B
BLR
Guest
FINALLY, now your getting it!
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
- Status
D
dullonien
Guest
Accusing me of plagiarism, nice! I wrote that all be myself, thanks. It's just my views on a couple of the ELV's.
Sorry Steve-o, didn't come across the way I meant it to. I wasn't trying to say they are illegal in the Super 14, I know that wasn't one of the laws they embraced. But it was one of the proposed laws of the ELV's in their complete form.
B
BLR
Guest
1. I think he perhaps also meant that you spit out the same old rhetoric that has been thrown around in the NH papers over and over and over again without thinking as much and geting your own view on it.
2. What does the complete form of the ELV's has to do with ANYTHING? To discredit a set of rules because of a scrapped variation? Alright....
G
gingergenius
Guest
1. I think he perhaps also meant that you spit out the same old rhetoric that has been thrown around in the NH papers over and over and over again without thinking as much and geting your own view on it.
2. What does the complete form of the ELV's has to do with ANYTHING? To discredit a set of rules because of a scrapped variation? Alright....
[/b][/quote]
What's wrong with the game as it is? Why bother changing it?
P
Prestwick
Guest
No Steve, I want you to set out a logical and well thought out case for implementing the ELVs as seen in the Super 14. If some people aren't keen on them, you set out your stall and try and bring them round, thats the whole point of a discussion.
Steve, ignore what people think for one single moment and think of it this way. You're the guy chosen to head the presentation to the iRB board entitled "why we should roll out the ELVs worldwide". They're there, waiting, some have flown thousands of miles to attend this meeting in trendy Dublin and they're keen to hear what you have to say.
Now, I know what you're thinking, an ipod playing David Bowie's song "CHANGES" through some speakers while you perform a funky dance with some up front insults for the Q&A session after the presentation. That may work at your local Braai but in the world of the Rugby Administrator, they might be stabbing at the "SECURITY" button within seconds of your presentation. You won't even have a chance to call them Amish people.
So, you're going to have to think about it, sit down, work out reasons why we should implement them. SANZAR has. Shtove has. Why haven't you? Get with the program Steve.
And sadly, it is reform. These rules are serious business, they will change the game (for good or for worse we don't quite know yet and I'm not going to bother speculating like before and retract all previous statements). Thus, by the very nature of the change that these rules might herald IF they are approved, they are indeed going to reform Rugby Union.
Coaches like the great Ian Mcgeechan, Graham Henry and Warren Gatland have said it, players like Bryan Habana and Martyn Williams have said it: these rules are going to fundementally change the nature of the game. Some may say its good and some say its bad but nobody has actually touched upon whether they are needed.
B
BLR
Guest
Now, myself I am sceptical on the rules, I think before they are universally implemented a few changes need to be made in the referees implementation of these rules. The benefits of the ELV's:
1. The scrum is once again put as the centerpiece of rugby union, with the free kick rule coupled with the defence being 5 metres behind the back of the scrum not only making scrums occur more often but be a much more dangerous attacking threat.
2. Officially the rules act to clear up most of the subjectivity around the field for the referrees, however this has been implemented poorley by referrees who have simply not done a good job. A failure of the terrible referees this season, not the laws themselves.
3. The laws act to increase the variety of ways that the game can be played successfully, althought the tactics which took England to the world cup final can be relied upon like usual, as instead of a free kick, scrum after scrum can be taken to bash the opposition into submission. Although now instead of needing to match that style of play eg. South Africa out-Englanding England in the final the free kicks could be used to run the ball, tactical kicking, scrummaging or a mixture or all of them. Penalty kicks still exist for repeated infringements, offsides etc. and can surely still decided the game but the new rules help to widen the varieties of options and surely variety in gameplay should be embraced?
P
Prestwick
Guest
Thats essentially what I'm looking for, BLR has set the bar.
Hey, that rhymes!
Hey, that rhymes!
S
Sir Speedy
Guest
Actually, that's just opinion. I'd much rather watch the Heineken Cup over the Super 14 anyday.
Why? :huh:
[/b][/quote]
Well, they don't need to but there's certainly seems to have been less shots at goal for penalties.
Anyways, I think a lot of people have overreacted at the effect the ELVs have had on the game.
[/b][/quote]
Considering penalties are more sparsely awarded, I can see why. Like someone else said, the game is fine as it is, so why fix what's not broken?
D
dullonien
Guest
Excellent post that has made me think about the free kicks instead of penalties a little differently. I can understand the reasoning behind it, I do hate watching a boring penalty shootout mascarading as a game of rugby (I'm Welsh afterall, attack is all we know!). But I'm still unsure this law change will change this for the better in the long run. Please no-one say watch the Super 14 and you'll see, it hasn't even been a season, players are still getting used to them/haven't figured out the best way to bend the rules in their favour.
