OPINION
Bruce Holloway and Adam Julian
The First XV season is over and the rugby goalposts have been taken down – but Auckland’s 1A media ban endures.
As part of a review of a season like no other, one year on from the media ban being announced, the
First XV rugby: My strange year inside Auckland schoolboy rugby’s media ban
NZ Herald
14 mins to read
Saint Kentigern College v Sacred Heart College. First XV Schools Rugby Union 1A Final. Auckland, New Zealand. Saturday 19 August 2023 © Photo credit: Andrew Cornaga / www.photosport.nz
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
But it was nevertheless important to allow them the same opportunity to shape the narrative as everybody else, and they were invited to respond to the following questions:
# Have school principals/headmasters discussed the media ban since its institution?
# Did the media ban achieve its objectives?
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
# Were there any unintended consequences?
# The media ban has attracted criticism from some quarters as being ill-conceived and unhelpful. In your view, should the media ban remain in place for 2024?
# Alternately, what modifications to the media ban – or media relations – would you like to see for 2024?
The only response came via Sacred Heart’s communications manager Anne Walbridge, who slightly incongruously offered thanks for “your support for our recent success in the 1A competition” and said the college did “appreciate your interest in schoolboy rugby”, but declined to comment on the media ban itself.
The ban was of course never going to stop media coverage, but the inability to discuss events and outcomes with coaches made it far more difficult to accurately report and contextualise occurrences, and led to a far greater reliance on “unofficial” fan input, so it had a definite impact in that respect.
Co-contributor to this column, Adam Julian, gave a personal memoir. In 2019, he had been invited to write a booklet on the 2018 St Peter’s College First XV that won the National Top Four with five wins by a combined margin of eight points in their elimination fixtures.
“It was an incredible story that also included many internal challenges but proved how powerful sport can be in producing good,” Julian said. “St Peter’s were a fantastic employer, open, honest, and generous. The boys I spoke to were humble and engaging.
“When the 1A ban was enforced last year, it was galling to think you could go from briefly living on the schools’ premises to not even getting five minutes on the phone with the coach.”
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
However, on a weekly basis, from the children at the gate at Tangaroa College to security guards at King’s College and St Kentigern, and the VIP guests in the pavilion at Auckland Grammar who would cheerfully drop down match programmes to the unwashed, everyone else was unfailingly polite and helpful when interacting with a cranky looking dude with a notepad and a camera – or in the latter weeks, also a cheerful-looking chap in a cheesecutter and overcoat.
Instead, the most widely felt impact of the ban was the death of Sky TV’s weekly rugby coverage, Landrover First XV Rugby. Loss of the big Auckland sector and the associated massive old boy market behind it meant the concept was no longer economically feasible.
This caused a lot of frustration in other parts of the country where schools have far more mature media relationships.
This more pragmatic approach was perhaps best reflected by TVNZ’s 1News running a 2-minute “Hillbillies to New Zealand champs” item about Southland Boys’ High winning the national Top Four First XV title in their 6pm Sunday bulletin a fortnight ago.
It was an extremely positive story and “Cover of the Rolling Stone” stuff for Invercargill, which reflected genuine public interest.
But imagine for a moment how awkward it would have been, had our national champs instead been one of these “no comment”, media-shy Auckland 1A schools, complete with mute coaching staff and tongue-tied principals.
The path forward
Meanwhile, Auckland’s leading rugby school, Westlake Boys High, which competes in the North Harbour competition, has made its stance known by installing its own camera equipment and running its own coverage of home matches, complete with lively commentary – something which may become a template for other schools to follow.
Westlake director of rugby Hugh McGahan acknowledged the cameras were not particularly popular with coaching staff, given they offered valuable footage to opposing teams, but saw it as the path forward for the school regardless.
Elsewhere Maori TV picked up the slack in covering the national top four series in Palmerston North, after another season of having covered every match in the North Island’s Super 8 competition.
Steven White, founding editor of popular Wellington community Rugby website clubrugby.co.nz, which provides extensive written, photographic and video coverage of First XV rugby, called the media ban “draconian”.
After being immersed in the game at grassroots level for two decades, White was baffled by the ban.
“I accept social media occasionally gets out of hand, but a blanket ban on all media is extreme,” he said. “It means we can’t even ask the coach for a team sheet before a game. That’s ridiculous.
“My experience of covering First XV rugby has been extremely positive. The kids love it and are respectful.
