RFU directly challenge iRB, Millar over pulling down maul.

[Prestwick]

http://www.scrum.com/39_54356.php

An interesting move by the RFU which has so far chosen (rather wisely) to pick their fights carefully. It has decided that it will not implement either the rule allowing sides to pull down mauls or that player's shoulders must not be lower than the hips at the maul in the junior game.

The decision seems to have been driven by those who coach and play in the junior game, Francis (the red) Baron explains:

'We have received a large number of letters from the youth game expressing serious concerns over the introduction of some of the ELVs (Experimental Law Variations) in the youth game. ''It is established practice that unions can apply variations to the laws at youth level and many unions exercise their rights in this respect.

''The RFU intends to exercise its rights in respect of the ELVs of concern to us and the game in England following discussion with the IRB and other affected unions.''[/b]

The RFU goes on to state that they will await the results of a youth tournament currently running under the ELVs in South Africa before making a decision. Even then, the results must be analysed by the iRB to prove the saftey aspects of certain laws of the game and if the results are positive, the RFU has signalled that it will drag its feet anyway, stating that it will find agreement on the safest way to pull down a maul and release the appropriate coaching techniques afterwards.

 

[BLR]

What a bunch of douchebags, why didn't you bring your objections up when you actually had a vote with the IRB, weak as **** RFU.

All it means is that the youth will come up and not be able to adapt to the new ELV laws and you'll get substandard players in comparison to the rest of the world...

 

[Prestwick]

I disagree. All they're doing is preventing the pull-down-the-maul rule, a rule which will probably be dropped anyway while allowing the other ELVs to be used in the youth game.

Regardless of what Paddy O'Brien says, pulling down the maul is dangerous, even more so if you let a bunch of kids do it. So it makes sense to try and make the rule as safe as possible before implementing it.

 

[Steve-o]

Right-o Prestwick, pulling down was 1st made illegal cause it was considered dangerous (which it is).

BLR, you're a little harsh on the old dogs at RFU. Atleast they went with the iRB's recommendation to trial that one particularly crap law, and after trialling it a bit they're saying "screw this bullocks laddie", cause now they've seen 1st hand was a rubbish and dangerous rule it is.

 

[Prestwick]

Indeed Steve. All eyes are on that under-19s tournament which will (or is) take place in South Africa that is using the pull-down-the-maul rule.

I think the old farts' hand was forced here. There are allot of middle class parents (specifically Mums and Metro-Dads) whose backing for their little darlings playing Rugby hangs on a knife edge at the best of times. Thus, there are allot of worried youth coaches.

 

[O'Rothlain]

What a bunch of douchebags, why didn't you bring your objections up when you actually had a vote with the IRB, weak as **** RFU.

All it means is that the youth will come up and not be able to adapt to the new ELV laws and you'll get substandard players in comparison to the rest of the world... [/b]

Hopefully not all the ELV's will be accepted as general rugby law. Hence the "Experimental" in "Experimental Law Variations." Pulling down the maul is the one out of all the new "variations" that I will strongly argue against. It seems like England are recognizing as I say the rest of the Rugby Community should that Pulling down of the maul is a stupid, stupid call. Everything else I'm not so worried about.

 

[Sharkattack]

I play rugby at uner-15 level and I can tell you mauls are dangerous enough in the current rules, never mind allowing pulling down. There have been some nasty injuries when mauls go wrong, so to speak.

 

[gingergenius]

What a bunch of douchebags, why didn't you bring your objections up when you actually had a vote with the IRB, weak as **** RFU.

All it means is that the youth will come up and not be able to adapt to the new ELV laws and you'll get substandard players in comparison to the rest of the world...
[/b]

Grow up.

These laws are highly controversial, there's very little conclusive evidence as to whether they're good or bad for the game given that judging them is so subjective depending on how you like rugby to be played. Thus both sides have to accept that other people disagree with them.

You appear to be concluding that ELVs will definitely be implemented which is ******** anyway. It's still 50/50. The RFU is clearly opposed to them, and being the iRB's biggest union it carries some weight.

