Law breakers

Join the debate on O'Neill's warning over the future of rugby union

Last updated: 14th July 2008

John O Neill

O'Neill: Warning

Also see

ARU chief executive John O'Neill has claimed that rugby union could be torn apart if the Experimental Law Variations are not accepted in the northern hemisphere.

Currently England, Ireland and Wales are refusing to trial the new laws, which have been used in the Super 14s and the Tri-Nations tournaments.

And O'Neill has called on the trio to trial the ELVs or risk seeing a split in the sport - with the southern hemisphere playing to the new laws and the northern hemisphere sticking to the old laws.

The Aussie chief is also warning that South Africa, New Zealand and Australia could pull out of the World Cup if the rules are not accepted on a permanent basis.

However, is O'Neill right that the future of rugby union is in the balance over the acceptance of the new laws? Or is this just a tactic to force the hand of the northern hemisphere?

Are the likes of England, Wales and Ireland right to refuse to trial the new laws or are they behind the times in what the fans want?

Join the Sky Sports Debate and let us know your views on O'Neill's comments via the form below...

Comments

John Wardle says...

ok, i agree that these new ELVs may make the game faster for the adult professional games, and i think that the new ELV on the line out numbers can add some more range in play but as a previous forward i think that collapsing the maul is just downright dangerous, especially for younger players such as myself, now playing at U-16 level, i am now a back as i had to quit being a forward after cracking my ribs during the collapse of a maul. how in any way will this make the game better? lets say that there is a really good forward who happens to be 5 foot 7, how are they supposed to be safe if a maul containing 7 other 6 foot heavyweights collapses on them? the other ELVs i think will be a welcome change to RU and i think will be welcomed, but the collapsing of a maul will just lead to a greater injury risk.

Posted 16:09 6th September 2008

Michael Forster says...

If you want a fast flowing game we have Rugby League and union sevens. Traditional RU is a different game and shouldn't be sacrificed at the alter of Aussie finances.

Posted 22:12 3rd September 2008

Brian Moore says...

ELVs? Hmmm, very much a case of , to misquote, the lady doth protest..., I have to say. Yes, the game can't remain unaltered forever and there is a case for the odd rule change if it obvious there is inconsistency or abuse, but wholesale changes,no. The idea that the coaches should be able to get the referee's decision changed is bonkers. What next, refereeing by commentators? The referee is the arbiter and that is how it should be, he also has two line judges and a TMO if he is in doubt. Enough, say I. Allowing collapse of the rolling maul should lead to some very substantial fees for lawyers and big bills for insurance companies and clubs, I would guess, particularly at the lower league levels. As for complaints about the flow of the game, the Magners league games generally are certainly not slow or lacking in flow! At lower league level there is not a problem with flow of the game as a rule - perhaps the real problem is that someone stands to make money from ELVs. No names, of course.

Posted 17:46 3rd September 2008

Mark Fillingham says...

So, Australia are having problems guaranteeing support when in competition with Aussie Rules and Rugby League, so let's make the game more interesting when played in warmer, drier conditions to help them out. Hang on a minute, we're in cold wet horrible Northern conditions where running rugby and a cold, wet January afternoon really don't match up too well. It's all well and good making rules to make the top flight more attractive to viewing supporters but has anyone over there thought about how they'll affect a local club based on, say, a Yorkshire moor in the middle of winter, or a Cornish hillside with high winds and howling rain governing more of the match than the referee could dream of? These rules are built for professional Southern Hemisphere to flight sides to 1, gain more income, and 2, be more competitive against their Norther Hemisphere counterparts. As a former prop I enjoy watching the battering forward battles that happen on a cold winter's afternoon on pitches all over the country. I guess if I was a winger in Perth I would prefer something that kept me included in all 80 minutes of the game. Can someone explain the benefit of allowing 15 people in a lineout, as long as they're all inside the 15 metre line? Or how a referee will still be responsible for the safety of players yet can not stop a powerful pack having the maul collapsed constantly until someone lands on their head and breaks their neck? Change the rules that need changing, I agree with the pass back into the 22, I can even see the point in reducing the number of penalty offences, especially technical ones in and around set pieces, but some of these rules make the modern game only for a select few to play, is that really what we want?

Posted 15:32 3rd September 2008

Mufc 09 says...

i like the idea of making rugby a faster game but i hate the fact that you can pull down the maul this is going to see a rise in injury

Posted 18:48 5th August 2008

Sean Bale says...

