ELV's

[Not Releasing]

A lot of Junior teams are going to struggle in Division 1 next year. With the rolling maul effectively finished in rugby, clubs like Portlaoise, Newbridge, Tullow and Enniscorthy will be facing a long season as these quite simply don't have the backs to compete at this level.

Looks like it will be a straight shoot-out between Cill Dara, Seapoint and Navan again

[downtime]

I wouldnt think that the maul is finished. Teams that get their act together could use it more effectively and have a much faster maul by continuous recycling.

[true blue 06]

little confused, are the ELV's going to be used at all levels of rugby in ireland, schools, u20s, club etc?

[Darce]

little confused, are the ELV's going to be used at all levels of rugby in ireland, schools, u20s, club etc?

yes and no.

most will and then a full set of ELV's will be trialled in a "Premier domestic competition"

[oh no where do we go!]

How does the elvs affect a maul from now on?

will everyone in front of the ball carrier be offside now?

[BlueArmyOriginal]

How does the elvs affect a maul from now on?

will everyone in front of the ball carrier be offside now?

The ELVs have for all intents and purposes have killed the maul. Defending players are now allowed bring the maul down and not get penalised.
Thing about this is I can see alot of serious injuries resulting from this at junior level next year, there's a reason this has always been illegal in rugby and thats because it's highly dangerous.

That other ridiculous offside rule hasn't been brought in as far as I know.

[Skyhawk]

A sad day for rugby union......the morons that create these moronic laws should f*ck off to RL and leave our game as it is. Good point about the J teams!

[Leinsterman]

A sad day for rugby union......the morons that create these moronic laws should f*ck off to RL and leave our game as it is. Good point about the J teams!

ELVs aren't being trialled at Metro level though AFAIK

[BlueArmyOriginal]

A sad day for rugby union......the morons that create these moronic laws should f*ck off to RL and leave our game as it is. Good point about the J teams!

ELVs aren't being trialled at Metro level though AFAIK

Not the full rules, they're being trialled in full only one elite player tournament in the NH(my money's on the EDF cup)but things like the maul and not being able to kick out on the full from the 22 if you brought it in there are now the rules and are in force at every level of the sport worldwide.

[Dublin Dynamo]

Cant believe the two worst ELV's are being trialled worldwide. Being able to pull down mauls, and no longer being allowed to kick out on the full from the 22 are going to change the face of all NH rugby, but particularly at the junior levels.

With all due respect to the junior players out there (of whom I have been one for several years now), there are not many of us fit enough to run at high speed for 80 minutes flat. We also dont have the pace or skill levels to score wonderful tries from beautiful backline moves starting in our own half, particularly not when you consider the pitch and weather conditions we will have to play in.

A good tactical kicking game, good tight driving forward packs, and solid structured gameplans are key features of Junior rugby in this country. If these new rules lead to the ball being in playfor obscene lengths of time, with turnover after turnover and endless aeriel ping-pong, I can see a lot of the big strong farmer-types no longer being interested in playing, and player numbers dropping drastically

[Spandex]

little confused, are the ELV's going to be used at all levels of rugby in ireland, schools, u20s, club etc?

yes and no.

most will and then a full set of ELV's will be trialled in a "Premier domestic competition"

I thought Ireland, Wales and England had binned that idea? AFAIK they're not getting trialled any more. John O'Neill threw his toys out of the pram in response.

A sad day for rugby union......the morons that create these moronic laws should f*ck off to RL and leave our game as it is. Good point about the J teams!

I agree absolutely 100%. Have never been able to understand why these laws were deemed necessary considering the strength of the game up here and how fast it was growing. Never heard one single person call for a change. The bringing down of the maul is the single most stupid change to any game that I have ever heard. Scrums, lineouts and mauls are the defining characteristics, it's what the game's famous for. Mauls are now gone and the lineout has been completely depowered (without the maul and the different numbers etc.)

It's the Aussies pushing it. Brian Moore wrote an interesting article on it (can't find it now). He said he had been at an IRB meeting where it was agreed that people could no longer table motions for rule changes and had to go trough a procedure (hence the ELV joke of a committee being set up). The rule was passed because the Aussies kept attempting to introduce changes that would play to their strengths. Will try find it.

[Spandex]

Brian Moore: Most players don't want a 'faster' game, so let's ditch these law trials
I think it is time to nail my colours to the mast concerning this issue; yes, it's the dreaded Experimental Law Variations (ELVs) in rugby.


By Brian Moore
Last Updated: 8:51AM BST 25 Jul 2008

Comments 83 | Comment on this article

• The laws are for ALL levels of the game. The view of Super 14 supporters and viewers is no more legitimate than that of any third XV player in London Division Two. It is now quite plain that only the views of those connected with games seen on television, and thus 'in the shop window', are being heard. Few unions have sought the views of all their constituents and even fewer have a mandate on the subject.

• Any ELV that threatens the unique tenet of rugby - that it is a game for all shapes and sizes - should not see the light of day.

• I do not accept that there was, or is, overwhelming evidence that rugby needs fundamental changes to its laws. Nobody has ever identified the imperative which made this whole exercise necessary.

• 'If laws do not move forwards, the game moves backwards' - it's a stupid cliche, disproved by many other sports whose laws have remained static without detriment.

