Having talked to quite a few parents about the issue in recent months though, I have found that most understand the logic, even if they still have some reservations.
So why are some big sports taking these steps?
One major factor is that many of them are facing declining player numbers, very often including significant reductions at the year 9 level.
As an illustration of that, North Harbour has seen a dramatic reduction in Secondary School rugby teams from 92 teams in 2014 to 64 teams last year.
Now there will always be a range of reasons for the loss of players, some of which are outside the control of sporting bodies, but each of them is looking very hard at what leads people to leave their sport and what they can do to stem the flow.
There is clear evidence that the pressure on kids to try to make rep teams and the sense of failure associated with missing out on selection are factors that lead to drop-off.
A common response to that is that kids just need to toughen up. And for some not being picked may well be a spur to greater efforts. But kids do not "need" to do anything and many more are voting with their feet and simply giving up the sport.
Another reality for many sporting organisations is that representative programmes cause them to invest a disproportionate level of resource – both dollars and time - into relatively few players.
Risking a drop off in numbers and using more of your scarce resources than you need to might make some sense if you knew that the 13-year-olds who were left and who you were investing heavily in would be the stars (or even the stalwarts) of your sport in the future.
However, in most sports there is no evidence that the best 12-year-olds are going to be the champion adult players – in fact quite the reverse.
In any top level team you are likely to have a mix of those who were good 12-year-old players, those who didn't stand out at all when they were 12 and those who had never even played the game by that age.
Investing heavily in the players who are the best at the age of 11 or 12 is unlikely to achieve anything in relation to long term player development or retention.
For many families too, the additional cost of a rep programme is either a serious financial burden or something they simply cannot contemplate.
That can lead to families making the decision for their child to forgo a sport entirely.
On top of that, rep programmes can extend what is in many cases a season which is already long enough and will exacerbate summer/winter code clashes, which can force children to prefer one sport at far too young an age. (Again the evidence is that people who play a variety of sports as children are likely to do better as adults.)
I do not think for a moment that all sporting codes will decide to abandon rep programmes for primary school age groups.
Every sport is different and faces its own challenges and has its own opportunities and traditions (although not all traditions are worthy of continuation).
However, it is likely that many codes will be giving this issue a lot of thought over the next year or two as they think through strategies to address declining participation.
I congratulate North Harbour Rugby on their fairly courageous step and well done too to Hawke's Bay Netball who were in the vanguard last year.
Sport Hawke's Bay will certainly continue to support Hawke's Bay's sporting organisations as they work through their options in relation to junior rep programmes – along with the many other challenges they face.
Mark Aspden is chief executive of Sport Hawke's Bay
