|
We all know that the IRB has made a huge hash of
trialling these variations with different sets being played around the world and
bizarre situations like the Wallabies and ABs not even knowing what variations
they will be playing in Hong Kong before playing to another set in the NH!
What has happened though is that we
now have had many of the worlds best players and coaches (and Puppets) working
the variations to their advantage in a highly competitive competition between
the top 3 sides in the world. Add this to the experience from the Super14 and I
think that we can see the effect that they have had quite clearly.
There have been many of us willing to
give the changes a chance to see what happens and others who dismissed them from
the start, but surely enough is now enough and the effects are plain to see?
They are certainly not the effects that either the optimists or doomsayers
expected but have come though the trials so far as an obvious pointer to how the
way the game is played will be under these changes.
Games have deteriorated into large
periods of force back. The unfortunate result of the rule (pass back into 22)
that was designed to increase the ball in play time has just created endless and
tedious high kicks in the midfield. The game has lost a lot of shape as players
stand around waiting for the next piece of traditional play where they can do
their own jobs.
The free kick ELV that had
possibilities of stopping offending by giving the refs the option to blow
quickly and get play moving again had resulted in more offending. Not
necessarily because of the decreased punishment, but because it has created a
lottery in which each free kick has often resulted in a change of possession.
Players are simply wanting to create the situation where the lottery kicks in
and they have a chance of getting the ball from the ref rather than from
contesting it.
There is an indication recently that
in some NH comps the refs are strictly enforcing the players at the breakdown to
stay on their feet. This was, as extolled by many pundits for years, the
solution that didn't require changes. There wasn't anything wrong with the Laws,
just the way they were being applied.
The only ELVs that have come up
smelling roses are the quick throw in one and the 5 metre offside line at the
scrum.
I was an advocate for giving the ELVs
a shot but I've seen enough. The cynical nature of professional rugby has
swiftly negated most of the benefits that they were designed to produce. Perhaps
it's time for the IRB to grow some balls and call an end to experimentation.
Make a few minor changes and direct the refs to enforce strongly the Laws as
they were written.
|