[
PLEASE LOGIN TO POST TO THE FORUM
]
|
|
|
ballsie
|
Sun, 04 May 08 15:35 GMT
|
This message edited on Sun, 04 May 08 by ballsie
|
-------------------------
Ballsie |
|
|
ballsie
|
Sun, 04 May 08 15:35 GMT
|
agree OB but resistance is futile and no doubt we will have a barrage of players quoting ELVS at us and god forbid you make an incorrect call... I think it is going to take a boat load of patience and tolerance from all involved and I mean coaches, refs, players and spectators otherwise I feel some will just leave..
dont get me wrong I will give any thing a good go but its tough enough on a saturday afternoon without making it any tougher
cheers
|
-------------------------
Ballsie |
|
|
ob
|
Sun, 04 May 08 10:40 GMT
|
balllsie - why not try it first before making up your mind?
|
|
|
ballsie
|
Sun, 04 May 08 10:04 GMT
|
Hi gents here is a good subject for a survey
How many grass roots referees are going to bin refereeing next season, its tough enough getting your head round the old laws without having a new set to contend with, the knock on effect is going to be tremendous,coaching, ect ect all effected I am starting to wonder if it all worth the effort.. and I love the game..but it is starting to loose its identity, next season it will be tag for all.. maybe
thanks
This message edited on Sun, 04 May 08 by ballsie
|
-------------------------
Ballsie |
|
|
weakone
- slfaithfull@aol.com
|
Sat, 03 May 08 16:39 GMT
|
Why all the panic? Since I stopped playing over 15 years ago, the game has already changed considerably. If you watch the old games on ESPN (sky channel 442) the game is extremely different to what is currently played.
I am sure that those laws adopted that are not succesful will be dropped if enough complain about them during the forth coming season. There are obviously concerns about some of those accepted this week. But until such time that they will cause you refs grief. What's the fuss?
With regard to the survey, it is a token gesture to make you feel involved but sadly, you are not! I personally agree with the other posts, ... what was the point of the survey?
Maybe the results will be concluded after you have all complained that some laws are unworkable or a backward step. I for one think there are two which are destructive, but I am prepared to watch, to see if there is such a detrimental effect as I suspect there will be.
People do not like change. Suck it and see and then form an opinion.
|
|
|
paulnewbery
|
Sat, 03 May 08 10:37 GMT
|
OB
I fully appreciate that but there will be "x" amount of views and opinions from the grassroots with no continuity.
Not a good formula for assesing an experiment.
Regards
|
-------------------------
NEWBS |
|
|
ob
|
Sat, 03 May 08 00:37 GMT
|
You are going to assess it. And you can tell the RFU your view.
|
|
|
paulnewbery
|
Fri, 02 May 08 23:26 GMT
|
Games at the elite end are usually recorded and can be assessed to see what effects it has on the game.
At the grassroots how and who is going to assess the effects on the game ????
Regards
|
-------------------------
NEWBS |
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Fri, 02 May 08 22:35 GMT
|
"As such they need to be EXPERIMENTED with somewhere."
Where have you been? They've been tested in Stellenbosh in SA, the cup in Scotland and now some of them are being tried in the S14. The IRB have rumpeted it as the biggest experiment of ELVs they've ever had!
---
So where in that list is the grass roots experimentation... which was my entire point.
If the experiment is only held towards the elite end, then implemented "cos it looks good" that sells the grass roots game short.
So for once the decision is made to also experiment at the lower levels - cynically one may feel that that is as far as the IRB's interest will then go but we can't complain we didn't get a go at it first.
Or would we all rather (cycnism aside) just be happy to take whatever is devised for the top end with no chance to taste it first?
didds
This message edited on Fri, 02 May 08 by didds
|
|
|
ctrainor
|
Fri, 02 May 08 20:46 GMT
|
I heard half the ELV's are in so what's the point of filling in a survey
|
-------------------------
Ciaran Trainor |
|
|
paulnewbery
|
Fri, 02 May 08 19:37 GMT
|
Wistleblower
Short Consultation is an understatement!!
regards
|
-------------------------
NEWBS |
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Fri, 02 May 08 17:15 GMT
|
Ealing Bill - I imagine the RFU reps went in to the Dublin with a pretty clear message from the short consultation. With the exception of the maul, I imagine the outcome is very similar to what the consultation found acceptable.