Free kicks instead of penalties will just end up in more infringment, which will hinder the game, not improve it. Fine, a penalty is awarded for continuous infingment, is this enough? At the moment yellows are awarded for continuous infringment (not quickly or regulary enough for my liking) which deters more of the same. When will yellows be awarded under the ELV's? It just doesn't quite make sense to me, it's just confusing things for the referee, there's room for even more leeway in how the referee sees things (one may say a free kick, another a penalty, another a yellow card).
At the moment free kicks and penalties are clearly seperated, usually free kick for mistake i.e. knock on, accitental offside etc. and penalty for something delibriate i.e. hands in the ruck, foul play of any kind. Why are we making an already complicated game even more so?
G
gingergenius
Guest
Now, myself I am sceptical on the rules, I think before they are universally implemented a few changes need to be made in the referees implementation of these rules. The benefits of the ELV's:
1. The scrum is once again put as the centerpiece of rugby union, with the free kick rule coupled with the defence being 5 metres behind the back of the scrum not only making scrums occur more often but be a much more dangerous attacking threat.
2. Officially the rules act to clear up most of the subjectivity around the field for the referrees, however this has been implemented poorley by referrees who have simply not done a good job. A failure of the terrible referees this season, not the laws themselves.
3. The laws act to increase the variety of ways that the game can be played successfully, althought the tactics which took England to the world cup final can be relied upon like usual, as instead of a free kick, scrum after scrum can be taken to bash the opposition into submission. Although now instead of needing to match that style of play eg. South Africa out-Englanding England in the final the free kicks could be used to run the ball, tactical kicking, scrummaging or a mixture or all of them. Penalty kicks still exist for repeated infringements, offsides etc. and can surely still decided the game but the new rules help to widen the varieties of options and surely variety in gameplay should be embraced?
[/b][/quote]
But the game as it is is already varied.
Look at this season's Guinness Premiership, there's a huge number of matches with both teams scoring lots of tries and playing attractive rugby. The reason the world cup had so much 'boring play' was because England, Argentina and Scotland were all usually playing against sides who would destroy them in an open game and therefore kept it tight. But Fiji vs Wales was one of the best games I've seen and rugby is certainly able to be played expansively under the current rules.
As I understand it, from a freekick at the moment, you can kick to touch (abiding by the normal 22 rules), scrum or tap it. So there's no need for a change here.
From a penalty, you can do all of the above but always have the lineout, plus kick for goal and get 3 points. Since penalties are given for more serious offences then this extra advantage is earned.
Now, ELVs convert a lot of penalty decisions into free kicks. These are for irritating infringements, the most common of which is when some berk like richie mccaw sticks his hands in the ruck and slows the ball down for the attacking team. If he gets caught he concedes 3 points. I fail to see why this needs to be changed.
This season in the Super 14, there have been less kicks at goal, less touch kicks into the 22 and the ball has spent more time in open play. I think most rugby fans would think that most penalties are fair enough. The laws are not draconian. If you're playing a team with a good kicker and concede penalties then you pay the price. So I'd question whether it's a good thing having less kicks at goal. Less touch kicks into the 22 mean less mauls. Another bad thing. Don't tell me they're impossible to defend against, I watched New Zealand repel England's rolling mauls all afternoon at Twickenham last year. And more time spent with the ball in play means less scrums; or less competitive scrums like the ones you get in rugby league where the aim is to get the ball in and out as fast as possible.
The game as it is allows for teams to be highly creative and score tries. It allows for them to kick drop goals. It allows for them to force their opponents into conceding penalties and therefore they get points. The emphasis in a rugby union team is always around the team's strength; if you have creative players then you'll score tries. Wasps and Gloucester have two of the more creative 10s in Europe and are scoring heaps of tries. It's nothing to do with a fault of the laws of the game.
S
Steve-o
Guest
Prestwick, I've gone through the in and outs of the ELVs in many a thread, and then this topic pops up, it's the same drill everytime.
The ELVs make it harder to play a negative style of rugby, which is a problem in Union (just had deja vu).
Be sure to take it all in. Print that out and smoke it if that helps, since you appear to be very selective to what you read or reply to concerning my comments.
I was a huge skeptic as well, I remember asking a few Aussies many questions when they were on trial in the ARC (back then collapsing the maul and hands in the ruck were allowed for a few games). But I went out and educated myself on the ELVs, read many articles, viewed the stats and understood where the IRB was coming from on this.
