Referees; rugby traditions, where are we heading?
View(s):It is a real shame that there is a perception that our referees are below par, a view which was starkly underlined during the CR-Navy clash last Saturday.
Watching my first game since returning home for the festive season, it was everything I expected with non-stop action as both teams dished out an entertaining display that had the sizeable crowd at Longdon Place on the edge of their seats.
Sadly the game was marred midway through the second half when the referee made a bad blunder and awarded Navy a try by the right corner flag. There was nothing wrong in the try itself, what was moot was that moments before the referee had blown for an infringement and awarded a scrum to Navy.
Rugby traditions have gradually changed in Sri Lanka as most teams prefer to meet each other on the field and skip after-match socials. - Pic by Amila Gamage
But while the rest of the players had stopped, the Navy try-scorer hadn’t heard the whistle and he managed to plant the try despite the attentions of a couple of defenders. The referee who was yards behind the action, then ran up to the touch judge, consulted him and awarded the try.
Yes, it was an advantage to Navy and the try should have stood if the referee had played that advantage. But having blown for a scrum, there was no way he could have overturned his own decision and let the try stand.
At the end of the day, Navy won 31-27, and the immediate reaction from the CR fans was that they had been robbed of victory. There is no way where we will know if Navy would have won if that try had been disallowed. But the all-important perception was that justice had been denied.
The next perception was that since Navy had two sons of the President playing – Namal and Rohitha – the referee was pulling for them. Some CR members even went as far as alleging that the League had already been decided and that the silverware was destined to end up on a mantelpiece in Welisara.
Having witnessed only one game this season, I cannot comment on such charges other than say it is a pity that such barbs are being fired. It will do no one any good, most of all the reputation of Sri Lanka rugby.
There is no doubt that the refereeing standards have to improve. Aruna Rankotge, the man in the middle of all this controversy, had a fair game and it would be harsh to label him as biased. Perhaps he panicked and made a wrong decision.
It is easy for us who sit on the touchlines to point out his flaws. It is more difficult when you are out there making decisions on the spur of the moment. One slip and you are castigated as a stooge. I have sympathy for those officials, so let’s not be too quick to cast stones.
What is important in this matter is the public perception that the League is destined to be won by Navy. I doubt Rohitha Rajapaksa or Namal Rajapaksa would want to win under such clouded circumstances. They don’t need that, especially when Navy seems to be (on my first impressions) one of the best teams around this season.
The League title will be sweeter if it is earned through hard graft. And the Rajapaksas, as well as the rest of the Navy players, will want it that way – earned through honest toil.
I bumped into Nimal Lewke after the match and he too strongly believes that the Rajapaksa siblings would prefer to win on merit. “They are nice boys and I doubt that they would want to win a title with such allegations of referee’s pulling for them,” said Lewke, a former president of the Sri Lanka Rugby Football Union, who had turned up to watch his son Dushantha play for CR.
Another familiar face at the match was Dilroy Fernando. A much-respected referee, Dilroy suggested the best way to quell such rancid talk would be for foreign referees to blow the big games.
According to Dilroy, this suggestion had been made to the SLRFU but that it had been shot down apparently due to the cost factor. Perhaps the Union should revisit this proposal before the second round commences if they want to cast a cloak of respectability over the local rugby season.
In the larger scheme of things, it would be prudent if a referee from Hong Kong or Japan is brought down to officiate when crucial matches such as the Kandy-Navy, Kandy-Havies, Navy-Havies etc come up. Justice must not only be done, it must also be seen to be done.
Until the public have faith in our own referees, it is perhaps best that overseas officials are got down. I’m not suggesting that they will be infallible, for after all we are all human and prone to mistakes, but at least the perception of neutrality will be seen to happen.
Another sad aspect of the game today took place after the controversial match had ended. The visiting team didn’t stay for the post-match social, preferring to take their dinner packets and leave.
Christopher Jordache, the president of CR, said it was commonplace. “When we play away to them, we do the same. It is a pity.”
Indeed. The post-match dinner is a very important tradition of rugby. Blood might be spilled on the field, but off it, everything is forgotten over a glass of beer – in this professional era – as the players mingle.
I have gone on many tours with Hong Kong and this is the norm. In domestic rugby back in Hong Kong, a beer is shared on the field immediately after a game for not many clubs have a bar or a clubhouse to call their own.
Clubs in Sri Lanka are fortunate in this aspect. All the established clubs have super facilities and it doesn’t cost anything to pull out the welcome mat for the visiting team. It is a shame that there is no attempt to revive this camaraderie.Sri Lanka rugby must not forget its roots. We are a country with people famed for our hospitality. So why not accept such hospitality graciously? Close interaction between teams can also help to dispel any ill-feeling. Rugby is a game which strengthens bonds between teammates. It also encourages sportsmanship. What happens on and off the field is important.