John Langley: No one wins if sport is allowed to become a free-for-all

Photo / Supplied

Opinion

It is hard to say what is sadder. The spectacle of an all-in brawl at a school football match or the spectacle of the two school principals involved pointing the finger at each other in an effort to justify what happened and blame the other side.

Both are sad and pathetic. Since the development of the educational reforms known as "Tomorrow's Schools" in 1989, one of the main criticisms of the structure is that what was spawned has led some schools, particularly some secondary schools, to care less about the bigger picture issues in education and the wider community responsibilities of schools and more about how to market their own individual schools to ensure their success and prominence.

It is hard to blame them. The system we have supports such behaviour to the detriment of both professional responsibility and the ability of some educational leaders to set an example to the community they are supposed to serve.

We have seen countless examples - glossy brochures, political posturing over zoning and NCEA, some schools bussing young people from various parts of cities into their own schools. Schools claiming they have "zero tolerance" policies over things such as drug use deluding themselves that it doesn't occur in "their school" and excluding young people rather than trying to develop the programmes that would actually assist them to become better citizens.

None of this is better exemplified than through the debacle that occurred in the semifinals of the secondary school rugby competition in Auckland last weekend. Apparently an all-out brawl developed between the players and spectators at one of those events and a rock-throwing incident at the other.

There are always fights in rugby matches. In fact, given the complexity of the rules in the modern game and the frustration that players must feel, it is probably easier to fight than actually play.

And any game with such close and physical components will always lead to some forms of aggression.

What is important is how such incidents are handled when they occur and by whom. It seems that in this case the spectators joined in rather than letting any incident that did occur get sorted out in the usual way. Many of these people are probably happy passing comments about the violence in our society and voting for more punitive penalties for offenders.

It is even more important what example is set by those who should lead any responses to such incidents. In this case it is the principals involved.

What was required was for them to stand shoulder-to-shoulder denouncing illegal and violent behaviour both on and off the field.

What was required was that they should have advocated leading some initiatives to ensure that such ghastly behaviour does not happen at school football matches in the future and working with all schools to make that happen.

What should have occurred is that, as educational leaders, they set an example to the rest of the community of what is and what is not acceptable in terms of the way "business is done" both in sports events, the expectations they have of their school communities and the way differences get resolved.

But, what have we had instead? A series of accusatory comments from the principals each trying desperately to blame the other school for the incident. Was it a "king hit" or some initial punches? Who punched first? Let's go and review the video so that I can then really stick it to you and get proof that it was your school's fault.

Our boys could not ever have done such a dreadful thing. Our parents would never do something like that without provocation. The problem was crowd control.

It has been suggested that what would have prevented all of this is more security. More security! Are we serious? This is a school football match, not the Brixton riots.

What has it come to when young men and their parents will no longer accept the consequences of their own violent behaviour?

When that day comes, the games are not worth playing and secondary rugby matches should be consigned to the scrap heap.

It was also suggested that all of this might be the result of the current economic depression. Yeah, right.

All of this is a sad and tawdry spectacle for both sports and education generally. What is worse is the impression that is given to the public by the principals involved that somehow this is not about the bigger issues around the education and development of young men but more about trying to minimise the blame of one school and its community at the expense of another.

In other words, to minimise the marketing damage that might have happened. That is not what schools should be about.

Why can't it just be admitted that this kind of incident is a disgrace to all involved, is part of a pattern in school sports that is becoming increasingly worrying and that it needs a collective response from parents, teachers and principals to deal with it?

It can only be hoped that in the next few days the principals and school communities do actually talk to each other and demonstrate some sense of common values and spirit over such incidents now and in the future.

Start by looking at the wider issues about the relationships between schools and what it means for those in them. Our young people deserve nothing less.

* Dr John Langley is chief executive of Cognition Education, an educational consultancy.