In the last few months, there has been a campaign in favour of changing the laws of rugby to encourage a more open game, a campaign led by many of the same people who objected to changing the laws when the ELVs were introduced last year. However, there is a strong argument that there is not that much wrong with the laws as they stand, and that apart from a little tweaking, all that is needed is a change in emphasis, and for one or two trend-setting sides to be more expansive. All sports teams copy each other to some degree, and the minute one side has some success whilst running the ball more, others will follow. For this to happen, all it will take is for the benefit of the doubt to shift to the player taking the ball into contact, and put more onus on the tackler to get away, and gradually the game will open up again.
What the ELVs proved was that by the time a problem in the laws has been identified and a solution devised, trialled and introduced, the game will probably have moved on again anyway. The ELVs were designed to reflect perceived flaws in the game around the time of the 2003 World Cup, but by the time they came in, tactics had evolved, and they already seemed dated (although they were flawed anyway). Far better to give the game a chance to sort itself out, and only change the laws if the situation is not improving. It is only a small improvement, but if Edwards is right, and last weekend did see a shift in attitudes, then hopefully by this time next year, we will no longer debating whether rugby is boring or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment