The Joe-Pete was not just a grudge battle
View(s):
The Petes enjoyed sweet revenge - Pic by Amila Gamage
Last week I was walking through a road closer to Murray-field, the home of Scotland Rugby with a boy who was three and a half years old and his parents returning from a supermarket. The child who was on his small bike with guided wheels wanted to ride through a path past a row of apartments than take the hill up to the main road.
The mother told “Son that is not the road we take”. The main road can be seen 50metres ahead. The little boy tells the mother “on this road I can ride my bike and also there will be a way to the road”. He goes onto say “Mommy, if we don’t try how will we know”. He was right as we found that this had a lesser climb and may be 10metres shorter to the main road. The words of wisdom of a small child and heard from a place close to Murray-field reverberated in my ears as I was wondering on my column for the week.
This was because I have heard or read much about the schools rugby season and the new faces refereeing at the higher level. Some are criticised on the basis of filial connection . About others they say they have little experience or ask where they played rugby. The world of rugby is seeing younger referees taking the whistle even at the higher level as they are fitter, faster and have better reaction time.
This requires the whistle to be taken up early than waiting for players to hang up the boots and get to the middle in a different role. I hope the young brooms will encourage more to take to the whistle as we go along. This does not mean the older versions are thrown out but they can serve another generation.
Speaking to coach Sanath Martis he was for new blood but felt the inexperience does affect their action and that they have to be guided. The examples he gave may be that he is correct or may be the referee read into it wrong. That is where a win has to be worked out when talking even you may have to agree with a coach albeit vicariously. Get referees to work with coaches and build a relationship of mutual acceptance of the role of each other and then things will work our better as against thinking it is my day.
In the midst the cherry of the Schools Knockout transferred to the hand and of St. Peter’s from the hands St. Joseph’s. The ballyhoo of being the ‘Battle of the Saints’ kept to the promise other than for the yellow. The hype created before the event saw a huge crowd in attendance buoyed by the common thread of belonging.
It was a game that proved entertainment to rugby lovers even if you were not a Joe or a Pete. During the League St. Joseph’s got the better of their traditional match played for the Rev. Fr. Basil Wiratunge Shield. This loss of St. Peter’s spoil their chances of the shy at the cup. It was therefore a match of importance to retrieve the loss of face. To the Joes it was another chance to strengthen the claim that they are better. With it was also the chance to lay hands on the Knockout trophy for the second year in succession.
St. Peter’s redeemed their loss prestige, the Knockout title slipped out of the hands of the Joes. As to who is better the question is a matter of a biased opinion on the basis of who you support. The supporters had something to crow about and be happy. The crowds were in numbers that was on par with most prestigious rugby matches – mostly school matches. The Bradby, Isipathana playing Royal, Trinity or St. Peter’s have been crowd pullers. To this lot the entry of the ‘Battle of Saints’ is encouraging. It also shows that schools rugby is more competitive among the schools in the league they belong to.
What Schools Rugby needs is more support and guidance than being pushed with words such as not sanctioned. Why in the name of rugby have you to make attempts to take over or run Schools Rugby when the interest is there while a match of the big brothers – including one among traditional clubs will have more empty seats. It is not only empty seats that need to be filled but also finish tournaments. The Division ‘B’ was in tatters while the Division ‘C’ is still being played while we are ready for the 2018-2109 season. The 2018 laws will add to confusion as the laws are written with less compared to the previous book and has to be read with the other section. Example; under maul it says the ball carrier in a maul may go to the ground provided that players makes the ball available immediately. Sanction: scrum. To find who gets the put in you have to go forward to laws 19 scrum which is no longer law 20. Is that the confusion that arose when a question was raised by coach Martis with an opinion given that the same side gets the put in.
Vimal Perera is a former Rugby Referee, Coach and an Accredited Referees’ Evaluator IRB