By Ian From NZ
June 2nd 2008 @ 4:45pm
Loading ...Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates..
---------------
Super 14 final: the birth of the generic ELV rugby style
Yes, I can honestly say the Super 14 final was one of the better ELV rugby games this season. But what did Robbie Deans work out at the beginning of the season that the other Super 14 coaches did not?
1) ELV rugby laws allow play to be very loose (non structured): Using free kicks solely for tap and go (add to this short lineouts) allows a game to have very little traditional rugby union structure. I believe Deans knew that having scrums and long lineouts (with the odd maul) allowed a better platform for attacking rugby.
The final had more than average scrums, long lineouts and mauls. This is why the final was a better representation of rugby union that earlier Super 14 games. Also Deans doesn’t need to be a rocket scientist to realise that the field wide defensive line is removed while executing a scrum or full lineout.
2) The kick and chase game is now critical to acquire territory: Kicking to find a defensive player out of position, up and unders landing outside the defenders 22, kicks that find middle ground and bounce causing defenders to take time to respond. The game of force back is more prevalent under the ELV rugby.
To have a smart kicking game you need smart kickers, this means all players numbered 9 to 15 must have an eye for the tactical kick. Just having a smart kicker at first five or fullback is not enough. The aim is to execute running rugby in the opposition half, the Waratahs on occasion broke this rule.
3) Player type selection: Selecting a tight five for solely tight forward duties is over. Brad Thorn is the new tight forward mold, he must be loose and tight when the circumstance requires it. (Yes you guessed it, the ARU can now go shopping for forwards in the NRL)
I guess while scrums still require pushing the only true tight forward is the tight head prop. Mobile, tall and very athletic tight forwards are the prescription. A game for all shapes and sizes, not any more!
3) Fast ball beats defense: This is not just true for ELV rugby, but the execution of fast and accurate passing finally allowed the Crusaders’ wings to get some space (on one occasion it led to the try of the game) to run around their opposition.
4) Fitness: Yes, having the puff and pace to go the distance, this was very evident in the last 20 minutes of Super 14 final. The side that lacks fitness is slower to set up an attacking back line, slower to run onto the ball, slower to cover the field in defense and more likely to drop a tackle. The Waratahs were dead in the water in the second half.
Why should I be worried about the state of rugby union when the Super 14 final was confirmed by all as such a good game?
Firstly, there was only 13 out of 23 ELVs applied in the 2008 Super 14 season. Yet to be used laws around the maul and lineout allow for more traditional rugby union structure to be removed from the game.
Secondly, answer this question: Is the above style likely to be adopted in every ELV rugby game? Yes, if you want to win!
Rugby union may be entering one style of play … the Crusaders way.
I am afraid whenever I watch NRL or AFL all I see is the same generic game every week. If the players wore the same colours each week, I wouldn’t know if different teams were playing.
The rugby union styles of England, France and South Africa may be morphed into the Crusaders ELV rugby style and the winning of the game will just come down to who executes this style better than the other.
This will lead rugby union to be boring and indifferent!
Ian McGeehcan has a point when he said: “My concern is that we will end up playing one type of game; that the variety and depth of options which the game has always had will be taken away.”
Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates.
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(22)
We were talking about the important things in life, mainly sport.
Loading ...
Peter K said | June 2nd 2008 @ 5:35pm | Report comment
I could not disagree more re ‘we will end up playing one type of game’.
More than ever with the current laws we are all playing the one style, especially when the pressure is on i.e. World Cup.
It is a forward based territory game. When in you own half kick it to the other end. ONLY Fiji was successful in running the ball from anywhere. All the current styles are predicated on forwards achieving parity and gaining the advantage line.
The most important requirement with the current laws are forwards that dominate and a good kicking game.
The ELV’s as used in the S14 do allow backs to win games with forwards being outclassed as demonstrated by ACT and WA. But vica versa is true also Teams with backs being outclassed still win like BULLS over NSW, ACT.
