Blowing the whistle on School Rugby hooliganism and its aftermath
View(s):
Their camaraderie as juniors is a forgotten entirely when players reach the senior stage - File pic
Rugby has its moments of madness. I have talked about the adverse effects and was also told that if I continue this way, parents will not send their children for Rugby. I ask whether the happenings now are conducive for parents to encourage their children to play Rugby. Speaking to the Education Ministry’s Sports Consultant, Sunil Jayaweera, he said it is essential to strengthen the Management of Schools Rugby. The aim of the Ministry is for a total education, with Sports as a vital component. Rugby too must contribute towards developing a better citizen. He does not condone the acts of a few who are a bad example to the students. Addressing through better management is important. Responsible for the formation of the Schools Rugby Association, he is no stranger to issues, resorting to strong action in the past. What is the point, if you have to take a school match between two Colombo schools to Kandy, for neutral grounds?
The chaos created by misbehaviour has taken more space than before. Ask most referees, they would say there is no problem on the field, and a well-disciplined team is the Green Machine. Same goes for Trinity and many other schools. The cost to host team S. Thomas’ is around Rs 1.5 million for damages at CR&FC. CR&FC is thinking twice about giving their ground for school matches. Havelock’s too does not have a fence. Where does Rugby stand if schools do not have grounds? May be cage them at Sugathadasa Stadium. There will be no end to this erratic behaviour, as punishment is quixotic on the one hand, and inconsistent on the other. It may be argued that the recent handouts are impractical, while on the other it may sound foolishly wise.
In a practical sense, what sounds unpractical maybe a decision that has been after much thought. I was asked by Jayaweera, “If a person is accused of stabbing another, do you punish the whole family?” On a note of being foolishly wise, it has a purpose. Foolish because it is off-season. Wise because it does not affect next year’s players. The action is on record and a petition is not acceptable, as there is a suspended sentence. That is the point being talked by the mandarins of the Education establishment. The Sri Lanka Schools Rugby Football Association must look after the rest of the operational side. On the other hand, have the authorities been consistent. The Trinity Principal raised a valid question as to why the decision has to be elevated to a political authority, when there is a body that runs School Rugby.
This is Sri Lanka, politicians control everything. Another point raised is that, the Education Ministry is not obliged to follow World Rugby guidelines. Does it mean the core values and philosophy of Rugby as written in World Rugby is not important? The question gets deeper as to who is responsible for the laws of the game. I wonder whether the same rule applies to School Cricket. An issue in inconsistency is why the punishment to one school this year, compared with last year when action was taken against a spectator. Why the difference between then and are now? I would think that Match Officials (referees) are foolish on continuing to take the whistle. but wise in not disrupting the game. Keep off for a few weeks or months and see how things go.
There have been over 250 matches played to date, and an equal number to come in various age groups. Last year, the referees’ interim committee headed by Chula Dharmadasa took a decision not to appoint referees for junior school games. They asked the school to find schoolboys or young old boys to take the whistle, so that a few could develop in the next three years. Royal had two, who are under 20, one from Isipathana around 22, and another current player from St. Peter’s has shown interest. What did the rest do for the many junior games? Most recruited referees from the Society and paid them as Under-10 or 12 coaches, and to referee junior matches. Who is it that took the short cut and be accused of being white with lines of shade?
This is true in the case of most schools who recruit referees of a lower level to their coaching staff, but ask to keep referees out of coaching. A careful analysis would reveal they first took to refereeing and then the schools recruited them as coaches. I remember only one coach who took to refereeing when challenged, and rose up the ladder to be in the Asian Panel. That Aruna Rankothge is also traversing the path of being a coach of match officials. He started as a coach and took up the challenge when he was right in pointing out the mistake of a referee. There are many from then to now, who are recruited by schools to coach juniors. Those who shout from the rooftops should ask their beloved, “Why are you doing this and why we are shouting?” Then we also talk of match fixing and various names when the mess is at your doorstep.
I also know of one former senior referee who is in the high echelons of the mercantile sector, who still referees Division II and III matches. He, I believe, is still capable and fit to handle a ‘A’ Division match at club or school level or be an Assistant Referee and be useful to an on-field referee.
His answer is, “I enjoy doing a lower level game; the pressure is less and the abuse is almost not there. Why should I referee and be under pressure or abused in a competitive match.” He says, at lower levels there is abuse, but it is less and he can cope with it, but it seems they too are taking the cue from the lower upper-class.
* Vimal Perera is a former player, coach, referee and an IRB Accredited Referees’ Educator