[
PLEASE LOGIN TO POST TO THE FORUM
]
|
|
|
hicksy
- rhicks@rutc.ac.uk
|
Fri, 02 May 08 15:14 GMT
|
Just wondering what the point was of the RFU Questionairre on the ELVs. It seemed a valuable tool to put forward the community games point of view, but now the the IRB has made their decision it all seems pointless.
Or does the RFU have the power to implement the ELVs its members want?
|
-------------------------
Hicksy |
|
|
morgan1994
- rhicks@rutc.ac.uk
|
Fri, 02 May 08 15:14 GMT
|
Just wondering what the point was of the RFU Questionairre on the ELVs. It seemed a valuable tool to put forward the community games point of view, but now the the IRB has made their decision it all seems pointless.
Or does the RFU have the power to implement the ELVs its members want?
|
-------------------------
Hicksy |
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Fri, 02 May 08 10:59 GMT
|
Didds, as you know, Elite and Community refs will blow very differently for the same offence - primarily because elite refs will only remain elite if they routinely allow players to cheat.
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Fri, 02 May 08 10:02 GMT
|
"Under the ELVs, accidentally lying on the ball or not rolling away (if that's even possible!) will be a FK only. Doing it deliberately will be a PK offence - not for lying on the ball or not rolling away, but for deliberately offending [Law 10.2(a)]."
Is this how the laws are being applied in the s14 currently?
(Limited admittedly) reports I have heard suggests not ie deleiberate killing the ball is being blown as a FK.
happy to be proved wrong :-)
didds
|
|
|
HighsideUK
|
Thu, 01 May 08 21:38 GMT
|
Whistleblower:
I see what you mean.
So now we have games turning on the ability of the referees to read minds eh?
Good luck chaps.
|
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Thu, 01 May 08 17:43 GMT
|
Highside, you imply that the defender is deliberately lying on the ball in order to slow it down. I would agree this is usually the case.
At present and in the interests of effective comminication, we refs tend to signal the offence as not rolling away or diving over when awarding the penalty. Under the ELVs, accidentally lying on the ball or not rolling away (if that's even possible!) will be a FK only. Doing it deliberately will be a PK offence - not for lying on the ball or not rolling away, but for deliberately offending [Law 10.2(a)].
I think this is what OB as getting at.
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
ob
|
Thu, 01 May 08 17:38 GMT
|
HighsideUK - Yes, sorry. I should have said "Killing the ball illegally can still be a penalty" eg intentional offending or (as you say) repeated infringements.
|
|
|
HighsideUK
|
Thu, 01 May 08 15:56 GMT
|
ob:
You said
"Killing the ball illegally is still a PK"
Oh that it would be!
The ELVs say that for all offences other than offside, not entering through the gate, and Law 10-Foul Play, the sanction is a Free Kick.
Killing the ball by laying on it for example is not foul play.
So its just a free kick.
Repeated offences are classed as Foul Play but how many times in what period is makes it "repeated"?
|
|
|
Oldmanmartin
|
Thu, 01 May 08 10:36 GMT
|
Thanks for the clarification, ob. Surely "at" or "from" would be less confusing than "in" the lineout. I shall now have to get my head around how the ELV regarding the non-throwing hooker interacts with this one - he can presumably be "the receiver" in the event of a lineout steal.
|
|
|
ob
|
Wed, 30 April 08 13:05 GMT
|
Oldmanmartin Wed, 30 April 08 11:04 GMT
"Rule 4.03 - "The receiver in a lineout must stand 2 metres from the lineout". What nonsense is this? How can he be IN a lineout AND 2 metres FROM it? In what direction? And what does the current law wording ("Each team may have only one receiver") mean in practice?"
(It's not Rule 4.03, but Question 4.03)
The definitions in Law 19 have not changed:
"Lineout players. Lineout players are the players who form the two
lines that make a lineout.
Receiver. The receiver is the player in position to catch the ball when
lineout players pass or knock the ball back from the lineout. Any
player may be the receiver but each team may have only one receiver
at a lineout.
Players taking part in the lineout known as participating
players. Players taking part in the lineout are the player who throws in
and an immediate opponent, the two players waiting to receive the
ball from the lineout and the lineout players."
