Dialog Schools Rugby League 2026: Week 2 Tactical Analysis

The good, the bad, & ugly of commercialised Rugby 

Although, a few of the second week games failed to conclude in upsets as anticipated, some underperforming sides with potential, like Science, DSS and STC stepped up their game. We also saw many teams with much improved ball handling compared to Club rugby, enthusiastically executing their short punts and cross kicks, looking to widen their attacking horizons.

 

While Trinity College put up that amazing, one-of-a-kind performance at the Knockout final, the undisclosed disclaimer was, “Please do not try these tricks at home, as these are stunts performed by professional athletes who have been trained on these skills for many years. Trinity College cannot accept any responsibility or liability for mishaps or backfiring encountered upon mimicking these tricks.”

 

Any entity that is serious about securing Trophies chooses a pragmatic approach in ensuring that all the required skillsets to defend and attack, all the different variations of attacks and defences that prevail in schools’ rugby, are acquired during the pre-season. Nothing drastic can ever be done once the season begins, except for some fine tuning, or minor error corrections, if at all.

 

Although it was heartening to observe various sides enthusiastically mimicking these finer skills, sadly they were never executed to precision, mostly hindering the respective teams’ onslaughts and momentum, while some resulting in pure self-destruction. A word of advice would be to never use these skills-in-progress in public, until they are perfected. But, one can be rest assured that it is never going to happen overnight. So, keep practicing until one day your team becomes ready, and then you can use the element of surprise to stun a tough opponent, and seize the day!

 

St. Peter’s hosting St. Joseph’s – 2 May:

A dozen healing Saints from Darley Road possibly suffered a relapse, when their hosting brethren profoundly refused to lend neither a heart of empathy, nor a tender hand of affection for their ailing brothers recovering from a viral infection. While the young Peterites learnt that the old saying “Charity begins at home” is a myth of the past century, the young Saints shall thank their hosts for teaching them a valuable lesson, in that the parable “The Good Samaritan” is only preached at Sunday Schools, but never meant to be practiced in the modern world, that opts - without blinking an eyelid, to secure its ROI on earth, as opposed to investing riches in heaven. This incident will undoubtably shape the character of boys from both institutions, but alas more negatively than positively. Back then, the good Samaritan assisted and healed a stranger lying beaten and wounded by the roadside; but here and now, we have a bunch of frail schoolboys who may be going in for a relapse, and possibly miss out a few weeks of rugby, as the modern-day Pharisees turn a cold shoulder, and walk away from their own brothers. The immorality of omission could be far greater than the wickedness of commission, as taught in the parable of “The Rich Man and Lazarus”. While lost sheep can be found by shepherds, who shall be designated to seek out and find lost shepherds?

 

Returning to rugby, the analysis of this encounter is quite simple. The Bamba Brigade has the amazing ability to attack frantically and score Tries, even if the opposition sneezes while being in possession of the ball. They are very sharp, very nimble, very fit, and extremely energetic until the last long whistle. Joes’ Mauls couldn’t move them even by a millimetre, hence had to revert to their Backline, all the time. Nevertheless, Pete’s rush defence constantly kept pushing Joes’ Backline back, forcing them to stutter and faulter, which was used to turnover possession and score. Joes made a ton of blunders in the second half that allowed the hosts to cement them in that half. A detailed analysis of this match becomes unnecessary, as one team was clearly unfit to play, thus follows a few pointers to improve each team.

 

Rejuvenating Joes:

Short Punts - Joes’ short punts faithfully failed to land on no-man’s land, hence landed them in serious trouble, as opposed to helping them attack deep inside opposition territory. It also resulted in a few Tries being conceded. New skills shouldn’t be unveiled at key matches, unless they have attained a certain level of excellence in execution.

Support Play – Joes conceded 4 ‘holding-on’ penalties while attacking inside Peter’s grid, that indicates a severe drought in support play, that abruptly terminated four scoring opportunities.

Premature Passes – The three quarters were seen making premature passes by default, where they could have advanced the gain line by at least a stride or two

High Tackles – The smaller size of the Peterites is no excuse for 3 high tackles by the taller Joes. Requires immediate rectification to ensure player safety.