“The audience is large and really engaged. Readers and viewers want to know how their old school is going or who the best young prospects are. They want the achievements of talented, hard-working youngsters acknowledged by a credible and independent source.”
Herald feedback
These Herald columns enjoyed significant positive feedback, both from inside and outside Auckland. That even included some unsolicited calls from teachers at 1A schools, as well as warm invitations from supporter groups to attend pre-match functions next season.
Online metrics mean news articles these days can be analysed within an inch of their lives, and on this front, those on high at the Herald were also kept happy.
But the kumara does not boast of its own sweetness, and the negative feedback was arguably more interesting.
In early May, there was strident criticism of Herald First XV coverage from sports journalist Scotty Stevenson, previously a commentator for Sky’s Landrover First XV rugby.
After the very first week’s 1A wrap in the new media-ban era, Stevenson posted on Instagram: “Auckland headmasters decide on a 1st XV broadcast ban and a football writer who saw a meal ticket in covering 1st XV rugby gets pissy. That is the @nzherald coverage that proves the policy. Bruce Holloway, kids aren’t your commodity. And boys and girls, play for the love of it.”
Stevenson was invited to expand on his views on why he supported the media ban for this article, but declined.
But the crux of his argument is believed to be that Pasifika kids have previously committed self-harm after not making the grade in schoolboy rugby, a view made more compelling by Stevenson’s prominent role in having boosted the code at this level.
It’s a worthy concern, but one better addressed in the first instance by coronial inquest. That might also help clarify whether once-over-lightly match reports or broadcasting of games was being unfairly conflated with social-media bullying.
And while it is a genuine concern, does it really mean First XV rugby should no longer be reported on, or presumably broadcast ever again in New Zealand? Readers can make up their own minds.
The only other negative blowback in the ensuing four months was a barely literate potty-mouthed email from a bloke from a listed company, which didn’t even argue a proposition that could be addressed.
By contrast, positive feedback for continued coverage was plentiful.
Sacred Heart old boy Matt Grace said there was “little to no support” for the media ban.
“Having two boys play in this environment I can say that they love and relish the opportunity to play on TV,” Grace said.
“Our out-of-town community feels they have missed out and our recent old boys at universities around the country can’t go to the pub with their hostel/flatmates from Auckland Grammar and King’s College and watch their teams play.
“Shielding’ boys from pressure is wrong – teaching them how to deal with it; now there’s an idea.”
Fellow Sacred Heart old boy Simon Hayden put it this way: “When it was decided unilaterally by a single group to cease media coverage of this competition because ‘the well-being of students at a time when secondary schools rugby players are being exposed to an unhealthy level of scrutiny in both traditional and social media’, players and supporters (often globally) were genuinely disappointed.
“Speaking to many former First XV players across multiple colleges, it was the highlight of their First XV time.
“Social media is a burden for every young person, irrespective of a sport or an activity. To be seen by family, friends and former players giving everything to honour the history of their jersey means a huge amount.”
Hayden also passed on a quote from a player: “Playing in front of thousands of chanting supporters is harder than a TV camera.”
What it meant to schools
In terms of how the schools themselves traversed the season, it was obvious a media ban meant different things to different schools.
Even prior to 2023, schools like St Kentigern and Dilworth essentially already had media bans as a result of their hyper-sensitivity to reporting on player poaching and historic misdemeanours, respectively.
Use of social media was mixed, but some schools worked diligently to circumvent their own ban. St Peter’s were the best in many respects with weekly Facebook posts giving well-written, informative player profiles and historic contexts for forthcoming matches, complete with photos.
Highly organised Sacred Heart old boys run a 1700-strong Facebook private group to facilitate their shared passion for First XV rugby and they informally took even more of a hands-on approach when they unilaterally undertook their own video production of the 1A grand final and duly circulated it to interested parties.
One of the unanswered supplementary questions asked of Sacred Heart principal Walsh was his attitude towards this video production, which the Herald understands has since been shared with the college’s First XV and has been widely cheered on social media.
In terms of other media, Auckland Grammar had the best match programme. Mt Albert Grammar occasionally featured some wonderful photos on its Facebook feed, but was always careful never to caption them in any way that would give context or meaning.
Hands-down best Twitter posts came from King’s College, who were happy to give quite forensic and timely match-scoring details.
But on the subject of King’s, spare a thought for First XV skipper Levi Gwynne. In a dreadful season for this illustrious college, they insisted on wheeling him out on Facebook with a tortured one-minute video week after week to explain the mounting losses.
