Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
New Stellenbosch Laws - Good or Bad?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="scuubasteve" data-source="post: 146711"><p>Watched an interesting program lastnight on the Rugby Channel by Paddy O'Brien (IRB Referees Rep and one of the guys behind the ELV's) on the aims of the new laws and the outcomes so far.</p><p></p><p>The most interesting thing was how this whole thing is described as 'the experiment' or words of that nature. The show gave you the perspective of this whole thing being some kind of science experiment with set aims, hypothesis and that it will generate results that can then be concluded.</p><p></p><p>This bodes well for people who may not like certain aspects of the proposed laws, because it appears they are happy to not accept every change for the sake of it. They appear to be taking an impartial point of view (as much as they can) so things are more likely to be genuinely for the good of the game, rather than proving their own opinions right.</p><p></p><p>The aims were:</p><p></p><p>1. Making the game more enjoyable to watch.</p><p>2. Retaining the traditional facets of the game that make rugby unique (ie, line-outs, mauls, scrums).</p><p>3. Ensuring the game is still suited to all the different body shapes.</p><p>4. Reducing the amount of dead ball (similar to No.1)</p><p>5. Taking the subjectivity out of refereeing.</p><p>6. Making bad referees call less important on the games outcome.</p><p></p><p>In the same sense as other experiments, they are recording massive amounts of statistics (from the Scottish, Australian, South African and NZ rugby comps in this case) to compare against the normal rules.</p><p></p><p>Results so far have been taken from the Scottish Cup, the 6 Nations and the Super 14.</p><p></p><p>The new laws were averaging the same number of lineouts and scrums. But the were averaging 9 tries per game, compared to around 4-5 for current rules. The time the ball was in play also increased significantly with the new rules, from around 35-45minutes to nearly 60mins.</p><p></p><p>So they said they were quite happy so far.</p><p></p><p>He said that using more free kicks meant that teams won't get the opportunity to kick penalty goals from a dubious call by the ref at the breakdown. Which seems valid.</p><p></p><p>There are now only 3 main ways to get penalised.</p><p></p><p>1. Offside (now including offside at the tackle)</p><p>2. Not entering through the gate.</p><p>3. Foul play</p><p></p><p>But he said that refs will also give penalties if players continue to cheat (mainly in slowing the ball down at rucks). This can therefore warrant a penalty also.</p><p></p><p>In regard to the pulling down of mauls (which personally is the only experimental law I see as failing) he said that their stats were showing it to be safer if players are expecting the maul to be pulled down rather than if their aren't. He also said that they were mainly trying to get rid of the tactic of kicking out to gain a 5m lineout. But I'm not sure why they see this as being beneficial, because I still find this aspect to be an entertaining part to the game which suits player of all bodies sizes. So I see that experiment as failing.</p><p></p><p>But in the whole, the experiment officially appears to be a resounding success so far.</p><p></p><p>Most importantly on the topic, the experiments will run through to the end of this year. The data will then be collated by the unions and the test organisers and delivered to the IRB. A meeting will take place in April 2008 where the unions and the council will decide on the conclusions of the ELV experiment and will decide what to do with these options.</p><p></p><p>So law change will not take place world-wide until May 2008 at the earliest. This means that Super14 and 6nations 2008 will not be affected unfortunately. But on the brightside, it appears the IRB i really dedicated to making sure the right choices are made, and changes are not made just for the sake of change.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="scuubasteve, post: 146711"] Watched an interesting program lastnight on the Rugby Channel by Paddy O'Brien (IRB Referees Rep and one of the guys behind the ELV's) on the aims of the new laws and the outcomes so far. The most interesting thing was how this whole thing is described as 'the experiment' or words of that nature. The show gave you the perspective of this whole thing being some kind of science experiment with set aims, hypothesis and that it will generate results that can then be concluded. This bodes well for people who may not like certain aspects of the proposed laws, because it appears they are happy to not accept every change for the sake of it. They appear to be taking an impartial point of view (as much as they can) so things are more likely to be genuinely for the good of the game, rather than proving their own opinions right. The aims were: 1. Making the game more enjoyable to watch. 2. Retaining the traditional facets of the game that make rugby unique (ie, line-outs, mauls, scrums). 3. Ensuring the game is still suited to all the different body shapes. 4. Reducing the amount of dead ball (similar to No.1) 5. Taking the subjectivity out of refereeing. 6. Making bad referees call less important on the games outcome. In the same sense as other experiments, they are recording massive amounts of statistics (from the Scottish, Australian, South African and NZ rugby comps in this case) to compare against the normal rules. Results so far have been taken from the Scottish Cup, the 6 Nations and the Super 14. The new laws were averaging the same number of lineouts and scrums. But the were averaging 9 tries per game, compared to around 4-5 for current rules. The time the ball was in play also increased significantly with the new rules, from around 35-45minutes to nearly 60mins. So they said they were quite happy so far. He said that using more free kicks meant that teams won't get the opportunity to kick penalty goals from a dubious call by the ref at the breakdown. Which seems valid. There are now only 3 main ways to get penalised. 1. Offside (now including offside at the tackle) 2. Not entering through the gate. 3. Foul play But he said that refs will also give penalties if players continue to cheat (mainly in slowing the ball down at rucks). This can therefore warrant a penalty also. In regard to the pulling down of mauls (which personally is the only experimental law I see as failing) he said that their stats were showing it to be safer if players are expecting the maul to be pulled down rather than if their aren't. He also said that they were mainly trying to get rid of the tactic of kicking out to gain a 5m lineout. But I'm not sure why they see this as being beneficial, because I still find this aspect to be an entertaining part to the game which suits player of all bodies sizes. So I see that experiment as failing. But in the whole, the experiment officially appears to be a resounding success so far. Most importantly on the topic, the experiments will run through to the end of this year. The data will then be collated by the unions and the test organisers and delivered to the IRB. A meeting will take place in April 2008 where the unions and the council will decide on the conclusions of the ELV experiment and will decide what to do with these options. So law change will not take place world-wide until May 2008 at the earliest. This means that Super14 and 6nations 2008 will not be affected unfortunately. But on the brightside, it appears the IRB i really dedicated to making sure the right choices are made, and changes are not made just for the sake of change. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
New Stellenbosch Laws - Good or Bad?
Top