it seems to me that:
(1) vs doesn't want to admit girls, which is, well, fine, i can understand,
(2) vs doesn't want to combine with vj to have a 6-year integrated programme, for fear of alienating some of vs' not-so-brilliant vs boys from their brillianter, later-developed vs boys and vj's brillianter-than-their-not-so-brilliant-v
(3) vs doesn't want vj to have their own 6-year integrated programme, for fear of the more brilliant (strictly in terms of academic excellence only) boys who could possibly have gone to vs, migrating over to vj's more elite programme instead (i.e. for fear of the good ones living in the east all flocking over to vj, leaving vs with only the more academically-mediocre).
so what do they want?
it seems to me that, not only does vs want their school to remain status quo, they also want to prevent the rise of another competitor, hence they want for vj to remain status quo as well. of course, they may more easily be able to prevent the rise of the competitor in vj, leveraging on the fact that the vj-vs affiliation allows the ova (vs/vj alumni group) to actually have a say in the running of not only vs, but vj as well.
that sounds kinda selfish and uncompromising to me.
i mean, to me, you can either consider taking girls in order to increase your school's competitiveness with regard to attracting better or more top students; or if you are willing to forgo that for the purpose of remaining an all-boys school (which i totally respect), then you should give vj your blessings as it is only fair that individual schools will try their individual ways to increase their own school's competitiveness, is it not? i mean, i do think that a non-interrupted 6-year programme does sound like a good idea for some.
but of course, this is only from a now-outsider's extremely-imperfect-knowledge point of view. *oligatory disclaimer*