North versus South on the ELVs: is there a solution?

Paulmc... I think the malts are hitting better than the wine did! But you're still making sense! Give the players the laws that let them govern the breakdown, and most of the issues go away... it's madness that rucking was discarded because it was deemed dangerous and would put off rugby mums letting their kids play, but now we can collapse the maul! No-one ever really get hurt from a rucking... sore, but not damaged... but being under 6 or 8 or more falling bodis could be quite different. It just feels like the game isn't being administered for the players by the players anymore? We really don't want to go the way of soccer... and if we let TV dictate the way the game should look, that's the way we'll go. The IRB can't have two masters... it either severs rugby, and rugby is it's players... or TV... I feel that TV has come to rugby because it is great, and rugby needs to stand firm, and administer the game proplery... and that means gettign a grip on the refs!

Bob I agree with the rucking comment. Last night my eldest (now 31) - we were watching the "canes v force" game - said bring back rucking like when I played - that will tidy up all the luing around. He was small but slow (re previous comment) played openside, great anticipation - coaches loved him - but after puberty he got smashed week after week- became a referree- then work killed that-like his old man (a useless hooker) but still loves the game. His point "we didn't wait to have studs on out back" Ps this is a couple of single malts

paulmc, valid points... the wine did you no harm! As for the refs, I agree... there is little reason why "interpretation" is needed... the laws are written clearly enough. Proper ref development will open the game up as it should be, and level the playing field. In the community game here, and even in the elite to a lesser extent, we still ruck... then suddenly a player will get binned for rucking... it doesn't matter much in the community game, but serious ref development needs to take palce world wide... it would help I suppose, if everyone played the same laws!

Bob I am just finishing a cheap bottle of Sh Shiraz so if the logic is obscured blame the booze I can appreciate where you are coming from - I lament the inability of our "OZ" teams to adapt to conditions that don't suit our "native" style eg. their poor kicking strategies when playing in your mud. Conversly I am critical of "pom" teams that kick the ball to death when they encounter a dry ground. This is why the rules must suit the universal game. I will add a comment here about the "body sizes- shapes" - this is bullshit. If you are small, skilled but slow - forget it! if you are big & fat - you'll survive if you are big & fast you'll be a named if you big fast & skillful - name you $ I'll bet in community rugby you have skillful but they are fat & slow or small & skinny. How are your referees? This is where he real $ should be spent (opinion only)

Paulmc.... how do you mean? If I give as an example, even in the fully pro 1st division, Carlos Spencers team was relegated last season, (back up to premiership now) but he was saying the experience was valuable, because a lot of his team mates, fellow kiwis, had never played on such poor ground, or had such poor fascilities... when I first coached in NZ, as a prop, I thought I should introduce the youths to mauling the Englsih way... it was S. Island, winter... but pretty soon it was clear that no way would they need to maul the Englsih way because the ground always, everywhere, so well drained, and on the occasion that a pitch was flooded, the game shifted to another pitch that was fine. as a result, tehy played a running, fast rucking, blow-over style that was perfect for teh conditions... there was no real thought in it, just the way the game was... but you couldn't play that style at grassroots here... not everywhere... and teh teams with well drained grounds do run a lot more. One problem here is that most of the pitches owned by schools and local authoritiies were sold off for property development under the Thatcher government, and have been lost... we are often left with virtually unploughed fields... not everywhere of course, but grass roots can frequently be just mud baths. Some clubs get lottery funding and euorpean union money, and they have really good conditions... the rest of us maul!!! I really think that the ground, couple with frequently sub zero conditions, sleet, rain and wind, have caused the Englsih game to evolve into the style it is... that's not to say it can't be different, the Welsh, Irish and Scots took a different route, but that's the nature of evolution I guess... now we're coming out of that, and instead of wingers dying of hypothermia, they're running again... but to be fair to us, our objections are not just beligerence... if we had your grounds, we would run more! I'm not kidding here when I say that in previous seasons rucking drills have had to be closely observed in case the guys trapped under it all ingested too much mud! I've been in games that were abandoned because the ref could no longer tell who was who... I once scored a try with a srumcap I'd torn off someone in a maul, thinking, in its muddied state, that it was the ball... ok, like I said, I'm a prop, but you get the picture? NZ 30 years ago maybe? So..... when the beloved RFU and the shiny IRB tell us we have to adopt laws that have no real sene in English, grass roots rugby, you can see why we get a bit aggressive? It's not that we don't admire SH rugby.... it's almsot like telling AFL players they have to wear ankle high boots to keep trhe mud out....

Bob Is the plot getting lost?

Paulmc... the clubs are pretty much self sustaining, self financing entities here... the RFU put money into development and equipment under certain circumstances, but the grounds are the private responsibility of the clubs... as a result they're often poor. Certainly the kiwi paddocks are far better...