 

Pump up Pete’s:

Side Stepping – The Peterites are not trained to side step soon after receiving the high ball, that constantly resulted in thumping tackles. Side stepping is a key skill in evasive rugby, that helps avoid unnecessary contact, while minimising injuries and fatigue.

Penalty Count – Conceding over 20 penalties, mostly when defending the Tryline illegally, and stamping on the spirit and values of rugby, against a feeble opponent may not pose any threat for now, except to the integrity of a team. Since bad habits die hard, they are often accompanied by the Grim Reaper at crucial fixtures against stronger sides, at which point there is no redemption through short-term penance, but only disappointment and misery remains.

 

Result: Frail Joes keep derby alive with self-sacrifice 19-50

 

Thurstan hosting Royal – 3 May:

Thurstanites cast a mesmerising spell on the Royal Tuskers, that turned them into tap dancing cats on a hot tin roof, and petrified the latter’s fanbase so much so, that they eventually conditioned their minds for a possible upset, as the game progressed. The hosts pounced on the visitors from the word go, applying immense pressure, mostly when the visitors were in possession of the ball, that ultimately resulted in Royal committing frequent errors, with which Thurstan struck back. Royal continued to preserve its reverence in game discipline, yet faltered in many other areas amounting to a sum of 8 errors, excluding offenses in the opening half, which was quite uncharacteristic of the Tuskers.

 

However once the sun was set, the tin cooled down, nerves settled and the Tuskers calmed down, they came back strong capitalising on the hosts’ mistakes to score Tries. The following is a summary of how Royal was allowed back into the game, and managed to overcome their overzealous, next-door neighbours.

 

• Thurstanites were pumped up from the onset with their excellent tackling, offering the Tuskers very little to work with

• However, Thurstan eventually allowed Royal to score a Try by conceding consecutive penalties 

• Thurstan scored its first Try by successfully charging down a box kick inside Royal’s 22 

• Thurstan continued to infuse panic in the Royal camp, forcing them to make mistakes, and eventually scored the second converted Try 

• Just before melons, Thurstan showed lack of focus, when two defenders missed their tackles as they rushed forward, allowing the ball carrier to conveniently pass through without a scratch, for a converted Try 

• Thurstanites rode in their shiny new bus, loaded with offside offenses into this game as well, where their defence rushed before the ball was picked up from the ground at the breakdowns, that costed them at least two Tries in this game. This was something that should have been corrected following their last game, where similar mistakes costed them dearly. 

• Royal also scored off a knock-on inside Thurstan’s half, aided by a subsequent penalty advantage for a Try in the corner, that was free of defenders 

• Royal scored its last Try off a crooked throw by Thurstan inside their half, and a subsequent ‘not rolling away’ penalty advantage, and once again facilitated by another completely abandoned corner post 

• Thurstan lost a couple of chances to score Tries by sealing the ball, as the latcher kept falling over the ball while picking and driving

 

Result: Thurstan thrust Tuskers to their triumph 15-40

 

Isipathana hosting D.S. Senanayake – 3 May:

Donz pulled up their socks, to put up their best performance of this season against a strong Isipathana outfit, who’s improved defence especially against Pick & Drives, didn’t get DS the result they wished for. However, the positive is that the phase of ‘lacklustre performance’ is now over and done with, hence DS could look forward to a positive season from hereon.

 

The Donz not only maintained impeccable stats in game discipline and ball handling, they also showed real intent and purpose to precisely execute what they were coached to, which was something seldom observed earlier. However, some of their other, but few shortcomings, worked against them when the Greens used them to score Tries with. 

First Half Stats	Pathana	Donz
Penalised Offenses	8	3
Unforced Handling Errors	4	0
Forced Handling Errors	1	1
Missed Penalty Touch Kicks	1	0
Turnovers	3	1
Delta loss in possession	11	3
Points Conceded	10	14

 

• DS could have led by at least 18 points to 14 by lemons, but they missed a penalty kick, while a Try was disallowed, as the referees thought it was knocked-on while being grounded, quite contrary to what others perceived it to be

• DS executed some patient, focused, fine, attacking moves in the opening half, cleverly outmanoeuvring the green defenders, to score two dazzling Tries, out of which only one was deemed legit 

• In the strong opinion of the analyst, DS made the first mistake in opting to take the first penalty that was missed, and the second penalty that was slotted, as opposed to kicking them to Touch, or scrumming down. This is because, Isipathana can never be defeated by penalty points, and it is a mystery as to how Head Coach Asela hasn’t learnt this by now, even after the trot of losses at the hands of the greens, ever since Donz stepped into the top Division. 