This particular ELV ****** me off the most. If anything makes the game more like Rugby League, it's this.

 

[danny]

What a bunch of douchebags, why didn't you bring your objections up when you actually had a vote with the IRB, weak as **** RFU.

All it means is that the youth will come up and not be able to adapt to the new ELV laws and you'll get substandard players in comparison to the rest of the world...
[/b]

BLR you are talking ******** as always when it comes to he ELV`s. You make out that any rule changes are good, pulling down a maul will NEVER be a permenant part of rugby unions laws as it is sooo dangerous and stops the rolling maul in its tracks which is an art in its self (remember World cup 2007 Eng Vs Aus). I find it incredible that the RFU allowed it to be a experimental trial. Lets back the good rule changes but for gods sake stop backing change for the sake of change!

 

[peppers07]

None of the rule changes should be implemented especially this one. As well as being dangerouse takes away a part of the game of the game. Actually i have changed my mind on the one were its only a free kick for ruck infringments but still dont think any of the others should even be considered

 

[Prestwick]

Should we all put bets on who in the GP and/or First Division is the first to get injured as a result of a collapsed scrum?

 

[InsaneAsylum]

None of the rule changes should be implemented especially this one. As well as being dangerouse takes away a part of the game of the game. Actually i have changed my mind on the one were its only a free kick for ruck infringments but still dont think any of the others should even be considered [/b]

don't forget the passback/carry back rule (you can't pass back or carry back into your own 22 and kick out on the full)

this rule combined with the ruck infringment free kicks rules, as you mentioned, make for an interesting game of rugby.

the super14 was a great tournament this year, because of these rules. the ball stayed in play a lot longer, and there was a lot more quickball/quick penalties which promoted the flow of the game

 

[gingergenius]

<div class='quotemain'> None of the rule changes should be implemented especially this one. As well as being dangerouse takes away a part of the game of the game. Actually i have changed my mind on the one were its only a free kick for ruck infringments but still dont think any of the others should even be considered [/b]

don't forget the passback/carry back rule (you can't pass back or carry back into your own 22 and kick out on the full)

this rule combined with the ruck infringment free kicks rules, as you mentioned, make for an interesting game of rugby.

the super14 was a great tournament this year, because of these rules. the ball stayed in play a lot longer, and there was a lot more quickball/quick penalties which promoted the flow of the game
[/b][/quote]

I expect England to lose heavily to New Zealand this month; however I think Sheridan and Stevens will be licking their chops. Your scrum is going to get slewed.

The problem with a fast flowing game is that the fatties have to trim down in order to keep up. Which in turn makes the scrum weaker. This is the problem the NH has over scrums - fine as people keep saying there are more scrums under ELVs but there are plenty of scrums in Rugby league too. No one says for a moment that these are hotly contested affairs...

 

[BLR]

BLR you are talking ******** as always when it comes to he ELV`s. You make out that any rule changes are good, pulling down a maul will NEVER be a permenant part of rugby unions laws as it is sooo dangerous and stops the rolling maul in its tracks which is an art in its self (remember World cup 2007 Eng Vs Aus). I find it incredible that the RFU allowed it to be a experimental trial. Lets back the good rule changes but for gods sake stop backing change for the sake of change![/b]

That's where my problem lies, the dangers of pulling down the maul is OBVIOUS, why didn't they put up thier objections when they were voting on it instead of a few months later, the fact is people will be exposed to this law WORLDWIDE, now why didn't the RFU say, 'wait a minute, this isn't a good idea' when they had the power and the possible pulling power to bring this particular aspect world wide. The RFU could have brought down the mauls aspect world wide but instead laid down and played the *****....I don't like the law and don't think it should be implemented anywhere, and I am worried it was allowed to be voted in.

 

[KZNSharksFan]

I think Sheridan and Stevens will be licking their chops. Your scrum is going to get slewed.
[/b]

:lol: Haha, good one mate

 

[william1024]

i thiknk it is a terrible idea beacause it will be utter carnage and at low level rubgy it will be worse