I am quite enjoying the new rules currently employed in the Tri Nations, the games I have watched have been a fantastic spectacle of running flowing Rugby. However, teams are happily killing the ball and slowing down quick play inside the 22 at the disadvantage of the attacking team. Teams will happily accept a free kick inside the 22 if they do not concede points. I do feel though that the new rules are being introduced to suit the playign styles of the southern Hemisphere teams. This then I feel is catergorically unfair. These rules should not be forced onto the Northern Hemisphere to a point where culturally they will have to adapt their playing style similar to what is normal in the South. It will be interesting to see how the game flows in cold, wet blustery conditions common to British Rugby, this type of game is simply nit suited to these conditions. I believe the rules of the game are need of a revamp but introduced over a few years. Lets see how we go, if Northern Hemispheres are hammered in forthcoming fixtures it will be very interesting time for World Rugby!

Posted 04:22 4th August 2008

Bob Furey says...

After watching thes14's and the Three nations it is clear that under the ELV's the game flows at a faster pace. Currently there is a lot of positional kicking but I believe that will change sooner rather than later. One thing that has concerned me is the problems with refereeing, it is quite clear after the world cup, s14's and tri nations that something should be done about that. I believe that the NFL game has the answer the implementation of coaches challenge which is an intelligent way to solve game changing blunders by referees- i think it would need to be limited in application maybe one challenge per game for either side final adjudication to be made by the ref after review. i think it do a lot for the game and help to eliminate some of the game changing non-calls and or calls. We watch all the games here in China which has a great expat community.thanks for the rugby

Posted 03:05 4th August 2008

John Edwards says...

I have watched all of the Tri-Nations series so far along with other games from the Southern Hemespher that have been shown on SKY. There are few of the ELV's are are definitely worth progressing but overall I have seen nothing to convince me that the raft of changes being made to Southern Hemesphere rugby is working. Where are these thrilling high try scoring games that we were led to believe were forth comming. So far I have seen endless and mindless kicking in the centre of the field, thuggery that I thought we had stamped out a few years ago and a boring spectacle that I can only thank goodness that I have a fast forward button on my SKY system. There is definitelt need for reform and change, there is a pressing need to make rugby an inclusive game for all shapes and sizes. Most of all there is a need to make rugby a fast flowing game full of incidents and tries [note the emphasis on ties]. I have seen nothing yet from the current series that convinces me that these new ELV's are in anyway nearer to making my beloved game brighter and better for the future.

Posted 01:18 2nd August 2008

Andrew Heap says...

The idea that the ELVs dumb down the game is a load of Northern Hemisphere (NH) rubbish. They are a conservative lot here. However, the simpler you can make a game the less chance there is for ambiguity and different interpretation by referees. The 3rd Tri-Nations game meant that the ball was IN PLAY for 39 minutes instead of 24 minutes for what had been previously been the norm between NZ and Australia. Apart from the Collapsing the Maul law change, the other ELV changes work. In actual fact, they provide more facets that both Coaches and Players need to think tactically about the game. Rugby was invented so that players would run with the ball and score tries, not kick it (Football) or wait for the infringements and 3 points by kick (as a result of inconsistent interpretation). I still like watching the Rolling Maul but it is not the be all and end all of the game. Also there are other players outside of 8 forwards and the 2 halves but the NH is generally in denial of them, playing 10 man rugby. So maybe the traditional game as it exists is not for all shapes, sizes and styles of play as the doom and gloom merchants would have you believe. RWC 2007 Finals are evidence of that. Maybe the NH do not like the ball 'IN PLAY' and that is essentially why they do not want the ELVs. Trial some of the ELVs from now, but it will not give you a full appreciation of what other ELVs offer such as the change in SANCTIONS speeding up the game. So the NH trail will be comparing apples with oranges (i.e. S14 and Tri-Nations ELV trials) and will not allow them to objectively argue their case against ELV laws 'not in their trial'. What a pity.

Posted 12:54 1st August 2008

Paul Edwards says...

