| The Aftermath |
[Oct. 2nd, 2008|12:57 pm] |
Sour grapes, what else
By Ding Marcelo
www.mb.com.ph
Sep 27, 2008
La Salle could have gone out with its head high during the championship series.
But leave it to coach Franz Pumaren to stain a great game and an exceptional Ateneo victory -- and to damage his own credibility -- by claiming that bad officiating did the Green Archers in.
Well, I can’t blame the guy. He’s got to justify the loss, find a scapegoat and what better scapegoat than the referees. It would be shameful if the school shared this misconception and allow this coach to rant about officiating instead of saying that his team will come back next year and play better.
He did not blame himself, did not blame his players who panicked and played selfish and, at times, arrogant, he blamed the referees. In doing so, he missed a golden chance to rise above petty partisanship and behave like a true gentleman.
By doing so, he made his players think that they are better than their opponents although they lost fair and square; and by doing so he tried to convince the La Salle community that they’ve been cheated. What kind of coach is this? Is he talking truthfully or is he simply trying to save his job?
The referees weren’t perfect, that’s for sure. They called a very tight game, worried perhaps that it might deteriorate to the point they would lose control. It just happened that Ateneo adjusted to the referees, La Salle did not.
From a neutral standpoint, there were no glaring errors that would merit the post-game tirade of Pumaren, or any call by the referee that would have altered the outcome of the game. Instead of coming out and praising the Blue Eagles for being the better team, he now claims things would have been different had the referees been less whistle happy.
His claim of referees being biased or incompetent would not have been laughable had La Salle won a game against Ateneo this season. As it is, La Salle lost all four encounters. Also, his claim that La Salle could have won the game would have been believable if La Salle did not have to struggle to make it to the Final 4 and take the second seeding through playoffs.
Instead of being grateful for having gone this far with an overachieving team, Pumaren tried to deflect the loss from his own shortcomings to his own perception that the referees "decided the game."
What an unsportsmanlike gesture.
Imagine Pumaren saying the game was scripted for an Ateneo win. And then said he’s not sour-graping. What do you call that?
Pumaren, should learn how to accept defeat. These things come naturally. And those are values taught in La Salle schools – that you can’t win every day and every game. Apparently he was off playing basketball when these values were the topics in his classroom.
Besides, when he was winning all those games and all those titles, nobody blamed the referees even when many calls were flawed.
What makes La Salle-Ateneo games special is oftentimes not the quality of the games. It is, as has always been the case, the spirit that both schools bring to the hard court. It is the never-say-die attitude that both teams always bring in abundance that makes their games a treasure and always memorable. This is the reason why games between these two schools are always special and the reason why their rivalry is enduring. Everything is always left on the court.
But Pumaren had to spoil it.
Maybe La Salle should assess his coaching status. Remember that he’s the same guy who was in charge when the school was suspended for bringing in two ineligible players three years ago resulting in embarrassment and the return of a championship trophy.
Had his school been less protective, Pumaren, who claimed to be innocent and a non-participant in the scandal, should have been consigned to oblivion a long time ago.
But he’s still there, ruining his own reputation and that of La Salle's.
(Ed’s note: Also see Ed Picson’s column on Page H-3 regarding La Salle’s boycott of the awarding ceremony.)
A bitter aftertaste
By Ed Picson
www.mb.com.ph
Sep 27, 2008
Basketball fans have never had it so good. In the current break between seasons of the Philippine Basketball Association, there is no dearth of thrilling hoops action as the UAAP and the NCAA has been providing more than ample excitement.
As of this writing, Game 2 of the NCAA Finals between the San Beda Red Lions and the Jose Rizal Heavy Bombers was yet to be played but I will surely make it a point to watch, even if my alma mater, Colegio de San Juan de Letran and its knights were unhorsed in the Final Four.
But let’s not get morose here. That’s how the ball games, as they say. You win some, you lose some.
While the Red lions may be favored after their win in Game 1, I have admired the way JRU has played under the able mentorship of Ariel Vanguardia. He deserves a lot of the credit for turning things around for this team. It pains me that it was his cunning and his boys’ determination that caused Letran’s fall, but we all need to accept defeat no matter how bitter it tastes.
Which brings me to the classic UAAP championship battle between Ateneo de Manila and De La Salle University the other night.
It was as expected, another spectacle of a game between the two bitter rivals and naturally, emotions ran high. In the end, Ateneo wrapped it up in two games, sweeping the Archers with their 62-51 win in Game 2.
I thought all along that Coach Norman Black and his boys had the more formidable line-up and were able to hold up under extreme pressure, but La Salle was also talent-laden and was just as motivated. So I held off making predictions when asked by friends on what my take was on that series. It would always be fool-hardy to second guess a game that was to be decided not only by talent, skill and preparation. Too many intangibles also figure in the equation.
It turned out to be as closely-fought and contested as expected and I thought Ateneo won it fair and square. There may have been lapses in the officiating as La Salle Coach Franz Pumaren decried, but those looked more a result of human frailty and did not really dictate the end result.
Of course, Pumaren had all the right to complain and we have also observed the need to professionalize officiating in such high-profile games, even in the collegiate ranks. We have cited before the efforts made by the NCAA in hiring PBL referees thus putting a premium on officiating.
But what provided a bitter after taste to an otherwise exhilarating evening was the failure (refusal?) of La Salle to claim the 2nd place trophy during the closing ceremonies. I can understand the disappointment, dejection and all-around grief that muddles a juvenile’s decision-making in the aftermath of such a loss. But I’m sure there were more mature personalities in their organization that could have provided the voice of reason.
Basketball is a sporting event and the object of an inter-school competition is to promote well-being and give all those involved, especially the studentry, the thrill of competition and absorb the effects thereof. These are valuable lessons that are to fortify them for the greater battles ahead in the game called life. And that includes accepting a loss with dignity and honor.
Sadly, this was not the case during the awarding ceremonies and many were sorely disappointed at the display of unsportsmanlike behavior. At the very least, it sent the wrong message to the legion of young minds that were glued to the event.
I hope Coach Pumaren and La Salle officials have a good explanation for the unfortunate incident. They owe it to the public, especially to the young. |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
nikiks's journal
happy
