Auckland First XV rugby dispute: Student ruled eligible to play for King’s – schools to consider Sports Tribunal decision

A First XV rugby dispute in Auckland has taken a dramatic turn, with a legal authority ruling that a King’s College student is eligible to play immediately for his school’s top team – but the
matter may yet erupt into a bigger controversy.

The Sports Tribunal of New Zealand – a legal authority that rules on sporting disputes – says the King’s College Year 13 student can play for the school’s 1st XV, after his parents argued he had moved from Mt Albert Grammar at the beginning of 2022 for personal reasons unrelated to rugby.

The parents were ecstatic about the ruling, delivered by email late yesterday afternoon. The tribunal said a written decision would follow next week.

However, rather than the dispute being settled, it might yet deepen.

The 12 Auckland principals whose schools are involved in 1st XV rugby have signed a 1A code designed to prevent the poaching of talented young rugby players although, as the Herald reported last month, there is significant debate about the legal status of that code.

Those other 11 schools have yet to see the tribunal’s decision – and the student’s father has been led to believe some or all of the schools might yet decide to refuse to play King’s if his son is selected to play.

The student’s father, Aaron Taylor, said: “We have been through the wringer.”

He was furious this morning after he believed another top school had told King’s it would boycott sport with them if the student played but both the school and King’s have said this threat was not made.

A King’s board member had reached out to the other leading school last night to try to calm the overall situation and to ensure a sensible solution was reached.

One source told the Herald: “Some of the other schools have reacted very badly already with veiled threats to throw King’s out. I predict they will calm down when they realise this helps legitimise the 1A code, given it will interpret it rather than declare it illegal.  The High Court would not be as kind.”

King’s College board chair Shan Wilson said: “I’m working really hard on what we can do here, and what solutions we can come to. I can’t comment on anything.”

In a follow-up emailed statement, she said: “I can confirm the Sports Tribunal has ruled that the boy concerned is eligible for selection in the King’s College First XV for 1A competition matches. We need to wait for the Tribunal’s written decision, expected sometime next week, to understand the reasoning behind its decision.

“This Sports Tribunal decision is legally binding on the parties. The college must therefore abide by this ruling and consider the boy concerned as eligible for selection. Team selection itself is a matter for the first XV coaches.

“Discussions are continuing with the boy’s family and with other 1A schools about the implications of the Sports Tribunal decision. I cannot comment further at this stage.”

A lawyer involved in the case noted the caveat of it being a decision binding on the parties who submitted the matter – ie, King’s and the student’s family.

The lawyer told the parties: “It remains to be seen how/whether other schools react to the decision.”

The chair of another leading school told the Herald his board “has made no decision in relation to this. We haven’t considered it”. It had yet to even see the ruling.

He said his school had only “one of 12 says in the matter”.

The Sports Tribunal told the parents and King’s College – the parties to the hearing – just before midday yesterday that it was granting “the unopposed application to declare [the student] eligible to play for the King’s College First XV until the Tribunal reaches a final decision”.

Just after 4pm, Sports Tribunal registrar Helen Gould advised the parties: “The Tribunal has issued an oral decision which is being conveyed to you by way of this email. A written decision and reasons will follow next week.

“The Tribunal makes this decision as between the parties who agreed to submit the matter to the Tribunal. The Tribunal declares that [the student] is eligible for selection to the King’s College First XV.”

King’s had wanted Mt Albert Grammar (MAGs) to be a party to the case but MAGs earlier told the Herald that it was over to King’s as to whether the student played 1st XV rugby. “This is not an issue that involves MAGs.”

The Herald reported in late May that the now 17-year-old had moved from MAGs to King’s early last year for personal reasons unrelated to rugby.

He was never in the frame to play top rugby at MAGs – he only ever played junior rugby there and was not in that school’s 1A (First XV) development programme. It was only after he joined King’s and followed a determined training and diet regime – gaining an extra 15kg – that he was considered for top honours this year.

But the student has run foul of the code drawn up and governed by 12 Auckland principals several years ago to stop predominantly wealthy schools poaching top rugby players.

While the code was devised with the best intentions – essentially to stop poorer schools being plundered of their top talent – it seems it is also catching innocent parties.

Legal experts have questioned whether the code is even enforceable under the Education Act.

The 12 schools that are party to the code are King’s, MAGs, Auckland Grammar, Kelston Boys’ High School, St Kentigern, Sacred Heart, St Paul’s College, De La Salle, Dilworth School, Tangaroa, Liston College and St Peters.

MAGs board presiding member Catherine Murphy told the Herald earlier that it was up to the King’s headmaster, Simon Lamb, to determine whether the student could play First XV rugby.

“This is not an issue that involves MAGs,” Murphy said. “Whether the family and Kings submit an issue to the Sports Tribunal is a matter for them to decide.

“MAGs wish [the student] and his family every success for the future and will not be making any further comment … We are concerned that litigating these issues so publicly is not in the best interests of the schools or the students.”

She described the code as an “informal” arrangement. “The 12 schools that play in the 1A competition, unanimously (and voluntarily) agreed to adopt an informal code that put the welfare of students first. This is the same overriding consideration of the principals in their approach to education. The primary obligation of every school is to support each student to reach their highest level of educational achievement. That is our core business. This code allows schools to focus on our core business, while also supporting the health and wellbeing of all our students.”