Thursday, 17 July 2008

RFU propose alternative ELVs

For some reason our antipodean friends believe that we in the northern hemisphere are all luddite dinosaurs determined to stand in the way of progress. Can't think why.

Here's an amusing little something penned by Karl (aka Stomper), an Aussie who reads and comments on this blog from time to time...

The RFU today announced that it is proposing a number of new ELVs to be trialled in the Northern Hemisphere commencing with games played from 1st August 2008.

The new ELVs are aimed to return rugby to its purest form and eliminate many of the changes that have taken place since the early 1900s. The key rule changes are:

  • The number of players will be increased to twenty reversing the reduction in player numbers that was effected in 1877. The RFU believe this significant change will allow the game to become more inclusive and tighten up the game for the forwards, eliminating much of the unnecessary open play that has become a blight on the game.

  • Another new exciting developments will be the reintroduction of the goal from mark that was cruelly abandoned in 1971. This exciting element of the game will allow skilled place kickers to score during open play without the need for the awarding of a penalty. This will result in more kicks at goal and further reduce the incentive to run the ball.

  • The RFU are also excited to announce the reintroduction of the leather spherical ball with an inner-tube made of a pig's bladder which had been incorrectly abandoned in 1862 following the introduction of Richard Lindon's rubber inner-tubes. The "new" balls will require a greater level of skill in order to convert kicks at goal into points - in particular in wet weather with the "new" balls weighing 30kgs when wet.

  • Other exciting ELV changes include no lifting in the line out and kicking out on the full allowed from anywhere on the field.

  • Point scoring will revert back to those of 1900 with 3 points for a try, 2 points for a conversion, 3 points for a drop goal and 4 points for the reintroduced Goal from mark. It is expected that this will be the most contentious rule change with some RFU delegates looking to a return to pre- 1889 rules where no points were awarded for tries.

A representative of the RFU Board, Steven Fotherington-Bligh, commented: "We are excited by this new proposal which will see rugby revert to it's original purity, with an emphasis on rewarding kicks at goal rather than tries.

Personally I love the idea of reverting back to the days when lifting in the lineout was outlawed - Chesham Vets might actually win a lineout or two!


BigDai said...

How about some a return to proper rucking, that would teach McCaw and the english back-row a few lessons.

Anonymous said...


Don't get me started!!!!

The draconican penalising of rucking is one of the reasons why poncy back-rowers percist in lying all over the ball in an attempt to slow the game down.

Once again the sanitising of the game has come from the English who have always had an aversion to a good old fashioned rucking.

I've even had the misfortune of being sent from the hallowed fields of Ealing Rugby Club on the back of some judicious english refereeing.... not withstanding the warranted and sublime rucking employed.

Karl aka Stomper

BigDai said...

"Stomper" - let me guess how you got that name!
I can reply as a referee or a player.
As player, I think a good shoeing is a great way for speeding up the game and punishing infringements and has a place in the game.
As a referee, it is a flash point, one man's shoeing is someone elses invitation to punch you in mouth which cascades into al types of trouble.
Secondly, when boots are flying around unseen, delicate joints, vision and good looks are all at risk. That's not what most players want from their Saturday afternoon on the field.

Total Flanker said...

Karl - you really can't blame the English for everything! Or can you? ;)

I scribbled something on this very subject last year -

So long as it's rucking and not blatant stamping (Ali Williams on Josh Lewsey springs to mind) then the vast majority of players don't have a problem with it. Players know when the line had been crossed and so, in my experience do most referees.

The IRB are a bit sensitive on the issue though - don't want the image of the game tarnished and all that...

Stomper said...

TF, no, while it's fun to ridicule the english I can't blame them for everything.

Bigdai, there is a big difference between rucking (ok) and stomping (not ok). If someone is deliberately lying on the ball he should be encouraged to move away.

I used to wear the tram tracks of a good rucking as a badge of honour.

Karl aka Stomper