The Lineout is both a phase of play, and the actual formation itself. Here is the changed bit:
"19.7 (e) The receiver must stand at least two metres
towards that player's goal line from that player's team-mates who are lineout
players and between five and fifteen metres from the touchline"
"Rule 5.12 - "The half back" presumably means the scrum half. "
It is shorthand (in this questions) for the person who is acting as scrum half. Usually only one such person is trying to retrieve the ball. Such a person cannot be dragged into the ruck.
"Rule 9.01 - I am in favour of quicker possession from, e.g. rucks, but how is this achieved by downgrading the sanction for killing ball from a PK to a FK?" Killing the ball illegally is still a PK. However if the ball is unplayable, it is a FK instead of a scrum (though a scrum can be taken instead of a FK.
"I am intrigued by the concept of laws which must be rigorously enforced, presumably as opposed to ones that shouldn't. "
No, it merely means that some laws are not being enforced rigorously enough, whereas other are.
|
|
|
Oldmanmartin
|
Wed, 30 April 08 11:04 GMT
|
Rule 4.03 – “The receiver in a lineout must stand 2 metres from the lineout”. What nonsense is this? How can he be IN a lineout AND 2 metres FROM it? In what direction? And what does the current law wording (“Each team may have only one receiver”) mean in practice?
Rule 5.12 – “The half back” presumably means the scrum half. Does this cover anyone acting as scrum half? If so, and there are more than one player who are in position to be so regarded, does this apply to them all?
Rule 9.01 - I am in favour of quicker possession from, e.g. rucks, but how is this achieved by downgrading the sanction for killing ball from a PK to a FK?
I am intrigued by the concept of laws which must be rigorously enforced, presumably as opposed to ones that shouldn't.
|
|
|
PaulHorseman
|
Tue, 29 April 08 08:57 GMT
|
Experimental Law Variations - details of the survey - list of changes - FYI
1.0 Assistant Referees
1.01 PROPOSED LAW
Assistant Referees can assist referees in any manner required when appointed by a match organiser.
1.01 CURRENT LAW
This happens currently. The difference is that “touch judges” would be known as “assistant referees”.
2.0 Posts and Flags around the Field
2.01 PROPOSED LAW
Corner post and post at corner of touch in goal and dead ball line not considered to be touch in-goal unless the ball is grounded against the post.
2.01 CURRENT LAW
Both the corner post and post at corner of touch in-goal are considered to be touch in-goal. The change would mean that a player could touch the corner post in the act of scoring and the try be awarded; this would assume that neither the ball nor the player carrying the ball were in touch.
3.0 Inside the 22 Metre Line
3.01 PROPOSED LAW
When a defending player receives the ball outside the 22 metre line and passes, puts or takes the ball back inside the 22 by any means, the following can occur:
1. If the ball is then kicked directly into touch, the lineout is in line with where the ball was kicked.
2. If a tackle, ruck or maul is subsequently formed and the ball is then kicked directly into touch, the lineout is where the ball crossed the touch line.
3.01 CURRENT LAW
If the ball is passed back into the 22 and then kicked directly into touch, the lineout is in line with where the ball crossed the touch line.
4.0 Lineout
4.01 PROPOSED LAW
On a quick throw in, the ball can be thrown straight or backwards towards the defenders goal line, but not forward towards the opposition goal line.
4.01 CURRENT LAW
The ball must be thrown in straight.
4.0 Lineout
4.02 PROPOSED LAW
A player peeling off at the front of the lineout can do so as soon as the ball leaves the throwers hands.
4.02 CURRENT LAW
A player peeling off at the front of the lineout can do so as soon as the ball leaves the throwers hands. Law exists but needs to be rigidly applied.
4.0 Lineout
4.03 PROPOSED LAW
The receiver in a lineout must stand 2 metres from the lineout.
4.03 CURRENT LAW
Each team may only have one receiver, however there is no requirement in Law for the receiver to be 2 metres from the lineout.
4.0 Lineout
4.04 PROPOSED LAW
The non throwing hooker does not have to stand between the 5 metre line and the touch line, but must be 2 metres away from the lineout. They must conform to law wherever they stand.
4.04 CURRENT LAW
The hooker is known as a participating player at the lineout. He/she is permitted to take up a position anywhere between the touchline and the 5 metre line.
4.0 Lineout
4.05 PROPOSED LAW
There is no maximum number of players in the lineout but there is a minimum of 2.
4.05 CURRENT LAW
The team throwing in the ball decides the maximum number of players in the lineout.
