PS: I have just received an email about the following post.

“Interesting too, that Peter Snell, John Walker, Murray Halberg and Nick Willis were all about 20 years old when the commenced serious training.”

I have written about the decision of the North Harbour Rugby Union to abandon under-14 representative rugby. Of course their decision is controversial. Some parents and media commentators have branded the decision as a symbol of national decline. They argue that New Zealand children are being raised as a bunch of wimps.

We know what the attitude of Swimming New Zealand (SNZ) is to pre-teen children participating in competitive sport. SNZ has just completed what effectively amounts to a national championship for swimmers 12 years of age and under. For months SNZ advertised the event in the hope of attracting as many children as possible to national competition. I have no doubt that the primary motivation of SNZ CEO, Steve Johns, was not to exploit children. The motivation was to extract as much money as possible out of their parents. Someone has to cough up the inflated salaries paid to Johns and Francis. Why shouldn’t it be several hundred New Zealand children? Their athletic exploitation is a sad by-product.

Even a nation as competitive as the United States has long recognised the futility and destruction of pre-teen national championships. Their Junior Nationals are restricted to swimmers 18 and under. Qualifying times set for 18 year old swimmers effectively mean very few swimmers under-17 qualify. Certainly no 10 year olds are involved. But in New Zealand two weeks ago 309 children 10 years of age or under lined up to compete in the 50 freestyle national championship. How many 12 and under swam I have no idea; well over a thousand I would think. What a travesty. What an injustice. What stupidity. No one can tell me that Francis, Cotterill or Johns have the best interests of swimming at heart when they take money from a thousand young children and line them up for competitive slaughter.

On the subject of slaughter, 394 youngsters were disqualified in the junior championship. That’s another 394 children who will be looking around for another sport this week. Well done Gary Francis, top marks Steve Johns – another successful weekend for swimming in New Zealand. SNZ got paid plenty but the cost was far higher than that.

As you have probably realised I am full of admiration for the action taken by North Harbour rugby. Swimming would do well to take note; because I am not alone. In fact two of the toughest men of New Zealand rugby agree with me. Add their voices to the Country’s most successful Federation and one of the world’s most successful athletes and there is quite a formidable school that agrees with North Harbour rugby and disagrees with SNZ. Let’s look at the four opinions lined up against the policy being followed by Cotterill, Johns and Francis.

First the New Zealand Rugby Union has sent a strong message to its provincial unions and franchises, saying it sees little value in representative rugby at under-14 level. In a document sent to provincial, school, regional and Super Rugby bosses, the national body outlined its position on the merits of age-group rugby.

The letter, written by head of participation and development Steve Lancaster, made it clear that New Zealand Rugby feel representative rugby at a junior level was potentially counterproductive.

“We do not see value in representative programmes at under-14 and below in relation to both identifying those players likely to go on to the elite level and encouraging the largest pool of players who may have the ability to play at the elite level to stay in the game,” Lancaster wrote.

Second, the hard man of New Zealand Rugby, Buck Shelford, said he never made an age group side as a young player, but it didn’t impact his future.

“I got dropped out at primary school. They probably thought I was no good. I never made another team until I came to Auckland and made the Auckland under 17’s. I still wanted to win. I still wanted to play rugby at the highest level.

“I look at it and go, – well we didn’t play outside the Bay of Plenty in my day. Do you really need it for the kids that are that young? They can still aspire to win. They still play for their club sides. Do you really need a representative team to play in another tournament?

“I don’t think because you’re not in a rep team, you’ll stop developing. As you go through the college system most schools have pretty good coaches and they develop kids anyway and when they finish schools they go back to the club and get more development. So, do you really need to have representative football at a really young age?”

Third, Jeff Wilson, probably one of New Zealand’s most talented sportsmen who represented his country in rugby and cricket. He believes the changes will encourage more children to play rugby, whereas traditional club representative sides can leave some kids feeling disillusioned with the game.

“I feel pretty strongly about this, I actually think it’s a great move. I just don’t understand the reasoning with kids of that age, to say that they’re not good enough, and that ‘we’re going to pick these rep squads. When you say ‘rep squads’ a lot of clubs are saying that they’re rep teams but they’re just the best of a grade coming together. At that age it’s about enjoyment and trying to help as many kids enjoy the game as possible. It’s a great move. The priority is, particularly at a young age, let them get out there and have some fun and enjoy themselves.”

And fourth the great American sprinter Carl Lewis, who had more talent at a young age than just about anyone who has come before or since. On this subject he is reported to have said, “There is no correlation between a childhood success and a professional athlete.”

So there you have the choice. Do you take the advice of a bureaucrat New Plymouth Boys High School “wannabe” and a North Shore age group instructor? Or do you heed the advice of the country’s most successful federation, the country’s toughest rugby player and All Black captain, a hugely talented double international in rugby and cricket and a nine times Olympic Gold Medallist.

Of course you can decide. But for my money I’m going with the NZ Rugby Union, Wayne Shelford, Jeff Wilson and Carl Lewis. My guess is they have forgotten more about sport than the two bureaucrats, paid a fortune to sit in Antares Place, have ever known. Not that that would be too difficult.