WRU pour cold water on ELVs

[Steve-o]

You obviously been too busy banging on about me supposedly banging on about change only, to realise I've add my personal views on the ELVs. I don't like repeating myself when you have the power to go back in the thread (and other topics involving ELVs) and READ.

 

[Prestwick]

No, actually, I've been working with BLR, SANZAR and co to get some answers and put out a clear clarification of where the yes and no camps sit.

Your contribution? David Bowie man. zing!

 

[BLR]

Nice addition of the ELV's Pros and cons....one point with the Anti-ELV's, the example of free kicks being given at the expense of scrums....it'd be good to list those particular changes down....because I sure as hell can't think of any off the top of my head....plus you do know scrums can be taken from free kicks anyway right? So it's technically not devaluing scrums whatsoever, simply giving another option...the scrum option is null in the Anti-ELV argument so I debate its relevance whatsoever other then trying to bring people over to the Anti ELV side by the use of false information, you know who used to do that? Hitler.

At first I thought that the all body shape nature of rugby would be threatened by the ELV's but the more I thought of it the more I realised the extra scrums and the possibility that the forwards could pin the defence in thier 22 for 20 minutes at a time without penalties breaking up the pressure (brilliant to watch if you're a forward) brings the importance of forwards and the need for strength and power to the fore. The tactic for a forward powered team to beat a backs powered team, do what teams have been doing to the Force, smash them with thier defence and keep it down and dirty in the forwards, smashing the scrum with pure power, destroying them in the rucks by just smashing them out of the way and bundling it over for the purest of forward tries, and it works...if you get a free kick, set up the scrum. Smash it through until thier forwards can no longer stand, it's bringing the forwards, the tough forwards into the front of the game once more....I have seen the forward aspect used against my own team week after week so I know the potential if an Australian team can dominate us in the forwards....imagine what someone with GOOD forwards could do! Hell, you could even have a chance of taking the World Cup from us brilliant Southerners for once!

Keep in mind I have been a critic of ELV's since day one, but I can see the potential if they are implemented right....and it is truely exciting stuff if done properly...it has potential it does!

 

[dullonien]

Nice addition of the ELV's Pros and cons....one point with the Anti-ELV's, the example of free kicks being given at the expense of scrums....it'd be good to list those particular changes down....because I sure as hell can't think of any off the top of my head....plus you do know scrums can be taken from free kicks anyway right? So it's technically not devaluing scrums whatsoever, simply giving another option...the scrum option is null in the Anti-ELV argument so I debate its relevance whatsoever other then trying to bring people over to the Anti ELV side by the use of false information, you know who used to do that? Hitler.[/b]

Just to let you know, I'd already pointed that out on the last page. But Pres, you really need to delete that from the list, as it's, well..... wrong.

Re the linout numbers. Why is it a good thing to get rid of the numbers game. It's ot exactly hard to do, and shortening the linout can be an important thing! Linouts are one of the few areas where everything is going well at the moment (apart from very few hookers being able to throw straight lol). One more thing, why don't teams use the best thrower available, since there's no rule to say a Hooker has to throw in, is there?

 

[Prestwick]

Nice addition of the ELV's Pros and cons....one point with the Anti-ELV's, the example of free kicks being given at the expense of scrums....it'd be good to list those particular changes down....because I sure as hell can't think of any off the top of my head....plus you do know scrums can be taken from free kicks anyway right? [/b]

Here is what the RFU asks in the Survey question:

5.07 Proposed Law
If the ball is unplayable at the breakdown, the side that did not take the ball into contact will receive a Free Kick.


5.07 Current Law
If the ball becomes unplayable at the breakdown:

• The team moving forward immediately before the ball became unplayable will be awarded the put in at the scrum.
• If neither team was moving forward, or the referee cannot decide which team was moving forward before the ball became unplayable, then the attacking team will put in at the scrum.

[/b]

Now, if there is a misunderstanding, I apologise, but as far as the survery question is concerned, it is removing the scrum as an option.

If they wanted to give you the option between a free-kick and a scrum, surely it would say:

If the ball is unplayable at the breakdown, the side that did not take the ball into contact will be able to chose between a scrum and a free-kick.[/b]

Here is a second example:

6.03 Proposed Law

If a maul becomes unplayable, the team not in possession at the start of the maul receives a Free Kick.

6.03 Current Law

If a maul becomes unplayable, then the team not on possession at the start of the maul will be awarded the put in at the scrum.
[/b]

And the third:

8.01 Proposed Law

The sanction for offences with regard to kick offs and restart kicks (drop outs) is a Free Kick.

8.01 Current Law

Depending on the offence, teams may opt for either kick again or scrum.
[/b]

Now, all three of those "Proposed Laws" are clearly saying to me: "from now on you must use a free kick and a free kick only." If these are taken word for word from the LPG proposals then surely, surely this is creating too much unnecessary confusion and that for all three they need to put "the sanction...is a choice between a free kick and a scrum".

Otherwise we're completely defeating the object of making the game simpler to understand.

 

[Steve-o]

<div align="left">You mean this?..</div><div align="left"> </div><div align="center">

ELV supporters
​

<div align="center">
*the new rules allow greater variability in game style allowing rugby to evolve into an even more original and appealing game.

*allot of the new ELVs merely call for existing laws to be more tightly adhered to.

*the ELVs solve problems such as implementing proper true quick line outs and removing the correct numbers in the line out problem.

*the scrum has become more important as they occur far more often, and the stats prove this. Already scrum dominance has destroyed opposition teams far more then would have occurred without them.

*with a bit more ironing out the true purpose of the ELV's will be achieved, taking the subjectivity out of many areas of refereeing.