4.0 Lineout
4.06 PROPOSED LAW
Neither team determines numbers in the lineout.
4.06 CURRENT LAW
The team throwing in the ball decides the maximum number of players in the lineout.
4.0 Lineout
4.07 PROPOSED LAW
Pre-gripping, lifting and using another team mate to lever is allowed.
4.07 CURRENT LAW
Other than the levering, this is effectively already in place.
4.0 Lineout
4.08 PROPOSED LAW
If a lineout throw is not straight, a Free Kick is awarded to the non-throwing team.
4.08 CURRENT LAW
If the throw in is not straight, the opposing team has the choice of throwing in at the lineout or a scrum on the 15 metre line.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.01 PROPOSED LAW
Players entering the breakdown area must do so through the gate.
5.01 CURRENT LAW
Players entering the breakdown area must do so through the gate. Law exists but needs to be rigidly applied.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.02 PROPOSED LAW
Immediately the tackle occurs there are offside lines.
5.02 CURRENT LAW
There are currently no offside lines following a tackle.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.03 PROPOSED LAW
The offside lines run parallel to the goal lines through the hindmost part of the hindmost player at the tackle.
5.03 CURRENT LAW
There are currently no offside lines following a tackle.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.04 PROPOSED LAW
Players on their feet may handle the ball in the ruck.
5.04 CURRENT LAW
Players must not handle the ball in the ruck.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.05 PROPOSED LAW
A tackled player must immediately play the ball and may not be prevented from playing the ball by any player who is off their feet.
5.05 CURRENT LAW
A tackled player must immediately play the ball and may not be prevented from playing the ball by any player who is off their feet. Law exists but needs to be rigidly applied.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.06 PROPOSED LAW
Any other players playing the ball at the breakdown must be on their feet.
5.06 CURRENT LAW
Any other players playing the ball at the breakdown must be on their feet. Law exists but needs to be rigidly applied.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
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.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.08 PROPOSED LAW
If the ball is received directly from a kick and a tackle occurs immediately, and the ball becomes unplayable, the Free Kick is given to the team who received the kick.
5.08 CURRENT LAW
If the ball is received directly from a kick and a tackle occurs immediately, and the ball becomes unplayable, the Free Kick is given to the team who received the kick. Law exists but needs to be rigidly applied.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.09 PROPOSED LAW
There are only 3 penalty offences (not including dangerous play) at the breakdown.
1. Offside for not coming through the gate.
2. Offside where defenders are in front of the last man on their side of the breakdown i.e. the offside line.
3. Deliberate and repeated infringements.
5.09 CURRENT LAW
Current law provides for penalties to be awarded for many more offences at all phases of the game.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.10 PROPOSED LAW
Free Kicks can be taken in accordance with current Laws.
5.10 CURRENT LAW
Free Kicks can be taken in accordance with current Laws. Law exists but needs to be rigidly applied.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.11 PROPOSED LAW
Dangerous play will not be tolerated e.g. diving over the breakdown.
5.11 CURRENT LAW
Dangerous play will not be tolerated e.g. diving over the breakdown. Law exists but needs to be rigidly applied.
5.0 Tackle/Post Tackle
5.12 PROPOSED LAW
The half back should not be touched unless he/she has his/her hands on the ball.
5.12 CURRENT LAW
The half back should not be touched unless he/she has his/her hands on the ball. Law exists; needs to be rigidly applied.
6.0 Maul
6.01 PROPOSED LAW
Defending players can pull down the maul.
6.01 CURRENT LAW
Law states that “a player must not intentionally collapse a maul”. This remains the case. The ELV would mean that a player could pull down a maul by pulling a player down from his/her shoulders to hips.
6.0 Maul
6.02 PROPOSED LAW
Players joining the maul must do so through the gate.
6.02 CURRENT LAW
Players joining the maul must do so through the gate. Law exists but needs to be rigidly applied.
6.0 Maul
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.
7.0 Scrum
7.01 PROPOSED LAW
The offside line for players who are not in the scrum and who are not the team’s scrum half, is 5 metres behind the hindmost foot of the scrum.
7.01 CURRENT LAW
The current offside line for players who are not in the scrum and who are not the team’s scrum half, runs through the hindmost foot of the player in the scrum.
7.0 Scrum
7.01 PROPOSED LAW
The offside line for players who are not in the scrum and who are not the team’s scrum half, is 5 metres behind the hindmost foot of the scrum.
