ELV Meeting News

[danny]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dundeesmiffy @ Mar 31 2009, 06:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

I like the "not matching numbers in line-out" rule, it opens up a lot more possibilities for the set-piece from the line-out, I never understood why you had to match the numbers, I want this one kept.
Collapsing the maul, ok, it maybe didn't work.
I also like the "no ground gained if the ball is kicked after being passed back into the 22", hopefully players will realize they will eventually have to back their sweepers when they run it back infield instead of the "ariel ping pong" which I think should be put down to "time wasting sometimes.[/b]

The reason there is so much kicking is the strict refereeing of the contact area. Its so hard to keep the ball in attack that teams simply kick it away. That has to change!

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dullonien @ Mar 31 2009, 03:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Logorrhea @ Mar 31 2009, 03:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

Law 19 – Freedom for each team to determine Lineout Numbers[/b]

Does this one mean that numbers must match in the lineout too? If so it'll open up the pitch again, along witht he maul.

Good news ...... no..... great news.
[/b][/quote]

Agree, this law had a much bigger impact than the IRB thought. Teams struggling at the linout can now properly shorten it again! Yay.
[/b][/quote]
I've no particular love for the law which was being trialled but if the iRB's stated wish was to give the sport more of a contest for possession, surely evening up the numbers in a lineout removes at least some element of a contest since it shifts the balance at a lineout firmly in the throwing teams favour.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Monkeypigeon @ Mar 31 2009, 02:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Other Union-specific ELVs

Up to 15 minutes half time - recommended to Rugby Committee for adoption into Law

Rolling substitutions for Community Game – recommended to Rugby Committee for adoption into Law[/b]

I think these are potentially important law changes.

Since rugby is becoming more attritional, players will need greater rest. Increasing half time in length by 50% gives players a bit more time to recover from the opening 40 minutes. It's only a small change (probably at the behest of TV companies) but it has other benefits.

Rolling substitutions aren't something I'm totally in favour of but if it helps guard against injuries by giving starting players rest periods, it's a good idea. It will probably put to an end the charade of emptying the bench in the last 10 minutes so everybody can get a game since the replacements will have more of an impact on proceedings under this law. I'd hope that there's some sort of limit put on the amount of substitutions which can be made in a game (a la rugby league) rather than the way substitutions which are employed in ice hockey and gridiron. It may only be brought into the "community game" initially but long term it's bound to be adopted at professional level.

A law I would have liked to have seen passed would be to increase matchday squad sizes to 23 players and ensuring a teams has at least 2 props and 1 hooker on the bench. It's being trialled in France to help stop uncontested scrums and by all accounts it's been a success.

 

[Prestwick]

The maul is coming back! People of Italy! Rejoice!

 

[Flux]

Just out of curiousity, does anyone know how many matches with ELVs have been played in the NH compared to the SH?

 

[danny]

I think its time to close this dark chapter in our great sports history. Look to the future and forget this last season of confusion and negativity.

 

[shazbooger]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flux @ Apr 3 2009, 03:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Just out of curiousity, does anyone know how many matches with ELVs have been played in the NH compared to the SH?[/b]

Havent a clue to be honest. I'm still confused over what ELV's are in use and where, never mind how many games we've played.

A seasons worth?

 

[An Tarbh]

they've only been in since the start of our season and there's far less of them than what you've trialled in the Super 14.

 

[gingergenius]

well, if you want to do some maths... the ELVs in England are certainly used for all the national leagues, so that's the GP, N1, N2, N3 North and N3 South. Then you have the Magner's League, Top 14, Italian League, Heineken Cup, EDF Cup, European Challenge Cup, all the Internationals... plus I presume for other less prestigious Leagues and Cups across the Northern Hemisphere.... that's hundreds of thousands of matches.

So the answer to your question Flux is that whichever hemisphere has more matches in general, will have played more under the ELVs.

 

[melon]

Hundreds of thousands of matches?? You ginger, are a joke.

I shall be updating my TRFies now.

 

[shazbooger]

Maybe hundreds or thousands?

Ahhh on a side point, how is this news been taken South of the Equator?

 

[gingergenius]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (melon @ Apr 3 2009, 11:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Hundreds of thousands of matches?? You ginger, are a joke.

I shall be updating my TRFies now.[/b]

think how many rugby matches have been played this season all across the world simple simon.