• Pathana rattled and weakened the opposition defence, by working the ball quickly from one side of the field to the other to score a spectacular Try. It should be noted that DS didn’t facilitate this onslaught or scoring with their mistakes. 

• Donz scored a hard-fought penalty Try, yet its progress filled with stunning moments composed of some nifty moves. It was adjudicated a penalty Try, as a smaller green defender jumped high, and deliberately attacked the ball carrier’s neck, for which he was extremely lucky to receive only a yellow card 

Second Half Stats	Pathana	Donz
Penalised Offenses	13	2
Unforced Handling Errors	1	3
Missed Penalty Touch Kicks	0	1
Turnovers	2	0
Delta loss in possession	12	6
Points Conceded	0	19

 

• Although the greens accelerated their offenses count in the latter half, they were able to defend most of them successfully, while DS foiled a few chances on their own. This was quite similar to how Trinity played in the beginning of last season, where although their defending skills were astonishing, the mode of defence was despicable, as repeated deliberate offenses tarnish the spirit of the game.

• Isipathana scored two converted Tries by counter attacking following two knock-ons that occurred at DS lineout throws 

• The hosts scored one more Try after rebounding off a ‘sealing the ball’ penalty by DS while attacking

 

Complaints of rough play and deliberate harm were reported by the DS players, that included eye poking. Although video footage indicates some purposeful suspicious actions by Isipathana players, the evidences were inconclusive from the low-quality video available on Papare. The relevant authorities should obtain a 4k version of the video from Papare, and investigate this matter seriously, as these actions could lead to permanent disabilities or lifetime ailments, if true. Moreover, these couldn’t be baseless allegations due to the following reasons.

 

1. Regardless of the questionable behavioural nature of some matured DS spectators, team DS has always maintained very high standards in discipline, sportsmanship and honour, even after losing close games, and this was the first time such complaints were made by their players.
2. Isipathana’s last year captain was yellow carded last season for eye gouging, with clear evidence available on video as well

 

Thus, there could be some truth to the claims made by the DS team, hence should be taken seriously, and investigated thoroughly.

 

Fending off by the ball carrier is allowed only if directed at the torso; contact with the neck or face should result in a penalty. In addition, the palm that is used to push away the oncoming tackler should be open, and not clenched to make a fist. Despite this being a challenging match to officiate, and a majority of the referee calls being correct, it also contained a fair number of oversights than usual, including hand-offs that made contact with the face or neck. The referee calls that were made, as well as not made in this match, should be closely reviewed for educational and training purposes, so as to ensure that these errors are not repeated by the panel in future.

 

Result: Pathana defence precludes DS 33-10

 

Science hosting Zahira – 3 May:

The scientists had saved up the stellar performance of the season, to show off to their home crowd, where they dismantled top dogs Zahira College, combining sheer game discipline with intelligent attacking gameplay, for the most past of the opening half. However, as they eventually abandoned their sanctity, Zahira was able to creep up behind them, to ultimately prevail over them.

 

The stats of the former half don’t really paint a clear picture of what made Science’s position strong when they led 19-nil, as it was later polluted by indiscipline, towards melons. 

First Half Stats	Science	Zahira
Sanctioned Penalties	9	8
Unforced Handling Errors	1	2
Forced Handling Errors	1	2
Missed Penalty Touch Kicks	0	1
Total loss of possession	11	13
Points Conceded	14	19

 

• The scientists scored their inaugural Try off three consecutive offenses lined-up by Zahira, all the way from science’s 40m to their front porch, as a peace offering to the hosts

• A series of mistakes by Zahira led to the second Try being scored. What began with a penalty touch kick that failed to clear the touchline, and zoned-in quite close to the hosts’ 5m line, ended with a ‘high tackle’ committed by Zahira close to their own 22m, that allowed Science to score a rather uncontested Try. 