Right now we going in circles, and I agree the 1st of May is a better time to debate this.
Dullonien, the Sharks got 2 yellow cards for infringing at ruck last weekend.
The ELVs make it harder to play a negative style of rugby, which is a problem in Union (just had deja vu).
Be sure to take it all in. Print that out and smoke it if that helps, since you appear to be very selective to what you read or reply to concerning my comments.
I was a huge skeptic as well, I remember asking a few Aussies many questions when they were on trial in the ARC (back then collapsing the maul and hands in the ruck were allowed for a few games). But I went out and educated myself on the ELVs, read many articles, viewed the stats and understood where the IRB was coming from on this.
Right now we going in circles, and I agree the 1st of May is a better time to debate this.
Dullonien, the Sharks got 2 yellow cards for infringing at ruck last weekend.
P
Prestwick
Guest
Okay, BLR has set the bar with a nicely written and balanced reply and Steve-o has set the floor limit with...something..which completely fails to answer anything which I asked in my previous post, so we should aim to place ourselves between the two.
Remember, we're only going in circles because you can't be arsed to state a proper case for the ELVs. Just re-read my previous post Steve and do it properly, jeez...look at what BLR and SANZAR have written for some clues on what to write if you're stumped...
Remember, we're only going in circles because you can't be arsed to state a proper case for the ELVs. Just re-read my previous post Steve and do it properly, jeez...look at what BLR and SANZAR have written for some clues on what to write if you're stumped...
D
DonBilly
Guest
P
Prestwick
Guest
Wow...for the RFU, that is pretty daring web design considering that their front page is still stuck in 1998.
P
paretrooper
Guest
the ELV's are just better ( sticks out tounge gives the fingers) so im
goin ta pick up my ball and f**k off home!!! :bleh!: :bleh!:
goin ta pick up my ball and f**k off home!!! :bleh!:
:bleh!:
S
sanzar
Guest
Actually, that's just opinion. I'd much rather watch the Heineken Cup over the Super 14 anyday.
Why? :huh:
[/b][/quote]
Well, they don't need to but there's certainly seems to have been less shots at goal for penalties.
Anyways, I think a lot of people have overreacted at the effect the ELVs have had on the game.
[/b][/quote]
Considering penalties are more sparsely awarded, I can see why. Like someone else said, the game is fine as it is, so why fix what's not broken? [/b][/quote]
Because it's not fine... The ELVs may not be addressing some of the most crucial area of rugby but to suggest everything is "fine" is having your head in the sand. The ruck and the scrum constitute 2 very unclear areas of the game that can see teams penalised purely depending on the attitude and interpretation of the ref and both the NH and SH refs interpret these areas quite differently, meaning their impact on the game is significant. If rugby were "fine" we would barely feel the refs presence on the pitch, but much of the time he becomes the focul point.
B
BLR
Guest
Agreed, but the ELV's act to make it even more so, without taking any of the variation that currently exists, it's one thing to say that nothing is broken in rugby it is another to try to deny the evolution of the game into something that could (with further development) make the game even greater then it is while appealing even more to much of the original basics of rugby union, getting back to the original scrum based roots.
As for the free kick situation, if you want a prime example of how it works watch the Force v Reds/Waratahs games over the last two weeks. In these games the Force would be in front of the opposition line and free kicks would be given, after about 3-ish offences a long arm penalty was given, and after about 3-ish more of these offences a yellow card was given. For a offence such as hands in the ruck this is appropriate, although the above example is over a period of a whole game, so it is concievable if you have a team putting thier hands in the ruck a couple of times in a five minute period from that point on the referee will know that this will be thier tactics and be more likely to give a long arm or card if it happens much more often, deeming it to be a professional foul. Penalties still exist, the Force for example haven't scored a try in thier last two games, relying on penalties, plus they have won a few games on penalties as well this year.
F
Fushitsusha
Guest
Agreed, but the ELV's act to make it even more so, without taking any of the variation that currently exists, it's one thing to say that nothing is broken in rugby it is another to try to deny the evolution of the game into something that could (with further development) make the game even greater then it is while appealing even more to much of the original basics of rugby union, getting back to the original scrum based roots.
As for the free kick situation, if you want a prime example of how it works watch the Force v Reds/Waratahs games over the last two weeks. In these games the Force would be in front of the opposition line and free kicks would be given, after about 3-ish offences a long arm penalty was given, and after about 3-ish more of these offences a yellow card was given. For a offence such as hands in the ruck this is appropriate, although the above example is over a period of a whole game, so it is concievable if you have a team putting thier hands in the ruck a couple of times in a five minute period from that point on the referee will know that this will be thier tactics and be more likely to give a long arm or card if it happens much more often, deeming it to be a professional foul. Penalties still exist, the Force for example haven't scored a try in thier last two games, relying on penalties, plus they have won a few games on penalties as well this year.
