The ELVs are dead, long live rugby – apparently
Roar Guru
By pothale, 30 Mar 2009 Pot Hale is a Roar Guru
159 Have your say
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- International Rugby Union - Six Nations, Heineken Cup, Rugby Championship news
- ELVs news
According to a report published today in a British Sunday newspaper, the trial of the Experimental Law Variations is nearly at an end, and the signs are that hardly any of the ELVs will be recommended to the IRB for passing permanently into rugby’s laws.
Following extensive trialling of a number of the Laws since early 2008 in SANZAR nations, and a global trial of some of the Laws since August 2008, extensive reports, surveys and studies have been conducted across the various playing nations around the globe.
What at first was being seen as a direct conflict between Northern and Southern hemisphere countries about the various Laws and their effectiveness, has, according to the Sunday Times report, apparently turned into global opposition to the majority of the proposed new Laws.
These views will be made known at a meeting of the various unions to be held this week in England, hosted by the IRB.
The meeting this week decides which measures will then be put to a formal vote of the IRB council. At this stage, the newspaper report asserts, little if any, of the Laws may make it through.
Each of the experimental laws will be assessed, and a judgement made if they are working well enough to formally refer to the IRB Council, where they will need a majority of two-thirds to be passed. The Six Nations unions, Argentina and Canada could force the IRB into recognizing that the Laws are doomed – because they have the voting power to say so, if necessary.
And it’s not only northern hemisphere nations who are making their opposition clear apparently. It exists in southern hemisphere climes too.
The coach of the Crusaders, Todd Blackadder, is quoted as saying: “The same issues that people are talking about in the north are happening here. The mindless kicking. The ELVs are supposed to encourage more running rugby, but everyone’s ended up kicking it aimlessly. It’s something that needs addressing urgently. I don’t see it as North v South, it’s a global rugby issue.”
The Sunday Times report claims that opposition is also growing in South Africa rugby clubs amongst the coaches and players.
One high profile SA coach – not named – involved in the discussions is quoted as stating: “We are under pressure from our Sanzar partners and the IRB, but we want most of the ELVs out. What was intended to simplify the game has done the reverse. Free kicks, especially, are too easy.”
The article is written by Stephen Jones for the Sunday Times with investigative support from a number of other named journalists for the story and related articles.
It’ll be interesting to see how accurate and informed they are, by the end of the week, following the outcome of the IRB meeting.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
bozo said | March 30th 2009 @ 7:36am | Report comment
According to a report I heard of what Robbie Deans told a Manly Roos fundraising lunch on Friday, the ELVs are gone.
Roger said | March 30th 2009 @ 7:54am | Report comment
I think the MAIN cause for the aerial ping pong we are seeing is the fact that players are now so fit and mobile there are simply too many players in the defensive line reducing space….given there is no space, players kick for territory and hope for turnover. Gone are the days where 8 players (typically tight forwards) are left sprawled and huffing and puffing on the ground whilst backline release into space. YES, the demise of the maul has exacerbated the problem, but rugby has had this problem increasing since 1997 when it went professional.
Having said that, bringing back mauling would make forwards committ to ruck area, but I think the one reason why rugby is having an identity crisis is the outlawing of rucking…the delicious tension at the contest created by the ability if a team to recycle breakdown ball has been replaced by the ref asking the tackling player on the rong side “roll away 6, roll away 6…thankyou” (5 seconds gone, defensive line re-set, attacking momentum stopped, no dis-incentive for tackler to roll away quickly).
I would love the maul to come back, becuase it is a part of rugby that makes it unique from other codes…HOWEVER, bring back a beefed up reading of the obligation of the tackling player…IF a tackling player falls on the wrong side of the ruck, send them off for 5 mins (bring in a new card)…players will get the idea quickly and they will direct their tackling at hips and legs rather than ball and all…we would then have cleaner rucks, quicker ball, more offloads…hey presto.
So bring maul back, bring in 5 min sin bins for even being on wrong side of ruck to compensate for no rucking…now that might be a good compromise for one and all.
If after ELvs are dumped, players fitness still means cluttered backlines and mindless general play kicking, increase area to “mark” to halfway for each team, but instead of kicking for a lineout, they take a short arm from where ball was kicked. This will mean defending teams will either have to kick with skill to space rather than a game of mindless force-em backs, OR actually run the ball out, heaven forbid.
If these dont work, we might have to start thinkng about reducing team suizes from 15 to maybe 10 players per team, perhaps jumping on Sevens wagon (esp with possible Olympics inclusion), to have a combined 10 a side rugby code.
Geoff said | March 30th 2009 @ 8:01am | Report comment
Having now played under the ELVs I would be very happy if the majority of them were scrapped. The only ones I would keep are the lineout laws, the maul law, and the prohibition on kicking out on the full if the ball is carried back inside the 22.
The main cause of the aerial ping pong is the fact that under the ELVs if a team takes the ball into a ruck and cannot clear it the opposition gets a free kick. Couple this with refs paranoia about players going off their feet at breakdowns and it means that teams are reluctant to counter attack from kicks as they risk turning the ball over with their defensive line not set. The chances of turning the ball over are too high so they kick the ball back instead.
van der Merwe said | March 30th 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Agh, hate to say it, but I told you so.