Like a solid no-frills No 8, young Levi did his best with a series of empty platitudes about how “the boys” were forever looking to “bounce back” the following week.
Mainstream media would never flog a dead horse like King’s College did, with those seemingly noble notions of player welfare somehow forgotten.
For a First XV with four coaches, two managers and a media assistant, this was a shocker. If you really believe in media exposure doing harm, get an adult to front.
Beware the scams
A report was received late season from a Herald reader of Kelston Boys’ High “sneakily” livestreaming matches, but this could not be verified.
On this subject, there was also a host of scam posts, with links posted on numerous school Facebook sites for online match broadcasting that simply didn’t exist.
Typically these would advise on how the 1A match being previewed or discussed was going to be livestreamed by outifts such as “icontv” – and all you had to do was use your credit card to sign up for a registered account (thereby verifying your location) which cost just $1.
Exactly why digital broadcasters from Egypt or Malaysia would be such adherents of 1A rugby was never clear. And what could possibly go wrong when they had your credit card details?
Internet scam-watch sites offered this consumer feedback: “SCAM... Money will be taken for a service not available then no reasonable means to cancel subscription. Only solution will be to cancel your credit card.”
Or this: “I signed up to watch a live streamed game for $1, not only did they not give me access to the live stream, they took my $1 twice and then also charged me a monthly subscription of $85 twice which i did not sign up for! I’ve only just learned that they charged my account again today, so now I’ve paid 2 months worth of subscriptions twice and I can’t get to the website to cancel it or anything.”
To a certain extent such scams links are an occupational hazard for any publicised sports contest anywhere on Facebook. But with schools typically being hopeless at monitoring their own feeds, such links are typically left live for the gullible even months after the event.
Anyone who has been caught out by a schoolboy livestream credit card scam, please make contact via the email address below.
Where to from here?
Who knows where things go from here? By choosing not to comment, the principals have relinquished the chance to provide their perspective, clarify misunderstandings, or offer context.
They won’t care of course. They have largely unfettered powers, are under no pressure and are oblivious or impervious to public disdain for their stance. But because of that they will also be the last to be conscious of shifts in the landscape, and in this respect they are followers, not leaders.
And they can’t complain about how they’re being portrayed in media if they haven’t offered any comment, while by staying silent, they allow the rest of us to fill in the gaps.
It is perhaps human nature to overrate the power of arguments we find personally convincing – and wrongly think others will be swayed. But not to engage at all is arguably worse.
School sources suggest principals tend to operate on an army-command model, or how a head nurse might run a hospital ward. They are not used to having their edicts questioned, so it should be no surprise there is a lack of nuance or sophistication in their media policies.
And the fact these principals are not even prepared to engage with media on discussions which focus purely on the realm of ideas (such as media bans) and have no bearing at all on player welfare suggests the ban is perhaps more predicated on control.
Indeed, you sometimes wonder if there might even be a few social studies’ “teachable moments” emanating from this media ban for students. There may be life lessons to be found here on how to effectively communicate and sustain healthy relationships.
Funnily enough, on this very subject, the Ministry of Education has a dedicated webpage which offers sage advice to principals on effective communications, noting it is the key to integrity and professionalism.
It includes urging principals to champion, or at least be a good role model for, clear and consistent communication, given many problems can be directly traced to the effectiveness of their communications.
It also challenges them on when they last reviewed their communications strategies, and what feedback on them they have received.
“Remember that you are now a public figure and subject to much more scrutiny than you were as a teacher. Be clear, consistent and transparent so that all members of the community know that what they see is what they get. Enjoy answering questions... and listen attentively to all community members.”
So if this was NCEA, you’d have to mark it as a “fail” for Hogarty, O’Connor and Emtage – and perhaps sportingly offer Walsh the chance of a resubmission.
But to be fair here, you can at least appreciate Hogarty’s reluctance to crouch, bind and set with media. Last year he personally facilitated Herald interviews with three of De La Salle’s First XV players, so it was astonishing to find just two months later Hogarty was the mouthpiece selected to publicly declare what a danger such things were.
Still, Catholic followers of the Lasallian Tradition may yet interpret this as a Mangere East take on a Road to Damascus moment (“As I was on my way and drew near to Damascus, about noon a great light from heaven suddenly shone around me” - Acts 22:6), so it should not be mocked.
Feedback to nzschoolboyrugby@gmail.com .