If you use pick and drive and flood the breakdown at rucks and have a useful maul i.e. a forward dominated game the defence has to commit players i.e. the forwards from the defensive line they cannot be fanned out.
The set of ELV’s used in the S14 almost have it correct. I would only remove the one re the offside line is created at a tackle, this gives the attack too much advantage over defence.
With the full set of ELV’s I really disagree with pulling down the maul. As shown in the APC the maul becomes useless, it is very easy to pull one down. I also disagree with allowing hands in the ruck.
BTW Deans copied the puma’s world cup tactic of constant mid field bombing under pressure. Deans did not originate it, just saw it as something useful to incorporate.
Spiro Zavos said | June 2nd 2008 @ 6:21pm | Report comment
Ian ffrom NZ
I don’t know what final you watched but it wasn’t,it seems to me, to be the Super 14 final. The ball is in play a lot more with the ELVs. But this shouldn’t be the reason why they are damned. The ELVs allow for more rugby. There are enough scrums to gladden the heart of any old scrummager. But there is more movement of the ball, too. The Crusaders scrum proved to be one of their dominant weapons. Their lineout beat the Waratahs lineout, as well. There were only 6 penalties. If you allow 40 seconds a penalty, the 10 or so missing penalties amount to 400 seconds, over 6 minutes of play. When this final is compared with the Heineken Cup final, it’s obvious which final provided the real rugby. It was a disgrace to the game that Munster started their slow flow routine with 20 minutes of play left.
The Tri Nations are going to be played with the current ELVs plus pulling down of the maul and any numbers in the lineout. This will force cleverer options from coaches and players. It will truly be survival of the fittest, rather than the fattest.
Garth Hamilton said | June 2nd 2008 @ 7:48pm | Report comment
Ian,
I’m just happy to see the inevitable, and in hindsight oh-so-obvious, coming together of rugby union and Iggy Pop right here on the Roar.
I’d like to think Iggy would have been a flanker in the Jean Pierre Rives mould.
matta said | June 2nd 2008 @ 8:23pm | Report comment
Perhaps the biggest load of crap ever written on this forum….
sheek said | June 2nd 2008 @ 8:26pm | Report comment
Ian,
Tough critics here…..don’t be discouraged…..keep contributing!
matta said | June 2nd 2008 @ 8:59pm | Report comment
Yeah sorry Ian, I should clarify.
“Selecting a tight five for solely tight forward duties is over. Brad Thorn is the new tight forward mold, he must be loose and tight when the circumstance requires it. (Yes you guessed it, ARU can now go shopping for forwards in the NRL.) I guess while scrums still require pushing the only true tight forward is the tight head prop. Mobile, tall and very athletic tight forwards are the prescription. A game for all shapes and sizes, not any more!”
is what I mean by stupid…
One, yes one RL forward plays one, yes one good season of Super 14 and all of a sudden the ARU should be looking at the NRL for forwards…?
Mate, I rate Brad highly but the guy is on his 2nd time round at Pro Rugby and he, unlike most League forwards, played union until his late teens. He also hasnt even played a decent test yet…..
bob said | June 3rd 2008 @ 12:40am | Report comment
Ian, you have my support in your assertions and my respect… don’t worry about the “we want all rugby players to be skinny and quick” brigade… mostly they are just jealous of anyone who can scrummage, maul, lift, tackle, pass and did I say scrummage? The game is for all shapes and sizes, but the likes of Spiro call large, “fat”… They’ve never been the in the front row, and couldn’t lift a half pounder with salad and beetroot!!
Keep the posts coming mate… there’s plenty of us who understand and agree!
And by next year the ELV’s will be gone gone gone, quicker than celery in a ELV lovers cafe, because in teh NH we will say no!
Ian from NZ said | June 3rd 2008 @ 6:10am | Report comment
First I never said I didnt like the ELVS, I just think they need amendments, see my other post on the roar called “My ELV amendments”. Second, if you read my post again next year or after the ELV test matches, you will see tactics that all look like crusaders rugby style, soon this will be boring, Ian McGeecan has got a very serious point.
