A former Senior A debater, who picked law solely because it allowed him to keep arguing, has expressed dismay at hearing that mooting requires reading cases and writing arguments out beforehand and not just winging it in court.

“Usually the fact that I could name a single female politician gave me enough of an edge in credibility to demolish the GPS competition,” explained the recent Grammar graduate, statistically called either Alex, James or Tom.

“But apparently if I rock up and try to Point of Information my way to victory I get immediately disqualified for not presenting submissions,” he said.

This student's struggle is not a unique one. In recent years scores of QDU trophy-winners have failed to successfully transition to the big leagues, leading onlookers to worry that maybe high-school debating is just a bit silly.

Will mooting finally start to credit manner as much as matter and method?

Would the average reasonable person believe my argument even if I just made a case up?

Does the non-transferability of its skills into the real world finally prove that debating IS a sport?

More to come.