ThePapare.com drove intensely for answers from the Sri Lanka Schools Rugby Football Association regarding the recent fiasco with regard to Vidyartha College along with other schools from lower divisions being found guilty of falsifying identity and fielding an overage player and the subsequent revelations being instrumental in grabbing the awarded Schools rugby league from Trinity and awarding it to Isipathana.
For long now ThePapare.com serving as guardian, servant and supporter to our favourtie sport rugby, has brought up many concerns in the way the School league has been run. In addition to this latest diabolical incident, the SLSRFA and over and over again put the league, players, coaches and even the media in constant strife.
In 2011 they could not issue the fixtures on time and thereby causing hard ship to schools because of the fiasco of bringing in 12 teams. In 2009 issues with teams caused them to increase the league from 8 teams to 10. The junior rugby tournaments organized are completely disorganized and always do more damage than good to young players.
As a sequel to our earlier article, ‘SLSRFA take responsibility’ and not to be one-sided, we fiercely sort after facts and allowed a forum for the SLSRFA to issue their answers.
Below are excerpts from the questioning:
Question : What is the system you have in place to check age? How did Vidyartha College field a player if there is a proper system in place?
SLSRFA: Birth Date – 93-1-1 and below. The format of registration includes a photo signed by the principal together with the relevant paperwork.
VCK had the details of Shanaka Bandara but had inserted the photo of Kasun Bandara on the card.
ThePapare :The ID card specifically says the principal and master in charge are responsible for the truthfulness of the details put forward. The player ID which is issued at the beginning of the season has the signature and authentication of the Master in charge of rugby, Principal of school, Provincial Union Secretary, Provincial union President, Schools union secretary, Schools union president and parent of player.
So basically the SLSRFA issued the ID without verifying that the player in the photograph and the information furnished belongs to the same person, Therefore the above mentioned persons will have to hold themselves squarely responsible for this lapse.
Basically what has taken place is that all the officials have signed the said document based on the affirmation of the School principal and Master in charge. This system is obviously flawed and has clearly shown up inadequate.
Question :Who reviewed the issue after IC complained the first time?
SLSFRA: Isipathana had videos of the match, and found the difference in the player and thus the complain came about
ThePapare: Why was this evidence not used in the 1st review? The first review was done by the SLSRFA and they cleared Vidyartha as they found no evidence because all the details were fine. The player was not brought forward at that point. Later on, Isipathana had forwarded a copy of Kasun Bandara’s ID, and that was used for the second review with the ministry.
Question: Did they appoint a review panel ? Who was on the review panel?
SLSRFA: Yes, it is known by the President. I wasnt there, i dont know who was on the panel, the president only had the whole thing sorted
ThePapare: A preposterous answer from a top official at the SLSRFA amply signifying the state of things at the schools governing body.
Question: What criteria did they use to decide the final awarding of the league – how did they construct it?
SLRFA : We acted according to the SLSRFA handbook; Isipathana won it on No. of Tries. Both Trinity and Isipathana had 45 points each.
ThePapare: In the SLSRFA’s last points table it showed that Trintiy had a total of 45 points – if the 5.5 that Trinity won against VIdyartha have been deducted – how are they still on 45 points? In the same manner Isipathana had 43 points in the final table – Pathana won 3 points in the drawn game against Vidyaratha then how did they end up with 45.
Question: How do you intend preventing such things in the furture?
SLRFA :In the future, we hope to stop this, by introducing finger print scanning, that will be fool proof.
ThePapare: Why waste money? What an elaborate scheme for a schools league. Instead shouldn’t the persons responsible be held accountable instead. Why did officials certify documents when in fact they cannot certify it as they have not physically checked the player
Question; Where is the final league table? And why was it not presented to the media along with the final decision? How can a decision be made completely if the final points table has not been completed?
SLSRFA: Everything is sorted now and there is no point. All these happened weeks before so whats the matter now?
ThePapare: There are still discrepancies’ and without a final league table and proper answers from the authorities, questions will be asked. The media, fans, players, coaches and schools have a right to know. This is a ludicrous answer from a senior official of a governing body.
Question: Who wrote the handbook and when was it written? What accreditation does the hand book have (irb,arfu,slrfu)?
SLSRFA: The Rule book is available, it’s not affiliated to anything, but it follows the same guidelines as the SLRFU and IRB with a few exceptions.
ThePapapre: The coaches and schools should have been given the rule book at the beginning of each season. The question still remains who wrote it? What accreditation does the writer have? When was it written?
Question :Why were points awarded for a loss?
SLSRFA: A point was awarded to the loser, to motivate them as few teams do not play to their full potential which might affect relegation standings
ThePapare: What a load of hogwash. If your last your last whether you have no points or 9 points. How capable is the SLSRFA to decide how to motivate rugby players
These questions were not intended to put anyone in a spot, but to draw attention of the community that allowing these officials to run rugby is not suited especially in this time and age.
The SLRFU has scampered in leaps and bounds to put rugby in place in the short time under the new president Asanga Seneviratne, it is time the nursery was handed over to correct and competent hands to nurture and bring to a professional platform.
It must be realized that Sri Lanka cannot have a rugby development plan because schools develop players. So if the players do not get the experience of playing in a proper tournament they don’t gain any experience and even though they are physically ready to play they are not mentally ready because they have not played in a proper professional tournament.