 

[Steve-o]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gingergenius @ Apr 3 2009, 02:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (melon @ Apr 3 2009, 11:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hundreds of thousands of matches?? You ginger, are a joke.

I shall be updating my TRFies now.[/b]

think how many rugby matches have been played this season all across the world simple simon.
[/b][/quote]

How about billions?

 

[shazbooger]

Actually the whole "less prestigious Leagues and Cups across the Northern Hemisphere" makes a lot of sense. There is a lot of rugby played up here, using the same rules across the continent. Numerous club compeitions, clubs outside the core 6 nations, professional and amateur.

Opinion from the SH anyone?

 

[Prestwick]

To be honest this is a just ending for what has been an utter fiasco for the iRB. Letting the sport effectively split into two sub-codes (which we will call Union 2.0 Beta release a and release b as its unfair to label either with the term "lite") which meet once a year in some kind of perverse version of the International Rules series made a mockery of the whole process.

Add onto that the lack of consultation the iRB had done with the game's fans which left individual Unions to do a patchwork of inconsistent surveys, the results of which were then twisted by opposing factions, meant that not only were most fans outside of the big nations clueless the ELVs themselves but were rarely told of any progress (if at all) had been made.

That said my view is that I'll be sad to see the ability to stack a line out go. I won't be sad to see the maul-collapse law go nor will I be sad to see the kick the ball out in your own 22 law go as half the time players rarely knew that this ELV existed and kept on wondering why they were standing virtually on their own try line waiting for a line out. The look on Stephen Jones face during the moments leading up to Ireland's winning DG were hilarious as it was a percular mix of confusion, bemusement and sheer horror. I would probably not be surprised if he went to the ref after the game and asked what had happened...

The law wasn't working, there was no evidence that players were taking the ball and running with it (unless your name is Clement Poitrenaud or Rob Kearny) rather they were just taking the opportunity to add further momentum to add venues from Twickenham to Eden Park to the ATP Tennis circuit what with the obsession with playing tennis with odd shaped balls. Hawkeye to contest a borderline out decision anyone?

 

[Cymro]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Prestwick @ Apr 3 2009, 02:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Hawkeye to contest a borderline out decision anyone?[/b]

:lol:

"You cannot be serious!"

 

[Prestwick]

 

[Cymro]

Ha ha BANTER!

"It was over by this much"

 

[Flux]

The reason I asked how many games had been played in the NH with the ELVs (which in the end isn't going to help my cause anyway) was to try and get a better grasp on who's had more time to adapt to the ELVs. While the NH has probably played more games with ELVs, it hasn't been using them for as long as the SH. That we're both using different sets of ELVs also makes it hard to make comparisions.

However, I'm for most of the ELVs. If they are played and reffed correctly I believe it does lead to a faster and better game. You could say that it's not played or reffed correctly often, but games like that still pop up with the old rules.

Another thing I'd like to point out is we've been playing with the ELVs for longer down here (not as many games have been played though!) and there are still times where teams fail to adapt. The main point there is adapting. Teams aren't going to adapt to a new set of rules straight away, just like they're not going to adapt to a new coach straight away. Things take time. I'm willing to wait for things to sort themselves out, but in saying that we can't be sure that things will sort themselves out.

A lot of it comes down to the refs. If you have a ref who is willing to let the game flow, chances are you will get a great contest with a lot of tries, if you get a whistle happy ref (i.e Matt Goddard) then it turns into a very ugly game.

What the Bulls have shown us this year is you can still play what one might call a 'boring' brand of rugby. It's forward orientated and involves a lot of kicking. The difference between their kicking and the majority of the kicking going on under the ELVs at the moment is that the Bulls execute their kicking well.

It's not the ELVs' fault that players aren't finding the space behind the wingers when they're kicking the ball. It is the ELVs fault that the ball can't be kicked out on the full when taken back, however. Either the players have to adapt and get better at kicking or this rule has to go.

I think it would be incredibly stupid for the iRB to bin every ELV, and I hope they don't. However, I am realistic enough to realise that it's highly unlikely that I will see as many ELVs kept in as I would like. For the record I think the collapsing maul rule is stupid, but I've still seen quite a few tries scored from a maul in this year's Super 14 already.

 

[Prestwick]

They're not binning every ELV but they're not accepting every ELV either. These are just reccomendations. I believe so far the only rule that is odds on to be dumped will be the maul collapsing rule. Whether the free-kick ELV will be dumped is a matter of speculation.