Ian from NZ said | June 3rd 2008 @ 6:22am | Report comment
SPIRO SAID : ..”The Tri Nations are going to be played with the current ELVs plus pulling down of the maul and any numbers in the lineout. This will force cleverer options from coaches and players. It will truly be survival of the fittest, rather than the fattest.”…
What wrong with being fat and slow, see you confirm one STYLE OF PLAY and a game not for all shapes and sizes, what wrong with England 10 man rugby, Gorgia used in the 2007 RWC to beat Ireland. Sure you and I liked the Super 14 final, but you are looking at the game with one eye, how many styles can you count under ELV rugby, I tell you, ONE, soon all coaches will mimick the Crusaders style, and there is your AFL and NRL generic style established. OPEN MIND SPIRO, please !
Ian from NZ said | June 3rd 2008 @ 6:24am | Report comment
sheek said ..is what I mean by stupid…
One, yes one RL forward plays one, yes one good season of Super 14 and all of a sudden the ARU should be looking at the NRL for forwards…?
Mate, I rate Brad highly but the guy is on his 2nd time round at Pro Rugby and he, unlike most League forwards, played union until his late teens. He also hasnt even played a decent test yet…..”..
ME: Ok maybe your correct, still a win for you on a minor point, well done !
Dexter William said | June 3rd 2008 @ 5:37pm | Report comment
Ian
Whatever rules you may have in Rugby, no two teams can play alike. The ELV is new and we will not know how each team will play by these new rules.
By making the game faster and more exciting, as compared to what we saw in the last RWC must be a positive.
The positives of ELV just simply out weighs the “negative” that you are trying so hard to put through - very little evidence but just your fear of the unknown. By the way, I would love to see two teams like the Crusaders playing each other. Don’t need fat people to entertain us unless it is Sumo and even then Sumo is changing to thinner less fat wrestler. Fat does not equate to strong.
The bottom line is that ELV makes for a better spectacle. It is more entertaining to watch and will attract not only us the diehards, but new fans to the game.
Dave74 said | June 3rd 2008 @ 7:09pm | Report comment
Ian,
I have heard the same argument regarding generic game plans in rugby since professionalism. First, it was the All Blacks style in 1996, then Rod Macqueen’s Brumbyleague, then in 2005 it was that all teams would play like the Crusaders within 2 years. In all cases the commentator(s) concerned were prven wrong. In fact those teams were forced to change their game plan when another style o play came to the fore. As long as their is a contest for posession in rugby the game will continue to revolve and evolve. If, as in league, the contest for possession is taken out of the game then a generic gameplan may come more to the fore.
Ian from NZ said | June 3rd 2008 @ 8:40pm | Report comment
Dave74…”As long as their is a contest for posession in rugby the game will continue to revolve and evolve.”..
Its the type of CONTEST thats the issue, reduce the variety and frequency of the contest that is the issue. Having 200 plus rucks in the super 14 game is a lot of the same contest. Scrums, linouts, kick offs, 22 drop outs, mauls are all forms of contests, MY POINT is lets reduce the massive count of rucks for those contests that are more traditional rugby union structure. lets say (for fun) you take the kicking game out of the ELV super 14 final, have 2 man lineouts, whats do you have, a hybrid game of rugby union that you might as well call rugby league. Ruck to ruck to ruck etc
Dave74 said | June 3rd 2008 @ 11:49pm | Report comment
Ian,
The amount of rucks is not really the issue IMHO. It is the lack of contests in the actual rucks which would lead to the game becoming more like rugby league. The “hands-in” rule of the ELVs actually restored the ruck to being a genuine conest for possession which meant teams had to commit or risk losing possession and giving the opposition an opportunity to counter attack.