*but the ELV's need to be worked on, their are a few things that don't work and a trial in the NH can help refine the laws.</div>[/b][/quote]​

<div align="center"> </div><div align="left">I know I've personally covered atleast 5 out of the 6 points mentioned above.</div><div align="left">But from here on its just silly</div><div align="center">
</div><div align="center">

*you're an idiot, we're right so shut up, and our trash newspapers prove we're right. You're all just being sticks in the mud and obstacles in the way of progress to improve the game.

*Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes
Dont want to be a richer man
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes
Just gonna have to be a different man
Time may change me
But I cant trace time

*This is all a conspiracy by the RFU aided by the WRU and the FFR to consolodate control of the running of the game and veto any changes which they object to.


​

<div align="center">Non-ELV supporters</div><div align="center">

*why fix what's not broken? NH rugby has witnessed bumper crowds in 06/07 and 07/08 consistently beating records and generating ever greater revenue. Under the current rules, the Guinness Premiership and France's Top 14 have never seen such crowds or multiple sellouts of over 20,000+ before.
</div>[/b][/quote]​

<div align="left"> </div><div align="left">And from here its just plain silly as well</div>

*the fact that the scrum is removed as an option in three separate areas in place of free kicks point to the notion that the scrum is being gradually devalued.

*nobody has sought the opinion of the likes of Argentina, Georgia, Italy and Romania, all three traditionally based on big, heavy lumbering packs. While they may like the idea of being 5m behind the scrum, the traditional forwards may baulk at being forced to shed weight to become lighter and leaner in order to keep up with the fast running game that the ELVs want to foster.

*on top of that, the ELVs might be a disaster for grassroots rugby and remove the "exclusively for everyone" tag which it carries in NH nations like Wales, England and France. Under the ELVs, being a 42 year old, overweight prop might be a liability and in the brave new world of the ELVs only those young, fit and light enough to keep up would be selected by grassroots clubs, thus narrowing already slim player bases in some countries.

*it's an Australian conspiracy to devalue the scrums. Despite the fact the laws itself were formulated by people all around the world, it is the Australian Rugby Union who is pushing the international roll out the most.

*you're an idiot, we're right so shut up, and our trash newspapers prove we're right. And no we won't try it for just a little while, we didn't develop them, it's our game, I'm taking my ball and leaving!


[/b]

All in a days work

 

[dullonien]

Why would it need to say free kick or scrum, since a scrum is an optional way of taking a free kick.

The present rules state that you have to take a scrum, but the new rules will allow a quick tap or kick to touch (oponents throw) as well as taking a scrum.

Don't understand where the confusion is coming from.

 

[Steve-o]

<div class='quotemain'> Nice addition of the ELV's Pros and cons....one point with the Anti-ELV's, the example of free kicks being given at the expense of scrums....it'd be good to list those particular changes down....because I sure as hell can't think of any off the top of my head....plus you do know scrums can be taken from free kicks anyway right? [/b]

Here is what the RFU asks in the Survey question:

5.07 Proposed Law
If the ball is unplayable at the breakdown, the side that did not take the ball into contact will receive a Free Kick.


5.07 Current Law
If the ball becomes unplayable at the breakdown:

• The team moving forward immediately before the ball became unplayable will be awarded the put in at the scrum.
• If neither team was moving forward, or the referee cannot decide which team was moving forward before the ball became unplayable, then the attacking team will put in at the scrum.

[/b]

Now, if there is a misunderstanding, I apologise, but as far as the survery question is concerned, it is removing the scrum as an option.

If they wanted to give you the option between a free-kick and a scrum, surely it would say:

If the ball is unplayable at the breakdown, the side that did not take the ball into contact will be able to chose between a scrum and a free-kick.[/b]

Here is a second example:

6.03 Proposed Law

If a maul becomes unplayable, the team not in possession at the start of the maul receives a Free Kick.

6.03 Current Law

If a maul becomes unplayable, then the team not on possession at the start of the maul will be awarded the put in at the scrum.
[/b]

And the third:

8.01 Proposed Law

The sanction for offences with regard to kick offs and restart kicks (drop outs) is a Free Kick.

8.01 Current Law

Depending on the offence, teams may opt for either kick again or scrum.
[/b]

Now, all three of those "Proposed Laws" are clearly saying to me: "from now on you must use a free kick and a free kick only." If these are taken word for word from the LPG proposals then surely, surely this is creating too much unnecessary confusion and that for all three they need to put "the sanction...is a choice between a free kick and a scrum".

Otherwise we're completely defeating the object of making the game simpler to understand. [/b][/quote]



It seems pretty simple to me, if the other team f***s up you get a Free Kick. A Free Kick has 3 options: 1) Scrum, 2) Quick tap, 3) Kick (like when you call a mark in your 22)

 

[Prestwick]

No, you're missing my point here.

My point is that yes I'm going to remove the point about the scrum being removed in three places but think about it, we're trying to simplify the game here.

A guy who is new to the game doesn't know that a scrum is an optional way to take a free-kick, nor will he find out about that in the rules.

Thus, he'll see a scrum and say "wait, isn't he meant to take a free-kick" and end up probably even more confused than before.

So thus, surely it would make sense to make it clear somewhere for new fans that a free-kick can be taken in all of these weird and wonderful ways.

----

Steve-o, leave it mate. You haven't really contributed anything constructive and simply cutting and pasting stuff that other people have put together is not going to make you look amazing or prove anything.

I gave you the chance to state your case properly earlier and you just complained that everyone in the NH is all biased against the ELVs and some other random stuff about change.

----

On the other hand, thanks to SANZAR, BLR, Dullonien, Shtove, Gingergenius and others (apart from some) for making decent contributions to the FAQ.

<div align="center">This thread is now closed and archived for future reference, thank you all for your suggestions</div>