Rugby: Counting down to rule change day

The ELVs programme is over and now the IRB is evaluating what will happen. Photo / Getty Images

The great rugby rules experiment will come to an end next month when the IRB Council decides how the game should be played.

Last week, a high-powered conference attended by the likes of Steve Hansen, Nick Mallett and Robbie Deans made collective recommendations on which laws should be put forward for potential ratification.

They came up with 10 they felt were worthy of consideration, kicked out others (such as being able to pull

down the maul and not match numbers at the lineout) and referred the sanctions and breakdown experiments for further research.

The IRB Council will vote on May 13.

To be adopted into law, each ELV will need a 75 per cent majority. Whatever becomes law will stay in place until the World Cup and will be introduced globally.

May 13 is, then, a big day for rugby.

1 Assistant Referees allowed

What it means: An extension of the touch judges' responsibilities. Rather than being confined to judging where the ball went out, whether goal kicks have been successful and indicating foul play - touchies can tell a referee about knock-ons, offsides and any other misdemeanours he missed.

Pros: The game is too complex and fragmented for the referee to pick up on everything. If he's focused on the breakdown, he can't monitor the offside line. Assistant referees can play a critical role if they have these extended responsibilities.

Cons: None.

Verdict: Should be carried unanimously.

2 Kicking directly into touch from ball played back into 22 equals no gain in ground

What it means: If the ball is carried or passed back into the defending team's 22, it should not be kicked directly into touch. If it is, the lineout will be parallel to where the kicker stood to clear the ball.

Pros: This rule had good intentions, as it was to encourage more running from deep. If the ball was retrieved outside the 22, there would be no easy escape of running or passing back into the 22 and kicking long. In theory this would keep the ball in play longer, lead to more excitement when teams were retreating. There was also the outside hope of improved counter-attack skills and long range tries becoming more of a feature.

Cons: Practice far removed from theory. Without an escape valve - the ability to usher the ball back into the 22 and clear for touch - defending teams have panicked. This rule has been a major drive of aimless kicking. No one has really seen the counter-attack possibilities, as they fear not being able to recycle the ball and conceding a free kick deep in their territory. So we see, almost by default, defending teams field the ball outside their 22 and hoof it straight back down the field without considering opportunities. Aerial ping-pong is a major blight.

Verdict: Good intentions but bad results. This should not become law.

3 Quick throw permitted in any direction except forward

What it means: That a quick lineout - say, a wing throwing to fullback after fielding a long kick - does not have to be straight. The thrower does not have to wait for the receiver to line up where the ball went out.

Pros: Creates more opportunity for quick throws and allows defending teams to capitalise on poor kicks. Speeds up the game and discourages teams from kicking the ball away.

Cons: None.

Verdict: Another rule that should become law with minimum fuss.

4-7 A variety of amendments to the lineout have been made

These include:
* Positioning of player in opposition to the player throwing in to be two metres away from lineout and the line of touch.
*Pre-gripping of lineout jumpers allowed.
*Lifting in the lineout allowed.
*Positioning of receiver must be two metres away from lineout.

What they mean: Cosmetic changes pretty much in force before the ELVs. Opposing hookers must stand two metres back from the touchline and whoever is playing halfback must be two metres back from the lineout while it will be okay for props to grip locks and loose forwards before the throw and then lift them - rather than just support them once they are off the ground.

Pros: Cleans things up. There is no ambiguity - the referee can control players more easily and will have the law on his side.

Cons: None.

Verdict: Get on with it.

8 Five-metre offside line at the scrum

What it means: Backlines have to defend five metres back from the hindmost foot of the scrum.

Pros: Creates more space for attacking team. For years, coaches moaned about the lack of space and how easy it was for defences to rush from scrums and kill any prospect of generating width.

Cons: Frankly there are none. But some have been reported. Chris Cuthbertson of the Rugby Football Union (RFU) was reported as saying in the Sunday Times: "The five-metre measure does create more space but in our surveys we've found that the No 8 is attacking on a very narrow front. The measure was supposed to persuade teams to attack out wide but we don't believe this has happened. It's one of several ELVs where we are not seeing the desired effect."

There is nothing wrong with the rule, Chris old chap - maybe tell the teams, coaches and No 8s to try something different.

Verdict: Ignore these illogical claims that it has been a negative and vote this one through. Please, please, please vote this through - it would be crazy to say a game with more space to attack is a negative.

9 Scrum half offside line at the scrum

What it means: The opposing halfback can have one foot in front of the ball while it is still in the scrum. He can't run round the opposite side of the scrum and overstep the ball.

Pros: The defending halfback is not able to muck about. Where he goes and what he does are now clearly defined but he has the advantage now of being able to put one foot in front of the ball so he can be more of a defensive influence.

Cons: None.

Verdict: Won't make much difference but tidy it up all the same.

10 Corner posts no longer touch in goal

What it means: A player diving in at the corner will no longer be deemed out if he touches the corner flags.

Pros: The flags are cosmetic and many tries in the past were disallowed because the scorer touched the flag in the process. Now players can touch the flag but still be awarded the try as long as they have not been in touch.

Cons: None.

Verdict: Why were the corner flags ever deemed part of the line anyway? It was a dopey rule and it will be good to get rid of it.

* There is no debate about canning the rule which allows a maul to be pulled down. It was too much in favour of the defensive team who could commit just two forwards to bring down the maul. The attackers are always likely to have greater numbers, meaning the defensive side can fan out across the field.

But the case for stopping teams from having as many players in the lineout is not so clearcut.

The Sunday Times quoted Owen Doyle of the Irish Rugby Union, who said teams were encouraged to kick as they feel they can load the lineout and steal the ball.

True - but if they load the lineout and don't win the ball, they will be exposed.

It is a risk-reward scenario that challenges teams to make tactical assessments and go for bust.

It also does away with the infuriating technical infringement where teams can be penalised for failing to match numbers.

* In a separate proposal, it has been recommended the halftime break be extended to 15 minutes. Nonsense. Talk about dragging it out - 10 minutes is long enough.