Sri Lanka remains in the Division 1 of the Asian Junior Championship for another year as they went down to Chinese Taipei in the final match. Sri Lanka on its way to the last match beat Singapore convincingly by 37 points to 13.  Speaking after the match a well known rugby player, coach and enthusiast [...]

Feeds Editorials Times Online

The Sundaytimes Sri Lanka

Lions thumping mice and winning at rugby

View(s):

Sri Lanka remains in the Division 1 of the Asian Junior Championship for another year as they went down to Chinese Taipei in the final match. Sri Lanka on its way to the last match beat Singapore convincingly by 37 points to 13.  Speaking after the match a well known rugby player, coach and enthusiast commented that the lions are enjoying thumping the mice. When I pressed him for a clarification he went on to say that Sri Lanka juniors were among the top five in junior rugby with a history of playing in the junior world cup. Therefore the game against Singapore is where lions have played the mice and won.

He went onto say the challenge will be in the next game when the lion will have to face t he equally tough tiger on the field. Chinese Taipei who in their first outing managed to beat Malaysia on a penalty shoot after being locked 10 all at full time were a different force in the final match. They were fast fit and had a plan to keep the Sri Lankans at bay. Like in the first match against Malaysia   they did falter in the last 15 minutes and Sri Lanka had opportunities within walking distance to the try line with Chinese Taipei leading 20 points to 14.

The U-19 final in progress between Sri Lanka and Chinese Taipei

The last five minutes of play saw Sri Lanka getting within 5 – 10 meters from the goal line. There were opportunities to score. Either selfish play or dropping the ball at crucial times cost Sri Lanka the game.  The feature of selfish play was not only during this last five minutes but during most times where the ball was not passed but opted to go solo and lose the ball.  Individual Players have been congratulated for their hard work. To me they did play hard but failed to be smart.  Rugby is not a one man game or is it limited to a few. My school mate and or my school does not help if you are one in a national team which consists of players from different walks. The battle was lost long before as another commented that the mid set of my school never changed.

There is no point in sitting back and sulking; the need is to look ahead and plan for next year. Take the case of the scrum half that was considered the best in the national Under 19 team. If you go back to the schools season his position was either as a full back or centre. But he is the best scrum half we have otherwise would he have been playing in the junior national team in that position. A similar sentiment could have been made about the substitute scrum half that played for school in another position while some forwards played for schools in positions that is not their forte. Some proved that they could not sustain a seventy minute match while others seemed not to know the expectation from their positions. Borrowing terms from the Boston Consulting Group Matrix, I would say that despite being the stars and cash cows of the schools season many looked question marks and lazy dogs.

It apparently looks like something is missing in the jigsaw as the objective of the rugby union is not understood or has not been communicated to the schools that run the domestic tournament. The dialog has to continue with the schools section as well as the schools coaches that the best player plays in the best position. This has to be part of the Long Term Player Development Plan which otherwise means that a coach has to teach a player at the national level.  Possibly taught but not learnt as the performance showed.

Taking on Chinese Taipei after Singapore required players who could have taken the impact in the key game and also have been able to sustain through the game. In this situation the first half would have been important. I doubt this was a consideration as with a number of them looked as though they did not realize what was expected form their position. It looked as though there was a lack of a mindset from top to bottom that is the players at the bottom.

Some are prone to say that if X and Y were not injured we could have done better. That seems to be no answer to be on the losing side as most that played were form the top schools of the rugby league. What were lacking were a team effort as well as the will to win coupled with bad skills as well as on field decisions. Playing for a school against another schools and coming out on top does not mean you could do the same with a national team. They have twenty two best players from that country who have to be tackled that way. That is the mind set we should be talking of. What makes the difference is not seeing a player as he did well for his school during the league but whether he has the temperament. The other question is whether something was held back as the schools knock out is on hand. (Vimal Perera is a former

Rugby Referee, coach and Accredited Referees Evaluator IRB)




Share This Post

DeliciousDiggGoogleStumbleuponRedditTechnoratiYahooBloggerMyspace
comments powered by Disqus

Advertising Rates

Please contact the advertising office on 011 - 2479521 for the advertising rates.