Wacthing the Super 14 this weekend, I think the game is being dominated by the whistle more than ever. ELV’s look like they are here to stay, at least in the Southern Hemisphere, in some shape of form. it is extremely confusing for spectators, players and referees.

The ELV’s were origninally brought in to promote a more open, attractive style of rugby, and go back to core rugby values. To ensure competition for the ball, and allow the attacking team chances to run the ball.

There is not just one form of the ELV’s, which is where the confusion starts. The internationals tend to use the global ELV’s which retain long arm penalties, whilst the super 14 uses the hybrid ELV’s which utilise short arm free kicks. It’s confusing and in my opinion produces 2 completely different games.

For a start I am not a fan of the ELV’s. We simply need to ensure the laws promote the game as we want it, and then get referees to ALL blow to that interpretation. Having multiple law variations simply makes the differences even greater.

I like to see an emphasis on set pieces, where there is fair, even competition for the ball. The hybrid ELV’s see a lot of aimless kicking from one end to the other. It takes out lineouts, (which is a South African strength) which should be as valuable as scrums in my view. Scrummaging needs to be fair and favour teams with a stronger, better scrum. Allowing weak scrummaging teams ie the Aussies, to be able to compete with no consequences simply takes the physicality out of the game.

At ruck time it is a lottery. Depending on the ref, and how they blow it. I’m seeing way to many variations with some refs favouring the defending teams, and some favouring the attacking teams. And markedly too. One only wants to see a fair contest for the ball if the defenders execute great tackles and are standing over the ball. Otherwise it should favour the attacking team.

Collapsing of the mauls is another rule that has been changed but I just don’t see why. If you can’t defend a maul, that is your fault. It rewarded good technique and physicality. They’ve now taken away a great option close to the try line. The problem in my view was that mauls were allowed to go on too long and should be blown earlier if they don’t have momentum and are rolling forward. The same should apply with tackles and rucks. If someone makes a great tackle and halts the attacking team or even drives them backwards, the attacking team should have to get the ball out quickly else a scrum to the defending team should ensue. Lets reward good play and allow turnovers for defence that moves forward.

The biggest criticism I have though of the hybrid ELV’s is that a free kick does nothing for the game. Sure it keeps the ball in play longer. But you can give away multiple free kicks to simply slow the opposition down, get a turnover at some stage and boot the ball downfield and snuff out their attacking options. With a penalty you get punished with 3 points. It slows the game but every action has consequences. At the moment it can be really hard to get out of your half because if you are infringed against, you don’t necessarily want to kick the ball out because you don’t get the lineout throw (which you do with a penalty) and hence you can get stuck in your own territory for long periods.

The advantage rule has gone 180 degrees too. A few years ago I felt it was way too long, now it is often too short. Teams often don’t even get to see whether they benefit from the advantage, because it’s over as soon as there is a turnover. There is a balance in the middle!

All in all I preferred a forward dominated game where set pieces were important and there was a contest for the ball. The ELV’s are ruining the game and i’m with the Northern Hemisphere on this one…