I am delighted that the cheats’ charter, random, wishy washy free kick is going, likewise about the slush that the maul has become. It is concerning to see that the 22 rule still has some support, though. I mean, which would you rather have, a lineout or a bout of aimless Garryowens? A dumb, manufactured, failed law aimed at making everyone play like vintage Frenchmen. I didn’t mind the 5 meter scrum rule too much, but in one of those Times articles a good point is made about the no. 8 picking up and driving most of the time, when in fact the original point of the rule was to create space for the backs move.
Jock M said | March 30th 2009 @ 9:29am | Report comment
BRING BACK THE RUCK.
STOP THE TACKLED PLAYER PLAYING THE BALL ON THE GROUND.
Roger said | March 30th 2009 @ 9:39am | Report comment
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/news-comment/elvs-reveal-startling-statistics-1655596.html
Skip said | March 30th 2009 @ 9:48am | Report comment
If true this is a sad day for Rugby. This will be the day that Rugby stopped progressing. The game will Slowly be overtaken by Rugby League in Australia and NZ. Growth in the USA will stop as American will find the rules to complex and the game to stop start as will football obsessed Asia.
I have played coached and supported the game for over 35 years……….Im off to buy a Bronco’s Jersey.
Matt said | March 30th 2009 @ 10:13am | Report comment
The ELV’s project has certainly been a failure, for many reasons. Some would argue the rules were never going to work, while others would argue that without the full set of suggested law changes that ELV’s were just a piecemeal idea.
How would a cake recipe perfom if half the suggested ingredients are missing, so to speak?
Personally I see most of the ELV changes being rather token when compared to the major failing block of the modern game, the breakdown. It doesn’t matter too much what tweaks are made at lineout time, maul time, scrum time and when kicking from the 22 etc when the tackle/ruck area continues to be an enigma for most refs, players and viewers.
The good thing is that some research has been made into this area. Research which shows that ruck retention rates by the attacking team is up at around 95% these days. And that the number of tackles/rucks has gone through the roof in modern times, while the number of players from each side commiting to these rucks has dropped significanty. This is where all the running rugby and space on the pitch has gone.
Would the hands in the ruck rule have fixed this issue and led to more forwards commiting to each ruck? Will we even know now? Will the game revert back to 2007 rules, plus the quick lineout throw backwards? Or will we end up, in 5 years time, trialling a new set of ELV’s as rugby tries to fix another boring kick dominated WC and a game deviod of running? Will we end up dropping two flankers off the field to try and free up more space? Will professional field dimensions be increased above the normal amateur sized field?
Personally the scrum law was one I’ve always been most skeptical of. The safest way to utilise this was always gunna be to attack close to the scrum with the aim of getting in behind the defending back and placing them offside. Personally I’d much rather see the annoying defensive scrum half being prevented (by law) from coming right around the scrum and disrupting the initial pass that can make or break a backline move. Why should the scrum half of the team who knocked the ball on, and who’s pack is being pushed around at scrumtime, still be able to come around and stick his foot in the way of the clearing pass. This is nothing but distructive negative play that isn’t so much about contesting possesion but destroying the quality of the oppositions deserved possesion.
I’m also skeptical that the ELV’s have anything to do with the high amount of aerial ping-pong. That has been the MAJOR complaint with the ELV’s, aling with Mauling (but lately I’ve seen plenty of mauling in the S14 that suggests that teams can still use this tactic to diversify their attack and keep the opposition forwards in tight). The aerial ping pong was already happening before the ELV’s and is simply about reducing the amount of risk in the risk vs territory equation. Argentina really went to town at the WC and used this tactic to great (surprise) affect against the French. So I don’t see it going away any time soon and certainly don’t see the removal of the ELV’s as getting rid of this blight on the game.
sheek said | March 30th 2009 @ 11:01am | Report comment
Gee……….It seemed like a good idea at the time!?
Ben C said | March 30th 2009 @ 11:19am | Report comment
This is something I posted elsewhere on the site and I think it is an interesting concept. First I would prefer to bring back rucking and allow the breakdwons to become self-policing but realistically this won’t happen. While there are some other problems, the breakdown is the biggest issue plauging the refereeing of matches and hence the flow of matches.
My boss’s two sons are in schoolboy rugby and they are ebing taught this year that there are three key rules at the breakdown:
(1) you have to come in from behind the last feet – no surprise there
(2) the tackler has to roll away, if he doesn’t it is a short arm penalty regardless of whether he was trapped and could get out of the way. In other waords, no excuses for not getting out of the way of the ball
(3) every player joing the breakdown has to stay on their feet with no exceptions. The moment someone goes off their feet, it is a short arm penalty against them. This prevents players flopping over the ball to secure (for the attack) or seal it/slow it (for the defence) which is one of the problems at the S14 level. Interestingly in the few games my boss has seen, the kids have brought rucking back since everyone is on their feet (once the tackler and tackled player are cleared) and the players can try and strike at the ball with their feet. As there is no one in danger of a boot to the head, the referees will allow rucking in those circumstances.
This ‘interpretation’ is bringing back some contest to the breakdown and making it simpler for referees and players to know what is going on. I think it would be interesting to trial this interpretation in a senior competition to see if this cleans up the breakdown a bit.