What should have been news this week was that Royal turned tables on the much fancied Trinity in Kandy. The issue of a mishap of a referee issuing a red card was also a talking point during the week.
The margin of victory at the first leg of the Bradby keeps Trinity in sight for a comeback in the second round. One may say the odds favour Royal as the match is played on home ground. This should have no meaning, as Royal beat Trinity on solid Trinity turf. What really takes the credit to support a Royal win is the fact that they are playing as a team and are focused on their quest.
I believe they have been training strategically towards this end and reaching the peak at the correct time. There is this funny feeling in me saying that in most cases teams have reached the high early and or on the reverse. We also hear of many players being injured and some are just able to field a side. Some coaches find difficulty in training as turnout at practices are low but has to be tolerated: else there is no team. I heard of a maverick player who plays on his terms and plays in many positions.
The dependence is so high that when he is told to play in the role meant and to pass the ball the answer to the coach was “leave me alone or I will come out.” This was related by the man carrying the flag on the side line and is true.
Royal on the other hand plays and stays disciplined and glued on path. It is not only that they are heading to bring the Bradby home but it also looks like they have more than a chance to win the League title. The numbers that have a chance have now reduced to three. Royal remain unbeaten but can be challenged by Peters and Pathana who have lost one game each. Of the four games left Royal has only to play one school among the top four while the other two have two matches each. The only other challenge of semblance of resistance can come to Royal is from Science who has upset two schools so far.
 |
| Royal is playing as a team and are focused on their quest. |
The Referee in the match between St. Josephs and St. Peters made a mistake of issuing a red card on the belief that he had issued two yellow cards.
This is grounds for the organizers or the relevant judiciary to decide that there are no further sanctions that are applicable.
This however is interpreted to mean that the decision of the referee has been reversed which calls for the decision of the match to be changed and or for it to be replayed. The game of rugby is governed by the rules and regulations of the IRB to which all participants are bound directly or indirectly. In this instance the reference is to regulation 17 where it states that a decision of a referee during a match cannot be affected by a ruling of a Disciplinary Committee or Judicial Officer.
It further states that in the case of an ordering off where the Judicial Officer or Disciplinary Committee is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the referee’s reasons for his decision were wrong to take no further action. In this case the referee has accepted he had made an error which he came to realize when it was brought to his notice after the match. From that point the referee is wrong and has made a mistake. This is not the first time that there has been an issue of mistaken identity and there has been no further sanctions issued.
To quote an example the law states “... As soon as a referee knows that there have been too many players the referee must order the captain to reduce the number appropriately. The score at the time of the objection remains unaltered.”
Is this the only mistake the referee made in this match? Having had the chance to see the report of the referee this is not the only mistake he has made. He says that the card was for dissent in the 29th Minute of the second half. He also refers to an earlier incident involving the same player where a general warning was given for professional foul.
The mistake of the referee is that a card was forthcoming for the professional foul and to follow up with dissent after a warning should have lead to a red card. Referees as humans make mistakes and for taking the incorrect decision they pay dearly.
The sore point of this whole issue which was an on field affair is that the referee has also followed up with an abuse form against some officials.
If this is true and these officials walked to the referee dressing room as alleged then it is serious business.
This probably is the culture that surrounds us which include stopping matches as missiles are thrown at officials as well as players.
Vimal Perera is a former Rugby Referee, coach and Accredited Referees Evaluator IRB |
E-mail