• A knock-on by Zahira while contesting the ball close to their 30m lead to a scrum, that was protected by a weak defence formation, facilitating Science to zip through a wide-open space, that was wide enough for an Elephant to pass through, to score an easy converted Try 

• Zahira scored the first Try off a ‘holding on’ offense committed inside Science’s grid, and then by attacking from the subsequent 22m line out 

• Zahira scored the second Try off consecutive penalties conceded by science before melons

Second Half Stats	Science	Zahira
Sanctioned Penalties	7	13
Unforced Handling Errors	2	2
Forced Handling Errors	0	4
Missed Penalty Touch Kicks	1	0
Total loss of possession	10	19
Points Conceded	17	6

 

• Although Zahira ran up its penalty count in the closing session, they put up a much better defensive effort, making Science slog at every given opportunity, and persuading them to opt for two easy penalties, thereby making them settle for just 6 points in that half 

• Zahira scored a Try utilising two consecutive penalties, viz. ‘off feet’ and then ‘closing gap’, off the subsequent lineout 

• The match turning Try came off an error at the hands of the science scrumhalf, as he fell prey to a severely contested 5m science scrum. Zahira scored the decisive, converted Try when the opposition scrumhalf failed to collect the wobbling ball cleanly from the base of the scrum, but instead let it roll backwards into the in-goal area, where Zahira happily pounced on it.

 

Result: Science slumber in own scrum 25-31

 

Lumbini hosting Sri Sumangala – 3 May:

Lumbini College Colombo, poured their hearts out in a courageous and devoted performance despite being overshadowed by a 23-point defeat. Lumbini’s constant commitment to defend their line of pride through persistent, nonstop tackling, made life miserable for Sri Sumangala, and also helped easily cut down another 20 points, that could have been potentially scored by the visitors. The team has been well coached, and should improve in timely decision making with experience. Nevertheless, a few improvements could be made to strengthen their present standing, in their consolidating season at ‘Segment A’.

 

Moments by The Rugger Rider

• Short Punts – Although their short punts didn’t cause self-destruction like it did for Joes, they were executed inaccurately at the most inappropriate moments, that abruptly disrupted their onslaughts, and allowed Summa to counter attack instead.

• Phases over kicking – The young lumbinians should be taught that securing possession, and advancing in phases, over uncalculated, instinctual kicking, should be the preferred choice, unless they are playing on advantage 

• Offenses Count – 20 offenses aren’t going to help them win anything at the top division, unless their opponents do worse 

• Touch Kicking – Touch kicking requires a lot of work, and has to be improved tremendously. 3 penalty touch kicks that were missed, in combination with 3 full-out kicks don’t go too well for you at the top division. 

• Tackling and rolling – Need to improve the process of tackling and quickly rolling away, as 3 ‘not rolling’ penalties were conceded 

• Not retreating – No retreat, no surrender shouldn’t be applied while being penalised, as a few ‘not 10’ offenses were conceded 

• Support play - Support play, and going to ground with the ball must be further improved at the breakdowns, in order to secure possession, as 3 ‘holding-on’ offenses were committed

 

Sri Sumangala College continued their substandard performance, which was much shallow than what they are actually capable of, that let go of another 20 points on the field, in addition to the ones Lumbini saved on their own merit. 15 offenses, a fistful of yellow cards, 8 unforced handling errors, 4 lost lineouts due to own blunders, aren’t features of a side that could be competitive even in the Bowl segment. Sumangala may be looking at a 60-points defeat against Trinity, if this standard of rugby continues over to the next weekend.

 

Result: Summa lumbers Lumbini 33-10

 

Kingswood hosting S. Thomas’ – 4 May:

Both teams turned up to play some improved and refined rugby that portrayed an upward curve, with the positive indication of things looking up for them. For the first time this season, the Thomians looked a serious rugby playing entity, working as a single unit, immersing oneself in deep passion, and purpose. This is one of the fundamental requirements for a team to perform well, and when this is existent, then the rest could follow automatically. However, as for the Thomians, this is just the beginning, and they have quite a long way to go, in order to catch up on what wasn’t accomplished during the pre-season. Consequently, the heavy burden falls upon the native coaching unit who has taken over the impossible liability of turning things around for this messed up unit of talented players, who once possessed the capabilities of winning the league, under proper planning and guidance.