• I was and still am suspicious of the motives of certain countries that are pushing the ELVs, because I was at an International Rugby Board meeting at which it was stated that the moratorium in introducing any new laws had to be introduced because it became obvious that certain countries, Australia in particular, were suggesting law 'improvements' which would favour their international team's strengths.

• Trialing has been inconsistent.

• The alleged success of the ELVs is based on flawed reasoning and to principles that are incapable of being defined.

• Many of the alleged benefits of the ELVs are illusory.

• Many of the first-seen consequences of the ELVs have now altered in a way unsought by their proponents.

• The history of their introduction will be a standard text for future sixth-formers in how not to do things.

Apart from those listed below, I have no problems with the ELVs, though their effects are minor, save for the one allowing quick throw-ins to be passed backwards.

Having been, wrongly, identified as a Luddite for daring to raise any or all of the points above, I do not agree with the following ELVs, and/or, make these comments:

Allowing mauls to be collapsed: I don't think collapses will produce many more injuries, save for lifting a man off his feet, which is dangerous and should be carded immediately. I do think it removes the last method of ensuring opposition forwards are kept in, or close to, the breakdown and not clogging up the midfield.

The assertion that it is impossible to stop is transparently untrue; if it were true every team that tried to drive the maul immediately from a line-out near their opponent's line would score. They do not - ergo?

Not having to match the throwing team's numbers in the line-out: This allows packing midfields with forwards and putting 'flyers' at the tail to exploit an advanced position. This could be solved by making any forward not in a line-out stand 10 metres back and within 15m of touch.

Handling in the ruck: They say this only legitimises what goes on anyway. It goes on only because referees allow it. Go back to the previous laws on rucking.

Reducing all offences to a free-kick, save for offside, foul play and repeated or cynical offending: This has not led to the referee being less involved in games, the reverse is true. On average there are 50 per cent more times when the referee whistles. This is because players are prepared to take a risk on committing offences, knowing the referee has a difficult job deciding on their intention. Thus, referees are as much, if not more, involved in influencing the game.

This proposed change has contradictorily been claimed to both speed up the game and empower the scrum. Both cannot be true. Further, even if there are scrums chosen instead of a free-kick, scrums are not empowered because they are not a contest anyway due to the IRB allowing referees to ignore the stated put-in law.

Drawing an offside line immediately when a tackle takes place: It is a measure of the confusion caused by the 'okey-cokey'-style trialling of the ELVs that we do not know if this still lurks or is dead. If not, kill it, it is stupid.

The avowed intent and claimed consequence of the ELVs to 'speed up the game' is illegitimate. The 95 per cent of players to which the ELVs will apply do not need or want a 'faster' game, nor are they equipped to play one.

If you want to discourage aerial table tennis, extend the 'mark' rule to the 10m line of the opponents' half. This would stop aimless punting, particularly the chip and chase when players can think of nothing else to do with possession.

Can I be any more candid?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyu ... rials.html

[BlueArmyOriginal]

I'd forgotten about the handling in the rucks. Only something that threatens the future of the game would have me actually agreeing with Brian Moore

The greatest thing about rugby is(was) that all shapes and sizes can play it but also the variety in which the game can be played. Up here we like a mud slogging arm-wrestle based primarily around the set-piece while in the SH they prefer to throw the ball around and run it more. These rules are completely designed to aid the southern hemisphere game at the expense of the northern style of play. They're killing the best bit of the game: It's variety, and all in a flurry of southern hemisphere(primarily australian) greed and panic at the fact that the Northern Hemisphere has more appeal at the moment.

I could rant about these rules(jeebus they come into effect tomorrow!) forever but I'll spare you and leave with one final question: What would the reaction of SANZAR have been if, in the mid ninties when the SH game was streets ahead of the 5Nations in terms of...well pretty much everything, the 5Nations had brought forward a set of rule changes aimed at promoting the northern game?

[jaybyrne]

Is the one where you can handle on your feet in a ruck being trialled??

[groundhog]

Is the one where you can handle on your feet in a ruck being trialled??

NO

Although it wouldn't matter as people have their minds made up already as to whether any ELV is good or bad

[jaybyrne]

it matters if your going to be playing with them

[bluerugbyrules]

WITH REGARD TO THE MAUL. The new rule on collapsing mauls will not necesarily stop the maul or remove it from the game. However it will change it. I CAN see it stopping a rolling maul because to attack the soft sides will probably expose a pack to continuous collapses as defences wil be lateral accross the pitch. However, I predict that if a maul is kept very narrow and very long, with only loosely bound players at the front - a collapse will not stop it. The place to attack then in my opinion is directly behind where it collapsed as defences are very rarely linear in formation. In other words it will continue to progress in a straight line. Note how SA did this against NZ to good effect.
The defence line of thescrum will bring a welcome return of the back row move and back line moves from scrumm will just have a wider strike point. Again as SA showed against NZ, if you have a 5m scrum on the right hand side it will be VERY hard to defend.
I predict most teams will leave 7 in most line outs, in defence at least.
The backwards quick line out is a good one as most junior rugby or schools / youth rugby is played with a ref & no touch judges and it's damn near impossible for a ref to judge if it's stright anyway.

STOP WHINGING. ALL THIS DOES IS CHALLENGE YOUR COACHES TO BE CREATIVE.
However, I do think the other ELVs that are not coming in will have a bad effect on the principles and ethos of the game.