From reading your posts you see the problem with the modern game stemming from a lack of traditional structures. My main gripe with the modern game are twofold: the first is that most teams’ footballing intelligence is left in the coaching box and not taken out onto the field. The second is that contests are slowly being eroded from the game - not by the ELVs mind you as they have been losing their contestability (bar the lineout) for a number of years (when was the last time you saw a straight put in at scrum time?) which means teams are standing in the “defensive” trench rather than contesting.
Ian from NZ said | June 4th 2008 @ 5:08am | Report comment
dave74 ..”My main gripe with the modern game are twofold: the first is that most teams’ footballing intelligence is left in the coaching box and not taken out onto the field. The second is that contests are slowly being eroded from the game - not by the ELVs mind you as they have been losing their contestability (bar the lineout) for a number of years (when was the last time you saw a straight put in at scrum time?) which means teams are standing in the “defensive” trench rather than contesting.”…
I agree 1000%, my blog is all about this. But I feel that the ELVS are a to the friend the field wide rugby league style defense trench. No mauls, very short lineouts, more ruck to ruck than ever before, the force back game, all this is not rugby union when the game is 85% this type of play, its school yard bull rush !
Jerry said | June 4th 2008 @ 6:56am | Report comment
Dave 74 - the “hands in” rule wasn’t played in the S14, but the free kicks for ruck infringements meant the refs could be more decisive with their calls and meant that teams got quicker ball in general, I feel.
Matt said | June 4th 2008 @ 8:16am | Report comment
Nice to see some stiffly defended opinion Ian.
A few of your points are debatable and a few are solid.
The use of tactical kicking for territory was a tactic that was already emerging prior to the ELV’s. Most obviously used by the Argies in their succesful WC07 campaign. Deans just had the best exponents in his team to use this tactic to better effect. I would imagine that other sides will be exploring how to use and difuse this over the next season or two. Aussie Rules coaches, for competency under the high ball, would be the first place I’d start. Taller wingers and Fullbacks would be another.
Fast hands beating defenses is no more important now that it has ever been. The counter-attacking ball movement of the Crusaders has been (and still is) a hallmark of their style. As is the balance of a strong forward pack coupled with a strong kicking and counter attacking backline. The age old rule of the ball being faster than the man has always rung true, but the increased dominace of defensive patterns has starved backlines of the space with which to ship the ball wide. Enter the ELV’s and suddenly teams are seen to be running and passing like they were 5 years ago in the Super 12.
The big arguement about the ELV’s removing the all shapes and sizes idealism is a false one. Tall locks have only become a trend in the last 15 years. Prior to that, the great locks of the game (like Willie John McBride, Collin Meads et al) were only just over the 6 foot mark. 6 ft 4 was a giant!! Amateur players were also far slimmer and lighter than they are now too. The game was less about power and more about mobility. Just like the ELV’s.
The pre ELV pro game has very VERY few small men. Shane Williams is one of the few that spring to mind. So much for a game of all shapes and sizes. Where was the place on the field for the smaller athlete? Guys were blessed with great skill levels struggled to tackle PROP forwards who were all of a sudden over 130kgs? The all shapes and sizes is a myth in the pro game. All we are seeing is bigger and bigger players. Scrum Halves over 6 foot (or over 6foot3 in Mike Phillips case). 5/8ths like Stephen Donald at 6ft3. Backlines where most players are over 100kgs!
The ELV’s just means that the monsters have to lose bulk to get around the park more and all players must be skillful (Prop Forwards included). Mobile front rowers are also not new. Guys like Kevin Mealamu, Carl Hayman and The Beast were all converted into front rowers earlier in their career. This trend was happening, particularly in NZ, prior to the ELV’s also. So a looser tight 5 is not a new ELV tactic.
The ELV’s took a while to get going, as we all realistically expected. But once sides understood the new game (and in most cases improved their fitness levels) then games became far more fluent and entertaining. Defence and the work of the tight 5 are just as important as ever. If you can put pressure on the oppositions set piece (as the Crusaders did) then they will struggle to retain possesion and will therefore be starved of attacking ball.