 

On the contrary, Kingswood had worked on their ‘issues’, but strangely looked less threatening in the last 20 minutes of the game, in total contrast to what they usually are. Focusing on the basics is more important than the wide variety of rugby skills that one could acquire. First solidify the basics, and then build the rest, which is proven to work; always. In fact, just solid basics would be sufficient for a team to be among the top 5 in the League. Kingswood commenced the game with an extremely conservative approach towards committing offenses, which was a fantastic sign. However, this shouldn’t transpire at the expense of the constantly attacking mindset. Eventually they slowly accumulated a good sum of sanctioned penalties, yet an improvement from their previous games. 

First Half Stats	Randles	Lavinia
Sanctioned Penalties	5	7
Unforced Handling Errors	3	3
Forced Handling Errors	1	0
Other lost possessions	1	1
Full out kicks	2	0
Total loss of possession	12	11
Points Conceded	14	12

 

• As the stats indicate, the P&L statement add up without further parameters or explanations.

• The Thomians scored their first Try by counter attacking off a penalty Touch kick by Kingswood, that failed to hit its intended target 

• The visitors scored two Tries, taking advantage of the lineouts from two full-out clearance kicks by Kingswood 

• Kingswood scored a converted Try off a STC knock-on, while catching a high ball inside their own 22

Second Half Stats	Randles	Lavinia
Sanctioned Penalties	7	1
Unforced Handling Errors	2	2
Forced Handling Errors	0	1
Crooked Throws	0	3
Total loss of possession	9	7
Points Conceded	19	0

 

• The Thomians suddenly attained sainthood in the final session, conceding only a solitary penalty

• Just as in their previous game, STC’s lineouts diminished to an utter disaster. A whole pre-season’s worth of work may have to be repeated in order to rectify this critical skill gap, if not, teams like Zahira could make a complete mockery of the Thomian lineouts, if it isn’t already. 

• Thora used deceptive footwork to confuse the Kingswood defenders, to find and creep through an open blindside channel to score a corner Try 

• STC scored a Try under the post off a Kingswood knock-on that occurred close to the latter’s 5m line 

• The visitors scored their last Try upon collecting Kingswood’s restart kick, and once again finding an open space through the blindside to infiltrate Kingswood’s 22, and then continued their attack to score on the left side of the post 

• Although the total loss of possession differs only slightly, STC lost only one while giving up real estate, allowing them to effectively defend the rest of their blunders, whereas a good majority of Kingswood’s loss of possessions, also resulted in them back-pedalling to the warmth of their home, where they had to face heated confrontations

 

In summary, the following improvements could benefit each team.

 

Randles:

• While Kingswood has improved their game discipline, it has to be furthered without impacting their natural appetite to play nonstop attacking rugby 

• 3 yellow cards are way too much for one game, and should be completely eradicated 

• Full out clearance kicks cost teams dearly in the modern-day rugby, hence should be eliminated completely 

• 2 penalties for stamping / trampling in one game cannot be a co-incidence, thus should be looked into by the coaching unit 

• 4 holding-on offenses indicate unforthcoming support play, or incorrect method of going to ground, both of which should also be looked into

 

Lavinia:

• STC has to build up its lineout skills from scratch, as all coaching done in previous years have failed miserably. They must unlearn what they know, and relearn the skill to affirm retention, if not turnovers. 

• A side that was a role model for reliable support play during the past two years, has lost its core competency, thereby becoming far less cohesive this season. 50% of the sanctioned penalties were ‘holding-on’, that indicates severe shortcoming in their support play, which is in sheer need to be enhanced immediately. 

• Their ball handling has been improved considerably for the first time this season, but maintaining this form in future games shall not be optional for their survival

 

Result: Thora’s 2^nd half abstinence pacifies Kingswood in 33-12

 

Footnote:

Though we love to, unfortunately we are unable to analyse all 9 games played during the weekends due to time limitations, and therefore compelled to accommodate only around 5 reviews each week.

 

(To receive future Posts delivered to your inbox: click "Email Subscriptions" menu at the top and follow instructions)