowes, St.Michaels or Terenure.

Amazotheamazing

Blut2 wrote: »

Getting wildly off topic but this does relate to the general perception of rugby schools so I feel it really should be cleared up....

Actually, none of what I posted is supposition. Both the government and opposition parties have carried out research on this issue and come to the same conclusion based on the facts. You can be damn certain that if subsidies for private schools werent saving the exchequer money that Sinn Fein and People Before Profit TDs, in particular, would be using it as a point against the government supporting the elites. But they arent. Because theyve done their research on the issue. Feel free to contact your local TD about this and have them explain it to you in more detail, might be of more use than dragging threads on Rugby forums off topic!

Of course it's supposition, in this instance there's no way of knowing what would happen until we finally end this bizarre practice. When we can afford Garda Stations and Nurising homes we can give back this luxury grant.

Amazotheamazing

S. Goodspeed wrote: »

Just a quick addition to the Off topic topic, the principal of Castleknock quoted some study in the Irish Times a while back which estimated the closing of all private schools (which would happen if subsidies were withdrawn) would cost the exchequer c. e100million more than the total subs it currently gives. Also some of the posters on this thread seem to think the schools' rugby programmes are being run with huge budgets which is complete nonsense. What facilities do they have? Basically pitches which they have owned for years and a weights room that might be refurbished every 5/10 years. The vast majority of coaches that I came across is my time were teachers, priests, ex pupils or parents of pupils all of whom were volunteers or earning less than the cost of travel to the school. Yes some schools have professional 'directors' of rugby now but these are in the minority and again the costs are relatively small.

Doesn't matter, imo. Do people no realise that as a State we're broke?

If people want private education, let them carry the full cost of it. Simple as.

Mind you, in a far broader sense, all the Catholic Schools should be taken over by the State. Why we continue to prop up an institution which covered decades of child abuse is beyond me. Don't care if it's Blackrock or a CBS in Donegal, time to end their involvement in Ireland's education system. I accept there's genuine reasons why Church of Ireland schools merit different treatment, even if I think they should stand on their own feet, so to speak, too.

vinny chase

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Doesn't matter, imo. Do people no realise that as a State we're broke?

If people want private education, let them carry the full cost of it. Simple as.

Mind you, in a far broader sense, all the Catholic Schools should be taken over by the State. Why we continue to prop up an institution which covered decades of child abuse is beyond me. Don't care if it's Blackrock or a CBS in Donegal, time to end their involvement in Ireland's education system. I accept there's genuine reasons why Church of Ireland schools merit different treatment, even if I think they should stand on their own feet, so to speak, too.

Ridiculously simplistic argument, that's just going around in circles now.

Your points about the State being broke: There is no doubt whatsoever that cutting the existing State funding to private schools would see a massive increase in the cost of education to the taxpayers. This is beyond obvious.

How exactly are all Catholic schools to be taken over by the State? You really should have a good read of Article 42 of our Constitution for yourself.

Amazotheamazing

vinny chase wrote: »

Ridiculously simplistic argument, that's just going around in circles now.

Your points about the State being broke: There is no doubt whatsoever that cutting the existing State funding to private schools would see a massive increase in the cost of education to the taxpayers. This is beyond obvious.

How exactly are all Catholic schools to be taken over by the State? You really should have a good read of Article 42 of our Constitution for yourself.

Well, considering there's moves to take over the Catholic primary schools, I don't see why secondary schools need be excluded. Constitutional issues notwithstanding.

Tbh, we should have demanded it when Bertie bailed out the Church over the cost of the Redress Board.

vinny chase

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

Well, considering there's moves to take over the Catholic primary schools, I don't see why secondary schools need be excluded. Constitutional issues notwithstanding.

Tbh, we should have demanded it when Bertie bailed out the Church over the cost of the Redress Board.

What do you mean "constitutional issues notwithstanding?" Maybe I'll quote the relevant provision of the Constitution to you just to clarify this:

Art 42.2: "Parents shall be free to provide this education in their homes or in private schools or in schools recognised or established by the State.

Also:

Art 42.3.1:

The State shall not oblige parents in violation of their conscience and lawful preference to send their children to schools established by the State.

I don't think you have a clue what you're talking about on this issue.

Amazotheamazing

vinny chase wrote: »

What do you mean "constitutional issues notwithstanding?" Maybe I'll quote the relevant provision of the Constitution to you just to clarify this:

Art 42.2: "Parents shall be free to provide this education in their homes or in private schools or in schools recognised or established by the State.

Also:

Art 42.3.1:

The State shall not oblige parents in violation of their conscience and lawful preference to send their children to schools established by the State.

I don't think you have a clue what you're talking about on this issue.

Actually, that's what I was referring to when I said CoI schools would have to be funded.

Now, point out where that stops us withdrawing funding from Catholic schools?

justsomebloke

Wow I could of sworn this was a Rugby forum people, hint hint