Bob I am not trying to be a smartarse but does what you you are saying about the grounds seems to imply that with all the resources that you say are being generated should be put into enhancing the grounds at the community level. If NZ can do it from a very small base surely UK can also do it. The corollary is the the poor sate of the grounds should not determine the rules of the game which was part of wht I was saying before

Nice one Terry... I'm sure the whole issue will find it's level, and the IRB will have to accept whatever the rugby playing world decides on... one thing is for sure, having played in both the NH and SH, the players are very, very simliar... much more so than teh administrators would have us beleive. And Paulmc... not different laws, amte, just laws that are valid and playable everywhere... if you're in mud, you have to be able to maul, to get in the trenches... if you're on the firm, run! Ironically, the SH style is more suited to the elite grounds here... they are usually well drained and well maintained... but that style is not suitable to the community game here. And I've played in NZ plenty, and beleive me, it doesn't have mud like we have mud in the UK... NZ grounds are way better!

G'day bob, Thanks for the reply. We are in complete agreement. I also agree with you on what ELVs are probably good for the game, and what are iffy. I also love to see good set pieces, especially a good rolling maul, and have got to admit that I am probably against the 'pulling down' rule .... I think that it would be hard for referees to rule on and too easy for a defending team to commit only both props to combat the maul by pulling down the leading players, leaving the remainder of the pack on the fringes to defend the peeling off runner. I'm not so sure about uneven numbers in the lineout. I would like the opportunity to see how various coaches go about developing tactics for attacking and defensive line outs, being able to see how the rule change affects the game would help .... lol, so I must want hindsight right now. Mate, my thoughts on your post is that we are not so far apart in what we like and don't like, in fact we are pretty damn close, so maybe my question and your reply have helped to draw our NH & SH rugby worlds a little closer. Cheers, and I hope your team gets up this weekend, likewise the Waratahs in Capetown.

Bob A couple of quick points - My wife loves Rugby & I love Music - Neither of us has played "the game". Also the inverse of your argument about the "months of Mud" is that other countires have low rainfall & therfore need different rules. Do we have different sets of rules for different climatic conditions or do we have a universal game? As I said once before - NZ has lots of mud & the south of France has little so climate is not really a NH or SH issue.

Terry Kidd... the general opinion up here (in England) is that the 5 meter at scrum, the 22 kick, and quick lineout backwards are worth a look... they might well speed the game up to a point... but the rest, collaping the maul, hands in the ruck, and short arms for more things, and uneven numbers in the lineout, offside at tackle, are not in the best interests of the game. We now know that accross the board we have to trial the bringing down the maul, the 22, and the quick lineout law, as well as the uneven numbers in lineouts... Our oposition is generally based on the fact that up here the game is healthier than ever, with so many players we are actually seeing new teams being founded, and games sold out even in division 1, let alone the premiership... the game has never been so healthy. We know we spend a lot o time in the trenches, but you know, we do spend 8 months or more a year in mud! We don't run it like the SH partly because you can't run too well in ankle dep mud, and although parts of Aussie might get more inches of rain in a year, here it doesn't stop all winter so it's NEVER anything but mud! Especially in the amateur game. So... the maul is an important part of our game, but we have to trial the collapsing law... and the uneven numbers in lineouts just seems like a charter to pack the defensive line... As for the other ELV's it seems the elite clubs are considering what action they can take to refuse to trial them... the idea of more short arms, hands in the ruck and offside at the tackle is really not going to work here... but not for the reasons you might think... we love the set piece, the forward battle, and when we see it,. we love the runners, but we want the balance... to our eyes S14 all looks the same... everyone plays such a similar game, just as they do in league... I know there are differences, but we don't see them, not compared to our game. I don't think anyone would be adverse to reducing the points for a kicked penalty, at least that would be more popular than short arm, which we see as deconstructing the game. But contrary to what people like sledgehammer thinks, we aren't against change.... we just don't think change should be for its own sake... it has to be for a reason, and the game here is developing and breaking out of the trenches and is looking really good. It isn't for nothing that that our clubs are so rich... they are rich because they have full houses, and big TV revenue... but our viewers are well informed rugby oriented people... and that may be a mistake the IRB are making... to love rugby you have to have played it on some level, it's a way of life, a culture, it ISNT like soccer and it will never compete as a major world wide game... it will always be, for most of the world, a minority game.... and perhaps the IRB drive to make it global is a pipe dream? They can see $ signs if they can get china and the far east plaing the game, and america... but in reality, although those palces will get involved, it will never take proper root compared to their own games... so changing the product to suit a hypothetical audeince of non-players is crazy.... IMO!

Chris, I was going to say "good question" before I realised that you have worded it badly. "the ELVs" implies that there is a uniform set of new laws that will be played by everybody. But what the IRB in its infinite wisdom have done today is bring in three different sets of ELVs for use in different parts of the world. Everybody will adopt a base level set of ELVs. But The SANZAR countires will go on playing the version of the ELVs they have been using. whereas "An elite competition" in the NH will expriment with some ELVs not implemented in SH. This will include pulling down the maul. So from next season there will be not one but THREE versions of the game being played around teh world. This is bloody madness. I don't see how you can have meaningful matches between NH and SH teams because both will hav eplayed completely different rules. Ridiculous.

great to see. artilce here if anyone interested from irb http://www.irb.com/newsmedia/mediazone/pressrelease/newsid=2023546.html#irb+announces+global+trial+elvs does that mean the tri nations and wallabies spring tour will use the ELV's?