Maybe it is a Super Rugby thing in general (or maybe it was aided by the ELV’s) but this year S14 was a great advertisement for the athleticism and skills of the game. And also a great example of how rugby is still a VERY different sport from all others, Rugby League included.
Ian in NZ said | June 4th 2008 @ 9:55am | Report comment
Rugby Union has is the past many styles of games, this is because the player depth in each country differs. NOT all countries have the speed and pace out wide as the All BLacks, for example when the ABs played England, England would have a chance of winning if they played there style of game (10 man), as they knew if they played the outwide game they would most likely loose. NOW with the ELVs the 10 man game is, well, diminished. Remember when Georgia Beat Ireland at the RWC 2007 playing the conservative forward game, wasnt this a fanastic game for Georgia. Thats what I mean by effective tactical styles being reduced. Dont tell me that 10 man rugby is winning rugby with the ELVs, I cant see it: Mauls defeated (new rule) , Lineouts need not be contested (new rule), kicking force back game, all promote less structure.
If you dont have blinding pace out wide you will most likely loose in ELV rugby, but in the past if you sucked the other team to play your style (say no pace out wide, forward battle) you had a chance. Just like a great boxing contest (like the rumble in jungle)
I guess well wont know until its too late.
Jerry said | June 4th 2008 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Lineouts need not be contested (new rule)>>>
Er…what? The rule is that a team can put more defenders into a lineout if they wish. All this will mean is that teams don’t get a free kick when the other team fails to check if there are 7 or 6 attacking players in the lineout and that refs won’t have to bother checking numbers and can instead concentrate on things that matter. If a team doesn’t contest lineouts they’ll be conceding good possession to the other team and will be behind the 8-ball all day.
Dave74 said | June 4th 2008 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
Jerry, sorry, I should have specified in the ARC. Teams quickly learnt in that comp that the cleanout at ruck time was very important. Hence, teams had to commit numbers to the breakdown which opened up space out wide.
I am not a fan of the numbers in lineout ELV as I like the existing rule about the attacking team setting the numbers. This ELV will spell the end of the short lineout - which is under-used in professional rugby IMHO.
Ian, IIRC Ireland beat Georgia in the WC game you mentioned, though it was a close game.
Jerry said | June 4th 2008 @ 2:48pm | Report comment
Dave - I’m not so sure about the short lineout being over. I think to defend a 4 or 5 man lineout with a full pack would be to concede an advantage elsewhere on the pitch - eg a pod of forwards in midfield ready to hit the ball up quickly. I’m not really sure about this though, cause part of the short lineout is that the defending team really only has one or two jumping options and if they put a full pack in they can have 3 or 4 jumpers ready to disrupt. I’m on the fence really, don’t want to see short lineouts go the way of the dodo but hate seeing cheap free kicks given cause a pack of exhausted forwards fail to notice the opposition blindside flanker is not in the line. Perhaps it could be stated that a defending team can’t put more than one or two players more than the throwing team - but that still leaves the ref having to count.
What I don’t like about the lineout ELV is that, in conjunction with the ELV allowing mauls to be pulled down, a team will be able to defend full lineout with only 4 or 5 defenders (they won’t be able to get possession most times but will be able to sack any lineout drive and have a 10 man defensive line if the ball is spun out to the backs). There’s no law saying you can’t defend with only a few forwards but practically you’d get murdered by driving mauls if you did. If the pulling mauls down ELV is scrapped it would be suicide to try and defend a full maul drive with only half a pack. One more reason why that ELV is crap, in my opinion.
Dave74 said | June 4th 2008 @ 9:26pm | Report comment
Hope the pull-the-maul down law is scrapped as I love to watch a well-worked maul (yes I am Australian or was last time I checked). You don’t have to worry about extra guys in the backline if you win the lineout which is a lot easier if you have 7 guys in to 3 or 4.