[/b][/quote]
Just to add to BLR's post -
The ELV's work just like the old rules in which a player is very likely to get a yellow card if they deliberately infringe inside their own 22m.
Teams defending still need to be careful when they're in their own 22m defending because it is most likely time a short arm penalty will be converted into a full arm penalty. So teams that rely on the boot will still get their shots at goal.
At the breakdown there are still quite a number of full arm penalties being awarded because offside at the ruck has generally been, and still is one of the main infringements at the breakdown.
I think the ELV's probably wouldn't have looked to appealing during the first part of the Super 14 as teams got used to them and at times the game was probably a little too free flowing with aimless kicking and the ball being frantically thrown around everywhere. Now that all the teams and coaches have adapted I feel it's made the game very exciting. There is still the importance on the set piece, but there now seems to be even more variety in the ways in which the teams due to attack or take advantage of penalties.
D
dullonien
Guest
But it'll all depend on the referees interpretation of the rules. As I've said, the free kicks instead of penalties is confusing the game when it doesn't need to be. What's wrong with leaving the team with the ball to make the decisions, i.e. a quick tap is always available, and one Wales with Peel use often and efficiently. If a rule needed to change, it's one where the player doesn't have to take the quick tap exactly where the ref wants, maybe a 1m radius round the infringement (hate it when referees call them back).
These rules are just forcing teams to play in a certain way, personally it wouldn't matter to me, as it's changing the game into a way Welsh rugby as a whole already play, but it still doesn't make it right!
People keep on saying that it'll put more emphasis on the scrum etc, why would we want that when the scrum is such a mess, with collapse after collapse, then referees just giving penalties at random!
The ELV's just aren't improving the game in the areas that need to be. Scrum and the ruck being the two major ones.
Edit. Forgot to say thanks to BLR and Fushitsusha for clearing up the Yellow card scenario. They still aren't used enough, with refs often reluctant to send a player to the sin bin, especially if that team already has one off.
These rules are just forcing teams to play in a certain way, personally it wouldn't matter to me, as it's changing the game into a way Welsh rugby as a whole already play, but it still doesn't make it right!
People keep on saying that it'll put more emphasis on the scrum etc, why would we want that when the scrum is such a mess, with collapse after collapse, then referees just giving penalties at random!
The ELV's just aren't improving the game in the areas that need to be. Scrum and the ruck being the two major ones.
Edit. Forgot to say thanks to BLR and Fushitsusha for clearing up the Yellow card scenario. They still aren't used enough, with refs often reluctant to send a player to the sin bin, especially if that team already has one off.
B
BLR
Guest
dullonien: Admittedely there is still some problems that need to be ironed out before the rules are implemented, the free kick position thing that you pointed out is one of them, seems to be a referee ego thing more then anything but luckily with all the debate over the rules I can only see good coming out of it, through debate will come compromise and hopefully through compromise will come a much better game. The refs need to become better quality before the NH ELV's are put on trial as the ones down here have been abyssmal and it's been thier fault the laws have been ugly, not as much the actual laws which, if applied properly, should really create a great spectacle.
The extra scrums coupled and the 5 metre distance behind the scrum by themselves are alright but the combination of both means that the scrum is the centrepiece of what could become a hugely devestating attack tactic combining both beautiful parts of rugby union and really containing a section of play that a neutral in a far off country can see and say 'This is Rugby Union.' Running a sweeping back play off the back of a dominant scrum is already a beautiful part of rugby but to do so with the ELV's could, in the future, prove to be the centrepiece of our game that sets us apart and draws people to our game, and I am all for it. Scrums are fine, once teams realise they will get demolished if they don't have a good tight 5 the weakness will dissappate as more resources are poured into tight 5 development.
The extra scrums coupled and the 5 metre distance behind the scrum by themselves are alright but the combination of both means that the scrum is the centrepiece of what could become a hugely devestating attack tactic combining both beautiful parts of rugby union and really containing a section of play that a neutral in a far off country can see and say 'This is Rugby Union.' Running a sweeping back play off the back of a dominant scrum is already a beautiful part of rugby but to do so with the ELV's could, in the future, prove to be the centrepiece of our game that sets us apart and draws people to our game, and I am all for it. Scrums are fine, once teams realise they will get demolished if they don't have a good tight 5 the weakness will dissappate as more resources are poured into tight 5 development.
- Status
Similar threads
- SaintsFan_Webby
- 2025 Guinness Six Nations
