E-mail Article Print-Friendly Version Contact Us

Deans wants S14 ELVs for Tri-Nations

Sunday 11th May 2008

Official Accusation: Deans believes referee dish out a 'quota' of penalties - and stop once it is reached

Incoming Australia coach Robbie Deans wants to see the Tri-Nations played under the Experimental Law Variations (ELVs) used in the Super 14.

Deans, who will take up his role with the Wallabies at the start of next month, believes the rugby public and players would benefit from the continuity of taking the ELVs that were trialled during this year's Super 14 competition to the Test stage.

The Tri-Nations - which involves SANZAR nations New Zealand, Australia and South Africa - begins on July 5 with a Test match between New Zealand and South Africa in Wellington, a month before the 12-month global trial of a reduced package of 13 ELVs begins.

But the over-riding feeling from the three unions is for the larger package of ELVs to be used - including those applying to sanctions, which are not part of the global trial but which the SANZAR nations have been given dispensation to continue to use.

"The public are familiar with them now and have embraced them," said the current Crusaders coach.

"There's been some good rugby so in the SANZAR market it would be logical to see this season out because it gives you continuity.

"Where we go next can be decided globally, hopefully."

The fear that the ELVs would fundamentally change the nature of the game has also been unfounded, says Deans.

Instead the coach feels it has promoted attacking rugby, while still maintaining the importance of the set-piece because of the option of a free-kick or scrum instead of a penalty for most infringements.

"There's a little bit of difference in so far as the ball can be in play a little bit longer and that teams that want to can choose to take the initiative if they want to and take quick free-kicks," he said.

"As we've gone through the [Super 14] competition and got to the business end, the game has become less and less discernible from what was there before which is good because there is scope for teams to be attacking and positive.

"If the pendulum has swung slightly in any way back towards the team that's prepared to attack that's good.

"We saw at the World Cup where teams preferred not to have the ball than have it, which is never good for the game."

He added: "It's also probably reinforced the need for props. There was a concern for some parties that blokes of that shape would fall out of the game but it's probably quite the opposite."

He is also an advocate of the sanctions ELVs, believing they allow players, not referees, to determine the outcome and therefore encourage more positive play, particularly around the contentious breakdown area.

"In the past there's been a bit of a fear with referees that they have this nominal number of penalties for the maximum number of penalties - a quota if you like - per game and they pull back [once they've reached it] and you end up with an arm wrestle around the contact area - it just ruins the game," he said.

"[The free-kick/scrum option] allows referees to enter the game earlier and be a lot tougher in policing around the contact area, which is a challenge area in the game, and as a consequence of that have a better game.

"Because the consequence of a free-kick is not as grave but is still advantageous enough, particularly because of the scrum option, it plays right into the hands of teams determining outcomes by having to play to determine that outcome as opposed to having a referee's decision that's unclear to some, possibly all, parties."

He continued: "Where it will end up who knows, but I think the referees will benefit from the experience of refereeing with free-kicks because they will learn that players will adapt quickly if they [refs] are prepared to enter and police those areas and continue to police those areas.

"Teams will adjust and we will end up with a better game."