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
mlegg
|
Fri, 02 May 08 12:34 GMT
|
The insidious side of all this is being missed methinks;
Q. Which Union is the biggest advocate of the ELV's?
A. Australia
Q. Which Union is almost solely dependent on Mr Murdoch's T.V dollars
A. Australia
Q. Who is on record as stating that that 'two codes of Rugby is just stupid, they should amalgamate'
A. Mr Murdoch.
As another famous Australian once said, "can you see what it is yet?"
|
|
|
ealing bill
- wjgrist@tiscali.co.uk
|
Thu, 01 May 08 23:06 GMT
|
So the 'consultation' was 23 April to 1 May?
This message edited on Thu, 01 May 08 by ealing bill
|
|
|
bill payer
|
Thu, 01 May 08 22:36 GMT
|
"No current ELV directly addresses anything of real significance regarding scrummaging."
Nothing except that there will hardly be any. Knocks-on are about all that's left as a reason to have one. So why would you want big strong pushers for the occasional scrum? Since most things will be free kicks it'll be 8 back row men you want.
"As such they need to be EXPERIMENTED with somewhere."
Where have you been? They've been tested in Stellenbosh in SA, the cup in Scotland and now some of them are being tried in the S14. The IRB have rumpeted it as the biggest experiment of ELVs they've ever had!
|
|
|
pauldg
|
Wed, 30 April 08 15:08 GMT
|
Didds,
>which ELV regards scrummaging, that Australia are trying to push exactly?
No current ELV directly addresses anything of real significance regarding scrummaging.
However, the more controversial ELVs reduce the number of scrums awarded and reduce the value of forward play.
Hence my expectation (and that of several others) is that, over time, teams will field fewer forwards reasoning that although they'll lose any forward dominated phases of play, they'll win more of the faster phases.
Giving the Ozzie TV audiences more of what we're told they want - play that looks more like League.
|
-------------------------
--
PaulDG |
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Wed, 30 April 08 13:56 GMT
|
which ELV regards scrummaging, that Australia are trying to push exactly?
didds
|
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Wed, 30 April 08 13:55 GMT
|
What has become lost i all this is that they are EXPERIMENTAL law variations. As such they need to be EXPERIMENTED with somewhere. As such the ideas may be totally barmy - but they at least get a chance to be tried out rather than just discarded... as much as anything just to prove that they may be as barmy as originally thought when put into practise.
As an example I undersdtand that several years ago the cambridge laws Lab (the digs league AIUI) trialled 7 points for a penalty and 1 point for a try. Daft? Yeah - I think so. But they gave it a go...
They are not (AIUI) precursors to definitely being introduced.
I do believe that they have been hijacked by some for their own agenda... but that doesn;t move away from the fact that they are EXPERIMENTAL in ature... and without experiments we'd never learn much at all. I'd also add that AFAIK this will be the first time ELVs have had the chance to be trialled right down amongst the dead men, rather than at the lowest strata, a bunmch of stufdents that in all reality are still quite talented.
didds
|
|
|
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 !
This message edited on Mon, 28 April 08 by RicGi4#5
|
|
|
pauldg
|
Mon, 28 April 08 14:20 GMT
|
>I completed the survey today.
Good.
>Couldn't believe 6.01 which allows propses allowing the pulling down of mauls.
Where *have* you been?
>What is the driving force behind these ELV's ... is there concern about the difficulty of enforcing the current laws?
We're told these ELVs come from a project set up by the IRB to take much of the "referee subjectivity" out of the game.
Some people (including me) suspect the biggest driver in shaping these proposals is to make Union look more like League and hence make it more appealing to TV audiences in countries where League is the dominant form of rugby and where those audiences only currently watch union by accident and then quickly flick to a different channel because they *apparently* find union boring.
|
-------------------------
--
PaulDG |
|
|
pg
|
Mon, 28 April 08 13:39 GMT
|
I completed the survey today.
Couldn't believe 6.01 which allows propses allowing the pulling down of mauls.
5.09 states only 3 offences at ruck none of which is requirement to stay on feet. Other proposed ELV's conflict with this stating penalty if off feet!
defenders 5m back will be hard to police ... back foot is much closer to the referees immediate field of vision and a much 'harder' definition.
Allowing handling in the ruck especially at grassroots will be a disaster with hands being stamped on and players reaching forward and as a result going off their feet.
What is the driving force behind these ELV's ... is there concern about the difficulty of enforcing the current laws?
|
|
|
|
|
|
