December 28, Colombo (LNW): The Sri Lanka Rugby League tournament proceeds in blatant disregard for the constitution, ethical standards, and established tournament regulations. We believe this situation has emerged as a result of years of interference by politicians, senior officials of the Sports Ministry and the Development Department, and individuals operating under political protection and foreign influence. Despite lacking formal recognition in Sri Lanka, these individuals have seized control of rugby, evading accountability and investigation into their actions.
As a result, the ongoing events in the current First Division League clearly demonstrate that wrongdoing and a disregard for ethical and moral principles have become widespread and normalized.
Currently, the administration of rugby was handed over to the Director General of Sports to be selected by the voting group, who are its owners. Instead of resolving it quickly and handing it over, he was trying with a group of people involved in the field to change everything in rugby with the power he temporarily received. The Director General’s dream team has had to back down because the new Sports Minister and Deputy Minister did not approve it, and the courts also gave the necessary rulings for the sake of justice.
However, since the National League tournament was launched under the leadership of the Director General, whose understanding of the practical conditions in this field is limited, a detrimental situation has unfolded. Certain individuals, whom he appointed and entrusted with responsibilities, have pursued their own agendas, undermining his reputation and position. If someone with no knowledge of cooking is appointed as a chef and uses ingredients at their discretion, the responsibility for any resulting issues such as diarrhea, nutritional deficiencies, and a decline in taste and quality falls on that individual. It is becoming clear from the events that are unfolding that the Director General has fallen into a state of enjoying the pain of taking on the mistakes of others as his own.
When a mistake occurs that affects the structure of a tournament, one or more teams cannot resolve the issue amicably at their own level, except by going to the tournament committee and resolving it in accordance with the tournament rules. Any legal violations that occur must be documented for the competition organizing committee and administration, ensuring that appropriate action can be taken either immediately or at a later time.
There is nothing wrong with such amicable agreements being reached before the match committee or a special investigation committee. However, the issue arises when resolutions are made without involving these bodies. The entire blame for this cannot be placed on the sports clubs. This is especially true for those who, like blind men, have attempted to organize the tournament with an arrogant desire to showcase their abilities, while neglecting the establishment of a proper rugby administration.
We know that rugby has never been a sport that overlooks offenses without consequence. This is why we are calling for punishments to be enforced today for past offenses. If the current situation in rugby, where the Director General himself bears responsibility, allows issues to be resolved without acknowledging the mistakes, then the fairness we expect in rugby remains nothing more than a dream and a mirage.
It is equally absurd to award the victory of the now abandoned Army-Police competition to the Army. A re-investigation into that decision is necessary, as it was made without considering the actual situation on the ground at the time. Not only is this decision unfair to the police, but it also risks discrediting the Army.
Each team in this league will be focused on maintaining the health and fitness of their team throughout the tournament. It is conceivable that the weather conditions may have also contributed to the Army Ground being in a dangerous condition for the game, at a time when a sport that requires a lot of effort has been affected by rainy conditions.
The police players, who entered the match with more of a refusal than a warning given the circumstances, did not return to the field for the second half amid heavy rain. They handed the situation over to the match commissioner, who, despite having verbally approved the conditions, ultimately awarded the match to the Army. This decision has unfortunately sparked significant controversy. If the opinions of the referees and the match commissioner are taken into account, and they honestly express their views on the incident, the correct facts will be presented about whether the conditions on that day were suitable for playing rugby and the dangers of the field. This was unnecessary, as the relevant match officials had agreed with both teams to reschedule the match for the following day. However, the Army later refused to play the match.
Although all of these considerations are limited to our investigation into the match, it is important to note that the chairman of the disciplinary committee responsible for this decision is Nimal Krishnaratne, a retired Army Major General. Even though retired DIG M.R. Latif was there, they should have kept quiet by handing over this investigation to others instead of these two.
Had that been the case, it is clear that this decision, though unfair, would have received a more credible and justifiable explanation. The intention here is not to target the Major General or make accusations. The recklessness shown in unethical and unethical behavior. The disregard for it and the lack of understanding to listen to the action, at least when it is reported to the higher authorities.
In this context, it is crucial for the newly appointed board of officials overseeing Sri Lankan rugby to make decisions directly, ensuring that the sport is governed with discipline and respect. They must restore rugby, which has now become stray, to its rightful place. It is important to reconsider the questionable and controversial decisions made regarding the ongoing rugby tournament. Even if the matter does not escalate to punishment, expulsion, or a ban, issuing a warning letter about potential consequences for future offenses and making it valid for the next two or three years would be a prudent step.
These measures should be applied universally, whether to a sports club, player, or official involved in rugby at any level, particularly at the professional level.
*Adapted from original article, “අයාලේ සරණ රගර්” by Nishman Ranasinghe published on 28/12/2024.
