SLRFU Junior 7s and that McCaw try
View(s):The SLRFU Under-20 Sevens at the Race Course last week saw Isipathana winning the championship beating ‘A Goal’ in the final. Science who beat Pathana in the league round failed to beat A Goal in the semi-final. This was also an opportunity for the selectors to name a pool in preparation for the Asian Under-20 7s Series to be played in Malaysia on August 15 and 16 and in Hong Kong on August 22 and 23.
The event released an opportunity for players from schools or those who had left school but are Under-20 to showcase their talent. The question that has to be asked is whether this tournament should have had the attention of either schools or accredited clubs. The schools probably would not have wanted to take responsibility as there was so much talk of player fatigue and the pending ‘A Level’ examination. The clubs, I believe should have taken this opportunity to build a feeder team and or a relationship with the junior players thinking of the future.
This would have been a part of the strategy. This reminds of a rugby pundit asking what a SWOT is following an article in this column. These are the same people who then sit and talk of the development of rugby. What I was told is that clubs did not have the budget to accommodate a junior team. These same teams would spend dollars much above the market to attract foreign players to play in their teams.
I wonder how those who took the opportunity and found the means to fund a team. These included teams from two academies, A Goal and HARFA who are organized but may not have budgets like the clubs or schools. The not rich clubs like Petersons, Old Mudalians, Science Maroons and newcomers Cavaliers, Kandurata, Maharagama and Cambrians also played. Talking of fatigue and injury, the talking point was Kevin Dixon seen running well and dangerously for A Goal, not showing any signs of an injury. I asked the team trainer the secret of this return. He explained that it was rest and stretches that helped this fine player to be on the field.
Probing further he said that he had a tear in a particular muscle which was the result of another muscle being stiff. All that was needed was to release the stiff muscle and stretch to get the player in shape. Looking back to the school season the player could not give the beat to the team and in turn the team suffered as he did not get the required attention. The poser is important for teams that spend so much on a team of coaches that include trainers. Is there a value received on all the spending or is the spend to show the world that we are keeping up with the Jones’.
While rugby has moved on after the McCaw try in the New Zealand vs South Africa match the debate on the legality of the try continues. The spill has reached the rugby island Sri Lanka. Come the next rugby season some are likely to try this move and challenge the referee’s decision.
There is debate for and against the decision of the referee: The law requires as explained by Kaplan in concluding that the try was not legal: “As a receiver, he (McCaw) has to stand 2m away from the lineout. It is questionable whether he was. Moreover he cannot move into the lineout to receive the ball until the ball has left the hands of the thrower. It is clear he does start moving before the ball has left the hands of the hooker”.
Kaplan sticks to a simple argument in his web site “rate the ref”. Other arguments in defending legality are more complex. These ask questions such as whether the laws are clear on that point of entering the line out. Law 19.8 (i) says that once the lineout begins (i.e., once the ball leaves players hands) the receiver can enter the lineout, but it’s not clear on what that means. McCaw moves toward the line before the throw, but he does not actually enter the lineout until after the throw is completed.
Meanwhile there are arguments on whether there was an early lift making way for the ploy and in which case there should have been a FK against the Blacks. Other issues include the possibility of a PK for Blacks as the South Africans were off side.
The job of the referee is more complex than only watching whether the referee was 1.9 metres or 2 metres while watching many other issues such as obstruction, crossing in this particular incident of a line out. Post match reviews have the advantage of reviews and measurements to a millimetre and or a split of a second whereas as the referee has to make a quick decision. I doubt whether the law allows a TMO referral in this case as some suggest.
Did the referee make a mistake? Arguments are for and against but what needs to be remembered is that there could be numerous mistakes in a match and interpretation that may not be agreed upon. Unfortunately that is part of rugby.
The crux is that New Zealand tried a ploy and South Africa got caught. When defences become strong as has been happening the scoring is when you become smarter than the opponents. This issue will continue to be debated and tried out in Sri Lanka and the question will be on the referee.
Vimal Perera is a former Rugby Referee, coach and Accredited Referees
Evaluator IRB