Schools Rugby is at a stage of being stretched tight and the race is on. The pride on the backstretch will be in the week beginning April 6. The pressure builds when the Top 4 continue to conjure images of the Cup. The fight has started and, at least, it looks so on Facebook, and [...]

Sports

Schools Rugby building momentum

View(s):

Schools Rugby is at a stage of being stretched tight and the race is on. The pride on the backstretch will be in the week beginning April 6. The pressure builds when the Top 4 continue to conjure images of the Cup. The fight has started and, at least, it looks so on Facebook, and the sharing momentum is reaching a limit. Despite that, there is more on the politics of government. If you go by another definition, that politics means “activities aimed at improving someone’s status or increasing power within an organization”. This too is politics. The best to remember by all is that these are schoolboys and leave them out of the fray. It is ‘cow crap’ trying to give reasons and meaning to justify on the “why” and “what”?

Getting back to the game, it is not for me to forecast, but on form, there are 4 teams getting closer to the sprint at the last stretch.

Royal held by S. Thomas’ in the 1st half to a 10-0 lead, the game looked poised to be exciting. Royal came into the 2nd half with better things fed into their minds by Coach Dushanth Lewke, and went on to add 45 points in the 35 minutes of play. They humbled their arch rivals with a resounding 55-0 victory, the highest score in this series. As has been in both games played so far, Royal made changes to the pattern of play in the 2nd half and got the better of their opponents. Royal have an all-round team with the forwards as well as the backs playing well and combining to get the best on the ground. What is with S. Thomas’ is possibly, about a development plan that went missing.

St, Joseph’s were a bit shaken by St. Anthony’s Katugastota, who looked like being a challenge up to 5 minutes into the 2nd half, but lacked depth of numbers or, in knowledge of using the bench. The Joes had both numbers and knew when and whom to replace. They, however, showed vulnerability in defense in the 1st half, letting tackles slip and allowing the Eagles to run. This match saw 12 tries scored by both sides and made the game more interesting. The Eagles looked a team with talent, but the direction seemed to be missing. A little bird whispers that it has all to do with those who do not know how to build a nest, but being Eagles makes them think they can fly. The crow is better in building a nest and has to be digested.

Royal showed that arch rivals are no match in their hands, and will be hosted by the Joes next. That will be the tussle for the top spot in Group ‘A’. The match is scheduled for April 6, after the break. Unless, and of course, if any of the babes in the bottom beat one of the two teams. This, on current form, looks to be a hope only. Royal and Joes have to play each other with Royal having to play Trinity and the Joes playing Kingswood after the Sinhala and Tamil New Year break. The way Trinity is playing, there is little chance of a dream win, but Bradby being what it is, anything may happen.

St. Peter’s got the better of Dharmaraja, but showed they need more polishing as they approach the 2nd Round. I was wondering what the Rajans held back to look threatening till 5 min. from the end. The Petes meet Isipathana after the lay off, which will decide the Group ‘B’ winners. This is a game that has always provided sparks and this time around there will be more at stake, which is the No.1 slot in Group ‘A’.

Isipathana won a hard fought game against Zahira. Both teams played well and within their capabilities in a close game that was exciting, but Rugby wise, a little above average, as unforced errors were the order of the day. A little thinking such as a chip over the advancing backs would have possibly given a win to Zahira. The indiscipline of continuous infringements and a dangerous tackle also contributed to their predicament. The Pathana back division was strong, but when play was taken to the forwards, chaos was prominent in the Park School Camp.

The DS Senanayake-Wesley match was the scrappiest game of Rugby in the tournament so far. DSS have themselves to blame for the loss, as in the previous 2 weeks of Rugby. They should have had 3 wins under their belt, but have none to boast of. Nine phases of hits on 2 occasions and within 5 metres, and unable to score, is not something one can understand. The play was continuous for about 8 min.

Playing tight with the forwards and trying to get closer to the opponent’s goal line from inside your own half is something I could not understand. The only time they tried different was 10 min. before the end and kicked into the inviting hands of Wesley’s Zuabai, who kicked judiciously, and a wrong bounce saw Wesley pick up run and score for the only points (5) of the match. Wesley too had opportunities, though less than DSS, but kept making mistakes.

What I could not understand was the post-match attitude of the coaching staff who was interested in accosting the Referee. One was showing the time and the other questioning on an infringement and trying to fish his mobile to show the Referee. Was he watching his players or capturing the Referee on video. Whatever it is, if you want to question the Referee, use the proper protocol of allowing him to cool down and discuss things leisurely. Tell the CMOO, if present or, the match commissioner that you want to discuss. That is the way to go and how it is done. This is something the schools section should nip in the bud, as otherwise, it will get worse as the competition increases.

On the Law: I hear each giving its own definition of a forward pass. The 2017 laws of the game, which is the governing laws of the present Schools Tournament, says, “Forward pass is when the arms of the player passing the ball moves forward. That is towards the opponent’s goal line. The question is what constitutes the arm. I hear the comment is an interesting call, followed with an explanation that the ball did not go forward. Another I see is the explanation that the whistle was for hands in the ruck whereas, the signal is for not supporting body weight. This, by the way, is an area where there should be a stronger whistle and more on those who remain stuck on the ground around breakdowns. Help this out and there will be more quick ball and more tries.

Vimal Perera is a former Rugby Referee, Coach and an Accredited Referees’ Evaluator IRB

 

Share This Post

DeliciousDiggGoogleStumbleuponRedditTechnoratiYahooBloggerMyspaceRSS

Advertising Rates

Please contact the advertising office on 011 - 2479521 for the advertising rates.