Sour grapes, what else

By Ding Marcelo - Manila Bulletin - September 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.