KEY POINTS:
Most of rugby's controversial experimental law variations will be adopted at the International Rugby Board's council meeting in May.
New Zealand, South Africa, France, Australia and England will vote for most of the proposals and Ireland, Wales and Scotland will be against.
Wales are seen as crucial in possibly being drawn to the side of those in favour. If the Welsh succumb, then Ireland and Scotland will be isolated, and certain to be defeated on the issue.
Wales' position is curious. With an international side keen on running rugby, they stand to gain more than most from the adoption of the ELVs. Yet national coach Warren Gatland admits he is against them and says he sees no real need to change the game.
But even without the support of the Celtic nations, most of the ELVs could be adopted at the council meeting. The motion for including them on a permanent basis, possibly with a review after the 2011 Rugby World Cup (an act that could appease the anti brigade), requires a two-thirds majority among the IRB council.
The eight major rugby-playing nations - the three Southern Hemisphere giants plus France, England, Ireland, Wales and Scotland - each have two votes. The rest, with one vote each, comprise organisations such as FIRA (European Rugby Association), CAR (African Rugby Confederation), ARFU (Asian Rugby Football Union), CONSUR (South American Rugby Confederation), FORU (Oceanic Rugby Unions) and NAWIRA (North America and West Indies Rugby Association).
In addition, individual countries like Japan and Canada have a vote.
Twenty-six votes will be cast and for the trialled ELVs to become law, 17 votes will be needed. Those in favour may already be well on the way to securing the numbers for change. New Zealand, South Africa, Australia, England and France now seem certain to vote in favour, a total of 10 votes.
Japan and Canada are also said to be in favour and so too are FIRA, CAR and NAWIRA. If those votes are confirmed, that would mean the pro-ELVs camp would already have 15 votes in the bag, with only two more needed to be certain of victory. The likelihood of Asia or Oceania turning their backs on their geographically closest rugby colleagues seems unlikely.
But even if there is now likely to be a majority in favour, a key issue remains. Will the council go all the way and sanction the most controversial law change, the replacement of full penalties by free kicks or set scrums for the majority of technical offences? This decision will hold the key to the entire debate.
If the council opts out of that one, they will have merely tinkered with the rules. They will have turned their backs on the one law change that could make a major difference to the game of the future and open it up as an exciting product for the new audience it seeks.
A significant body of opinion within the IRB is in favour of the new laws. But fears have been close to the surface that if accord could not be reached, there might be a split in world rugby with countries like Australia, New Zealand and South Africa keeping the ELVs they trialled in 2008 but the Northern Hemisphere sanctioning only the minimum changes which they are currently trying out.
The IRB council meeting in May will not be straightforward. But it does now appear that those in favour hold the advantage and should prevail.
- Peter Bills is a rugby writer for Independent News & Media in London