I have been lucky enough to attend Wallabies V SA & AB's Tri-Nation matches this season and also as a member of Western Force saw a fair few Super 14 games. During Super 14's, I don't remember to many people being confused with the changes to some of the laws and the only confusion last sat night was the sight of the AB's dropping the pill and looking like a deer caught in headlights. The new laws are needed, the game has evolved with great speed since 'official professionalism'. Bigger players all over the park, crash and bash, slow ball, solid defences, games won with the boot. Changes had to happen. Yes the best 3 teams in the world contest the tri-nations and yes in general the games are of a high std. Now the level has gone a lot higher and faster and defence must work a lot harder to contain across the width of the pitch. The ELV's are embraced by players/coaches/supporters, the buzz last sat was amazing with the game flowing so quickly from end to end. The ELV's should be made mandatory up north but as mentioned elsewhere caution should be made with regard to implementation, stagger it. We had a number of changes for the 14 season then a number of additional changes for the internationals. Perth Pom.

Posted 06:47 28th July 2008

Liam Banks says...

the ELVs are just dumbing down the game.They want to make it more of a spectator sport but they dont need to as everyone i know watches the world cups anyway! Also the beauty of rugby is anyone can play it and making it faster is macking it less excessible for bigger slow peoplee to get in to and there arnt many other sports for them!also i am 15 and play junior rugby for telford hornets and the idea of callapsing a maul is just downright dangerous!the tackling hardly even hurts but i am only small and if people my size pull down a maul with 6 15 st people in people are gonna get hurt! for adults it aint so bad but at all rugby levels it is just stupid!

Posted 21:18 25th July 2008

Ben B says...

I personally don't agree with the ELVs as they seem to be a way of getting more viewers of tv games. Also the safety of players is less paramount with collapsing a maul now going to a free kick with these rules, i am a player who has had a maul collapse on me and only get muscle damage to my neck making me lucky, it could be a lot worse for someone if these rules come into place with more serious injuries ruining young players chances early on in their development. The whole idea that these rules would make games more exciting with huge points score is rubbish take the tri nations so far 2 games have been low scores 16-9 and 19-8. O'Neills warning about the tri nations pulling out of the world cup if the ELVs aren't implemented is stupid as there is no way New Zealand are going to not compete in 2011 as they are hosts plus it gives smaller nations more chance to compete if they don't. I personally believe that the right way forward is to develop other rugby nations around the world and get them to a better standard with the current rules but encourage them to play a running game.

Posted 02:37 24th July 2008

Graham Griffiths says...

It's amazing the number of postings I've read since the Stellenbosch rules were first mooted, in which some rugby union fans declare their love for the 'arm-wrestle' type of game to which we were 'treated' so frequently in the RWC. Yet whenever classic games are re-screened on television, they are always the ones which have the most running and passing, resulting in tries rather than goals.

Posted 22:06 22nd July 2008

Solminic Joseph says...

I agree with the above statement that the new laws were too quickly inserted a systematic approach with maybe 2-3 laws a year would have been much better. The amount of new laws have just created confusion amongst spectators and ref's. however these new laws have made the game much quicker and certainly more interesting so those of you who are afraid that the gap between North and South would open up more are just stupid, you have such great players in the North such as Shane Williams and Olly Barkley to name a few and also great flankers that would relish the new laws. So come on and start getting with the times and lets better the already perfect game. Rugby's greatest fan

Posted 14:46 22nd July 2008

Harold Hare says...

The choice I fear is between which laws you would rather PLAY the game of Rugby Union and which set of laws you would rather WATCH the game of Rugby Union. I fully admit to being old-fashioned.. I remember as a wing throwing in the ball to the line out.. often the only times I touched the ball. I was under the belief that Rugby was a players game and spectators could watch if interested. What was and in my opinion still be the important factor is the GAME of Rugby. I would prefer the 2nd code of Rugby Union.. lets call it Rugby Classic where we revert to the laws as they were BEFORE professionalism.. lets put the game back in the hands of the players, not the money men in suits. With all these changes to make the game "faster" is in effect a dumbing down and reducing the technical aspects of this wonderful game.

Posted 07:44 22nd July 2008

Jonathan Ray says...

