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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 !

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.

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

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.

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 !

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 !

“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…..

Tough critics here…..don’t be discouraged…..keep contributing!

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.

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.