The tale of two Associations

By Blind Side

Yesterday both print and electronic media revealed that Sri Lanka Rugby Referees Society (SLRRS) slapped bans on two Referees and two Touch Judges claiming that they had been responsible for incidents which had taken place at two leading school matches of the current League Tournament.

Media mentioned that one of the Referees, escaped with only a two weeks suspension though he had deliberately allowed a match to be played a couple of extra minutes. This had resulted in the spectators of the losing side running amok. This Referee is known to have played the match above the permitted time limit until the host team scored to record a victory. However, those who imposed this two week punishment had not taken cognizance of the fact that the Referee’s act of playing extra time had been deliberate.

The other Referee is known to have been banned for one year, after the host team walked away from the playing field claiming that this Referee and the two Touch Judges had turned a blind eye to several alleged punches thrown by players of the side that won.

Rumours are afloat that a Referees’ Fact Finding Committee (RFFC) launched an investigation into the acts of negligence by the two Referees and Touch Judges. Rugby loving fraternity were amazed to hear that RFFC had comprised three Old Boys of the College which had walked out of one of the matches, The 4th Committee member’s impartiality too has become questionable after it had come to light that his Company and a Rugby Academy were having close links with the two host teams. Had they refused to be members of this RFFC they would have been able to maintain their impartiality and integrity intact.  

The incidents of the match, at which the host team walked out, are known to have been discussed at a meeting of an Inquiry Panel of the Sri Lanka Schools Rugby Football Association (SLSRFA). The Inquiry Panel would have definitely watched Video clips of the match. The question is whether they saw the untampered version of the Video footage.

Many articles in the media gave the impression that a majority of the writers were hell bent on justifying the ‘walk out’. Banning the Referee and the Touch Judges of this match appears to have been the first tactical move of this episode. This enables the team which walked out to claim that these Match Officials had in fact made some serious mistakes and were given such harsh punishment.

Those who have watched International Rugby matches may have seen how International Referees too have made mistakes.  However, we are yet to hear of any instances where Referees or Touch Judges have been punished for negligence.  Accordingly, SLRRS seems to be setting new standards and giving a message to the rest of the Rugby playing countries of the entire world how to deal with and punish Referees and Touch Judges if they make mistakes.

Severity of the offences seems to be of less importance to SLRRS. That is why one of the Referees had gone away with a lesser punishment for a deliberate act of playing extra time till the team host team won. Didn’t he have control over his own stop watch? This kind of irrational and inconsistent decisions will only keep people away

from handling the whistle for fear of being humiliated in public by their own Society, which seem to thrive on favouritism.

Already the SLRRS has confused many intelligent Rugby lovers who have followed the game for years, by their irrational and inconsistent way of handling different situations. Confusion aggravated from the moment the RFFC’s impartiality created doubts in the minds of the Rugby lovers.  

At this moment, all eyes are on the individuals who were members of the Inquiry Panel appointed by the SLSRFA.  At least, are they capable of delivering an impartial decision against based on the Rule No’s 9.1 and 9.2 relating to Match Abandonment which are displayed on their own website http://www.slsrfa.com/singer-league/?

Their failure to act impartially would lead to the following questions relating to this ‘abandoned’ match:

 1. Can a school unilaterally decide to abandon a match and walk out claiming that they do not wish to run the risk of injuries?

 2. How many schools have ‘walked out’ in the past during Rugby matches and what punishment had been meted out to such schools which ‘walked out’?

 3. Has the SLSRFA Inquiry Panel depended on Video Clips of matches in the past as well, to take decisions of Rugby Matches? If not, why only on this occasion?

4. Isn’t the Inquiry Panel still not clear about their own rules as to what punishment should be given to a school team that walks out of a match according to Tournament Rules?

 5. What would be the action SLSRFA would be taking to prevent teams from walking out quoting this incident as an example, if no action was taken against the team walked out?

Already the SLRRS has made a mockery by giving inconsistent and irrational judgments which can be branded as hilarious. Readers are now entertaining similar doubts as to whether SLSRFA would be in a position to impartially implement their own rules discussed above. Let us not forget that SLSRFA too have drawn flak from Rugby lovers for their inability to conduct a single proper Tournament in the past.