Knock on Wood with some well balanced thoughts on the ELVs, and the trialling of the ELVs...  From the ELVs thread on the TSF forum.

Legalising maul collapses totally removed mauling from the game in the Australian competition... A cynic might say that there was never any mauling in Australian rugby prior to the ELVs  !  But the possibility of removing mauling from the game does worry me.

However my biggest worry, is that by introducing this dumb law to the NH experiment, we will see them dismissing ALL the ELVs on the basis of one or two crap ones.

At the risk of digressing horribly, I  think the worst thing about all the ELVs is that they have failed to reduce the amount of judgement calls made by the ref. He still has to judge if this player fell over the ball deliberately, if this player was "holding on" or "placing the ball immediately". He has to judge if this player came in from the side, if this player dragged the halfback into the ruck, if this player was ahead of the hindmost feet, etc etc etc. All these things at every given ruck, when you can bet that at least one player from each team was infringing in some way, and the ref has to judge which infringement was worst and whether to let the game go on. so the ELVs have not succeeded in reducing the influence of the ref on the outcome of the game.

The best thing about the ELVs is the fluidity of the game, the extra decision making that is required around the 22, the removal of back-passing into the 22 and kick for touch, the attacking options off the back of the scrum, the encouragement on team-work to score points instead of individual penalty-milking and goal-kicking.

Anyway, digression aside, to create a petition to dismiss the trialling of ELVs is misguided in my opinion.

I was opposed to many of the law changes initially, because I thought I knew what would occur... However, having seen the experimental laws in action on TV in the MARC and B comp and now in-person in the Super 14, it is surprising that some of the laws I was most opposed to I actually don't mind.

I was worried about the reduction in line outs due to the kick from the 22 law. But, despite having fewer line outs, the extra decision making, time in play, and kicking skill required at the back under the ELVs means I never want to go back to the old pass back and kick-for-touch concept.

I was worried that power scrummaging would disappear from the game, but under the new laws I am surprised to find we actually have more scrums, and disrupting the opposition feed is as important as ever.

I was opposed to free kicks because I thought infringing would become rampant in the face of not conceding 3 pts in your own half. However (after the first 4 weeks or so) things seem to have settled down and infringing is less commonplace.

I was opposed to the off-side at tackle law, and I know plenty of people who still are... but it really encourages attack and offloading and defending from in front of the tackle, and once the players can quell their natural instinct to tackle from anywhere it just might work.

I certainly wouldn't be narrow minded enough to say DON'T even TRY to improve the game, or stubborn enough not to concede that there are issues with rugby union laws.

The breakdown is still contentious and I would like to see it fixed, but I don't think the current ELVs fix it. Rather than signing petitions, I'd rather people made genuine suggestions on how to remove the ref judgements from this facet of play. I'd also like to see the TMO replaced by some sort of "challenge" system, where coaches can challenge ref decisions a number of times per game and only then is it referred to a TV official.

Some of the stated original intents of the ELVs were to reduce ref influence in the game, and simplify it for players and fans alike. I believe even the staunchest ELV supporter would have to agree that these good intentions have not been met by the current experimental variations.