Well Well !! Reuters reports (Thursday morning AEST) "The International Rugby Board (IRB) Council controversially agreed on Thursday to introduce a year-long global trial of 13 changes to the laws of the game, beginning at the start of the next European season. The trial of the Experimental Law Variations (ELVs) for a 12 month period starting on Aug. 1, 2008 at all levels of the game will involve 13 of the 23 ELVs that have been undergoing experimentation in various tournaments around the world over the last two years."

good rant :)

Oh, and another point. The anti ELV arguments seem to repeat ad nauseum incorrect statements put forward by certain 'journalists' such as Stephen Jones. These arguments go along the lines that Australia has a poor scrum, therefore in order to win more games they have been the driving force behind these new laws which devalue the scrum etc and will destroy the very fabric of our game (all shapes and sizes etc). These arguments play on existing prejudices and emotions and create a climate of fear of change, and have been very successful. I would therefore encourage everyone to avoid taking as fact the second hand opinions of hacks. Rather than repeating the mantras of these journalists, I dare you to go directly to the source and read the IRB's reports on the ELVs before you jump to any ridiculous conclusions. My other point is that you are passionately opposing a trial of the ELVs, not their implementation. This tells me that the driving force against the ELVs is fear, not reason. Finally if anyone wants a few examples of why Paul Ackford's article is unsubstantiated garbage, just ask and I will list all the incorrect, emotive and otherwise unsubstantiated comments he makes in his article.

Aaaah please! Reading the anti ELV brigade is akin to reading Kafka or Orwell - they seem to believe that if you repeat the same lie enough times people will eventually believe you. Or if you misrepresent your opponents view, you will discredit them! Paul Ackford's article was pure emotive, unsubstantiated garbage. The article posted above is even worse - these guys should really give up journalism and get involved in the Chinese Olympics committee - I believe they value propagandists over there. So for the last friggin time, let me state the bloody obvious for our bloody minded, stick in the mud, pig headed planks up North: 1) The ELVs are not being driven by Australia, they are being driven by the IRB - by the way, most Australian fans care more about the quality of the contest, not the winner - believe it or not we do not share your English, St George cross, national action style nationalism and therefore would not attempt to change the whole fabric of the game so that we could be more competitive - especially given the fact that all things sporting are cyclical and in a few years time we may have a dominant scrum anyway! 3) The ELVs do not devalue the scrum in any way shape or form. 4) The ELVs are being trialled (repeat TRIAL). No one is asking they be implemented at this point. 5) The ELVs are not turning rugby into league - the fabric of the game is not under threat! As I said in my previous ELVs blog, rugby is under threat at the moment, but not from the ELVs. The ELVs are in fact an opportunity to evolve the sport. Rugby's biggest threat comes from the recalcitrant, conservative, stick to bayonets old boys brigade, who represent the established home nations of England, Wales and Ireland, not France, Italy, not the IRB, and certainly not FIRA. Let's hope they fall on their swords, so to speak. Personally I would like to see all the ELVs trialled, and from what I have seen believe the hands in the ruck law works pretty well. After all rugby is supposed to be a contest for possession. Under the current laws it is not, as the defending team rarely has the opportunity to pilfer the ball at the breakdown. Watching the club rugby in Sydney on the weekend it was great seeing the team which arrived at the breakdown first being able to reach in and rip the ball back to their side.

catastrophic HAHAHAHAHA it sounds like the world is coming to an end for that NH reporter.... so the result will come out 2mrw some time maybe ?

North versus South on the ELVs: is there a solution? I don't know if it is a complete solution, but a good start would be for rugby loving people from the Northern hemisphere to stop listening to their own press, and we Southerners need to stop listening to our administrators. I'm sick of it all. From the NH all we get is a pile of steaming excrement poorly disguised as sports journalism, solely designed to insight and sell copy at the expense of the truth or fact. The sad thing is, in some of these writings, like in the article Mart has kindly posted, there is actually some good information buried deep in there if you have the stomach to dig through it. And from the SH we have drama queens in positions of power telling us our game is dangerously and horribly ill, and nothing, absolutely nothing will save us except for the mythical ELV gods and television gurus. Basically, it’s an opinion I have not seen shared by any club people, referee’s, or other people I know working in rugby. I have been told that here in Queensland, junior participation numbers are up this year. A few weeks ago I read that in Australia the TV ratings for the S14 were up, and now there are plans drawn up to bring Agrentina into the Tri-Nations. That’s grassroots, provincial and international level rugby, all with a positive signal. It doesn’t sound to sick to me.