7.01 CURRENT LAW
The current offside line for players who are not in the scrum and who are not the team’s scrum half, runs through the hindmost foot of the player in the scrum.
8.0 Kick Offs and Restart Kicks
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.
9.0 Sanctions
9.01 PROPOSED LAW
For all offences other than offside, not entering through the gate, and Law 10 - Foul Play, the sanction is a Free Kick.
9.01 CURRENT LAW
Current law provides for penalties to be awarded for many more offences at all phases of the game.
Overall Opinion
For the professional game the number of proposed Experimental Law Variation (ELV) changes to current laws is in my view:
Reasonable, and can be successfully trialled simultaneously
Too great to successfully trial all ELVs simultaneously
For the grassroots game, the number of proposed ELV changes to current laws is in my view:
Reasonable, and can be successfully trialled simultaneously
Too great to successfully trial all ELVs simultaneously
My overall opinion of the proposed Experimental Law Variations (ELVs) is
That all of the proposed ELVs should be trialled
That some of the proposed ELVs should be trialled
That none of the proposed ELVs should be trialled
In my opinion, the proposed Experimental Law Variations (ELVs):
Should be trialled in both the professional game and the grassroots game
Should be trialled in the professional game only
Should not be trialled in any section of the game
In my opinion, the best time to trial the Experimental Law Variations (ELVs) is:
In the next season (commencing September 2008)
The season after next (commencing September 2009)
The Experimental Law Variations should not be trialled, nor implemented
|
|
|
RicGi4#5
|
Mon, 28 April 08 23:19 GMT
|
ELV Survey
Forum Home > Referees > ELV Survey
[ REPORT THREAD TO MODERATOR ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RicGi4#5 Mon, 28 April 08 23:14 GMT
you are quite right with regards to the reasoning behind the law changes. The irb are tryig to do exactly as you say, scrummaging is one of the things that sets us apart from the other code and teams like Australia are supporting the IRB because as we all know they are not the best at scrummaging and would dearly love to give themselves,as they see it an advantage buy changing scrummaging and forward play ! if the IRB are not pulled down a peg or 2 soon then the RFU might as well fold and the IRB can put everyone under the umbrella of Rugby League and kill off the code of Union !
|
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Mon, 28 April 08 09:46 GMT
|
I agree about the methodology. I'm interested in this idea of including as ELV's some current laws that aren't well enforced - I wonder whether the RFU is using responses to these questions as some sort of control, or whether it's just wondering whether people would actually prefer to see them enforced rather than travel down the ELV's route.
But you still potentially get confusion either way. A Community referee who avidly watches the elite game might have very different experiences in those two different activities of whether the current laws (e.g. not diving into a ruck in a "planes landing" attitude) are enforced; which of his experiences does he report?
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
milligani
- iandmilligan@btinternet.com
|
Fri, 25 April 08 14:34 GMT
|
I tried last night and it failed totally to get past the first screen and that said the email address had already been used to completed the survey!! Tried again with a different email today and worked fine. Not sure that the methodology of the survey will produce the most robust outputs however.......
|
-------------------------
Spike |
|
|
nicknell
|
Fri, 25 April 08 14:00 GMT
|
Just logged on under different e-address and completed successfully.
|
|
|
nicknell
|
Fri, 25 April 08 13:42 GMT
|
It's definitely live now.
I get about 6 pages in and get some sort of error message.
|
|
|
Nigib3
|
Fri, 25 April 08 13:38 GMT
|
Nicknell:
The email I received today from my RefSoc said that the site goes live sometime tomorrow...
|
|
|
nicknell
|
Fri, 25 April 08 13:36 GMT
|
I've tried twice this morning to complete the RFU ELV survey and failed both times.
Is it timing out because I'm doing it at work and taking so long?
|
|
|
Icm5Fa#s
|
Fri, 25 April 08 06:59 GMT
|
http://betterrugbyrules.blogtown.co.nz/
PLEASE SELECT THESE LINKS FOR A FULL DISCUSSION
http://betterrugbyrules.blogtown.co.nz/2008/04/21/checkers-vs-chess-rugby-league-vs-rugby-union/
http://betterrugbyrules.blogtown.co.nz/2008/04/21/elvs-experiment-law-variation/
|
|
|
|
|
|