Ok, we all know that the major driving factor is Australia's lack of money in the game, and that the full set of ELV's are an attempt to reduce the forward contest and i am vehemently opposed to them. An important reason for this is the way they have been brought in. 1. there's FAR too many wholesale changes so its scary. 2. They've been implemented so haphazardly across the globe, with no systematic approach that is acceptable in any way. 3. They contain a few HORRIFIC changes that are causing those of us in the north to adopt a very defensive stance that isnt helped by the inept, intelligible ramblings of one J. O'Neill. However, i think there could be some scope for rule change if it was done more sensibly. more importantly, if it was done more SLOWLY: 08/09 1. 5m back at scrums 2. No matching of lineout numbers 3. Quick lineouts can go backwards. Start small, just a few changes to quicken up the game slightly and provide a bit more space. i doubt too many would argue these too strongly 09/10 4. Free kicks for ATTACKING penalties; driving to ground, not through the gate, holding on. 5. Maintain full penalties for defensive infrigements; in at side, killing ball etc A bit more speculative, avoids a "cheats license" but lowers overall penalty count to appease those in the south. Also makes it harder to clear your lines, making possesion more important and tries from long periods of pressure more likely since you have to "attack your way out of defense". 10/11 6. Allow hands in the ruck if on feet. VERY speculative, but breakdown needs cleaning up and the only way to remove the grey area is to ban hands entirely or allow them. Notice any mention of maul collapsing is nowhere to be seen since its lunacy! Personally i'd rather keep all full pens but as an attempt to appease the south this might suit everyone. Any thoughts/musings/personal attacks for even suggesting any of this?!

Posted 23:23 20th July 2008

Lewis Gomersall says...

andrew heap calls rugby league 'stop-start'? coming from a rugby union fan, that is priceless!

Posted 17:48 19th July 2008

Danny Thomas says...

From a spectators point of view the new laws make for a more interesting spectacle and the only people who seem to be suffering from it are the referees who dont seem to be able to keep up with the pace of the game. The southern hemisphere teams are faster and fitter and if the northern hemisphere teams are disadvantaged by this then perhaps they should train a bit harder. Lets move forward with the game and keep the interest going this has been the most interesting and even contest in years. Good on Robbie Deans for moving to a country that respects his talents as a coach, we look forward to his reign for some time to come and it's about time we had someone of his calibre leading the talented players that we have so that we can be in the winners circle again. Thanks mate, from a long time frustrated Wallabies supporter you have made the game worth watching again ! !

Posted 13:49 19th July 2008

Andrew Heap says...

Mark Dean, Seems to be re-inforcing my argument that the Northenrn Hemisphere are paranoid, that they will lose a competitve advantage if some of the ELVs get through. Moving from set-piece to set piece with some beefy forwards holding onto possession - using a the rolling maul - and waiting for an 'infringement' so they can kick a penalty and gloat about their forward dominiance is not what you would engrossing Rugby. Where as I thought the idea is to have the game more in play, using all the facets of fast recycling of possession, pick and drive and or rolling mauls, multiple phase play, running good and varied lines, great inerchange of passing and use of different of angles, tactical kicking when the defence is up or out of position as well as good scrummaging and lineouts is what the game is about. It has been proven that the ELVs keep the ball in play more, the games are definitely faster and it does require players to be fitter and this is no way changes the body shapes that have been plyying under the 'old' laws - they are all still playing under the ELVs. But it does allow teams - whether they be at the grassroots level or not, to be get closer to playing better Rugby with less stoppages. May be the North don't like this prospect, but there have been and are some Terrific Northern Hemisphere players that would love the chance to see how they would go. Mark maybe you have not seen a lot of Tri-nations/Super14 but in no way does it resemble Rugby League. The intensity at the breakdown, the competition for possession, Rucks, Rauling Mauls, Lineouts Tactical Kicking, and great scrummaging are as important as they always have been and will remain so. Scrummaging is more important, particularly from short arm penalties, as it's a great way to launch an attack where the forwards are sucked in - the backs have a bit of room to move with defences back 5m. The sanctions changes don't encourage cheating.

Posted 10:46 19th July 2008

Dave Ball says...

Where were these two great games discussed??? I saw a lot of inane kicking in the 1st Test and a slight improvement in the 2nd. The BIG point is interpretation of the laws by the officials. If they are NOT singing off the same hymn sheet with the old rules forget the new. What was crooked feed/forward pass/not straight and offside???? If you want basketball with pain carry on but persoanlly I think O'neill has been on the bundy.At ground roots level it seems a tadge risky and at the end of the day that is where the majority of us play for FUN. Oh to have been priviliged to play for your Country and then have some executive screw it up for you with mickey mouse ideas. Take up womens hockey O'Neill and leave rugby alone.

Posted 17:40 18th July 2008

Page 1 of 4

Add Comment*

All fields are required

Are you a Sky Sports subscriber?

Character Count : 0/1950

Please tick here if you wish to receive emails relating to Sky Sports.com or any other companies, services or products related to Sky Sports.com

Please send me the weekly Sky Sportszine - exclusive content, features and competitions to my inbox every Friday.

*All fields required, your email address will be kept private