What awaits U-20 Schools Rugby League?

With Vidyartha College finally accepting the allegations brought forwards by Isipathana College, the million dollar question lies about the Under-20 Schools Rugby League Championship which is still in the balance as there seem to be no precedence with the last similar issue being in 1990 when there were no league or tournament games but friendly matches. Other issues were when Royal and Kingswood refused to play Thurstan and Dharmaraja respectively. At that incident both Royal and Kingwood were demoted.

Looking at the current issue if points are taken off for all matches played by Vidyartha there will be a whole lot of difference to the points table. If this is not done there will be issues on who else should be relegated.

On the other hand the possibility is to award the win to Isipathana who is the only party that has made a complaint as they can be awarded the win in which case Trinity and Isipathana will be equal. However Isipathana will win the league title on the basis of scoring more tries as reliable sources confirm.

Sources further say that Isipathana is not on the hunt for the league title but that should prevail as they continued to be hounded for an incident that happened in 1990. On the other hand others believe that the league title is theirs as the boys have something to be proud of eventually. Some are of the opinion that they should lay the hands on the cup and pay a tribute to coach Shamly Nawaz who was much criticized at the beginning of the season.

Earlier on July 25, Vidyartha Principal and its Prefect of Games produced a student named R.M.S Bandara to the committee consisting three Directors of the Ministry of Education appointed to inquire into the allegations made by Isipathana. The inquiry was held at the Ministry of Education.

The school authorities of Vidyartha accepted that the person produced is R.M.S. Bandara, who is in the school, but is not the same person who played using the name of R.M.S Bandara in some of the schools league rugby matches this season. It was revealed that another played using the name and had used a doctored photograph to register with the schools section under the name of R.M.S Bandara whose identity card number is 930980536v.

At the first inquiry conducted by the Ministry of Education held on Monday, July 24, the Prefect of Games and Master-in-charge of Vidyartha had been reportedly told by the three Directors of Education who were in the committee to come clean and sort out the issue as it has all the possibilities of being a criminal offence which might have to be referred to the Police. But an ada- mant MIC has retorted that the case can be referred to the Police.

For all purposes the Inquiry Committee did not have to confront a doctored photograph done possibly using the software ‘Photoshop’. The presence of the real R.M.S Bandara was adequate proof to convince the committee of wrongdoing. However the doctoring of photograph is a serious issue that need to be addressed and the persons responsible need to be punished.

The puzzle is why the schools Inquiring Committee headed by its President, Ranjith Chandrasekera did not call for the National Identity Card of the named player at that stage. If this was done the truth would have been revealed much earlier. It is also noted that the Schools Rugby Constitution (clause 28/11/5) requires that the disciplinary committee should consist of the President and seven of its Vice Presidents and the Secretary as the Convener. It has come to light that there was no committee that sat and the President, Chandrasekera himself and Vice President Brigadier Udaya Ariyaratne, who is apparently the Principal of Trinity College, had examined the documents and had come to a conclusion. The question that people interested in schools rugby ask is whether it was ethically correct for the Principal of Trinity to be involved as the outcome had a direct effect on the league championship which may have been taken away from Trinity. Further the question of integrity arises as the committee was not a proper disciplinary committee which is empowered to inquire into all issues as per the constitution but an ad hoc sitting of two persons where one has a conflict of interest.