Rugby World Cup - The need for change: John O'Sullivanon moves to make the game less defensive and reward flair and invention.

The recent Rugby World Cup final wasn't for the faint-hearted. Even aficionados of the sport would have balked at the sterility of the play, if not the intensity of the contest. South Africa and England applied the boot-and-bite philosophy, relishing the physicality of endless collisions. It was rugby's version of taking the door off its hinges rather than using the key.

It was the second time in the history of the tournament the final failed to record a single try - 1995 was the first, a final also won by the Springboks.

In all there have been five tryless matches since the competition's inception in 1987.

The 1999 semi-final between Australia and South Africa, the 1991 semi-final between England and Scotland, and a pool match contested by Australia and Samoa in the same year also failed to yield a try.

It's difficult to deny the 2007 World Cup was dominated by defence and kicking, particularly in the knock-out stages. While few would want to denude the game of traditional collision areas like scrum, lineout, maul and ruck in favour of a more Sevens-style approach, the International Rugby Board (IRB) are conscious that the sport as a spectacle requires careful monitoring and, in some of the laws, tweaking.

Most countries have opted for a former rugby league player as a defensive coach, and while great strides have been made in shutting down the opposition, those charged with prising open defences have struggled to keep pace. It's not a new phenomenon; it's just the 2007 World Cup was the most stark manifestation of where the game is heading.

Intelligent punting is a skill, but several matches simply degenerated into interminable loops of kick-and-chase. In some respects union and league appear to be getting ever closer as teams opt for, not quite the six tackles but, a few phases before putting boot to ball.

The emphasis seems to have shifted from attack to defence.

There were exceptions in general attitude and some exceptional matches in France 2007, but it's increasingly obvious the game needs to introduce breathing space that facilitates a more expansive handling game.

Modern forwards are bigger, stronger and faster than those of previous generations and therefore better able to cover every blade of grass on a pitch. So space and time for backs and back play are at a premium and in essence the playing surface has shrunk.

Rugby has traditionally been a game for all shapes and sizes but if the current trend is maintained it won't be so for much longer.

There is also a necessity to simplify the laws for referees, coaches, players and spectators.

In deference to the officials presiding over matches these days, it's nearly impossible to avoid errors. Interpretations vary from referee to referee and in reality there is probably an offence committed at every contact point. Even with the benefit of replays, as television match officials demonstrated during the recent finals, it's still possible to err.

In 2006 the IRB offered backing to Stellenbosch University to conduct trials into altering several laws in pursuit of a faster game that would be more transparently understandable for everyone. It gave birth to the Stellenbosch Experimental Law Variations (ELV).

This year the trials were expanded to Scotland's Super Cup (an amateur club competition), the English County Championship, the New Zealand rugby union B competition and club competitions in New South Wales and Queensland. Next February they will be employed in the Super 14 and in April 2008 will be discussed at an IRB Council meeting, and the likelihood is a further one-year testing programme right up to test level will be prescribed.

The ELVs champion the creation of space and reducing the influence of the penalty and, by extension, placing a greater emphasis on scoring tries.

Among the more interesting changes is permitting mauls to be collapsed deliberately, pushing both back lines back five metres from the hindmost foot at scrum time, changing several offences from penalty to free kick, and abolishing passing or taking the ball back into the 22 and then kicking to touch.

The accompanying panel offers an overview of the alterations but what are arguably as salient as the changes themselves are the statistics gathered in analysing the ELVs.

The comparison was drawn between the Scottish Super Cup (SSC eight matches), the 2006 Six Nations Championship and round seven of the 2006 Super 14 tournament.

Those who feared that the identity of the sport and its traditional values might disappear should be heartened by some of the facts and figures.

In the SSC, where the ELVs applied, there were on average 143 rucks and mauls, as against 167 in the Six Nations and 134 in the Super 14.

The number of lineouts was only marginally down in the SSC, 28 as distinct from 31 in the Six Nations and Super 14, while the number of scrums was actually more in the SSC (21) than the Six Nations (17) and Super 14 (20).

The most striking statistic is the number of tries per game, the SSC averaging nine while the Six Nations rowed in at just over four and the much lauded entertainment-fest that is the Super 14 had five.

The ball-in-play figures are also quite revealing, the SSC recording 59 per cent of the time during a match as against 46 per cent for the Six Nations and 41 per cent for the Super 14.

The increasing number of free kicks, the tap-and-go becoming more attractive, and the fatigue factor guaranteed more open matches with more tries.

This doesn't represent a panacea for all the problems that bedevil rugby union as a spectacle, but it confirms there is a proactive process charged with addressing several shortcomings.

The next 12 months will be instructive in the development of the sport.

Experimental Law Variations - Layman's Guide

Touch judges: Can indicate offside at the tackle by raising flag horizontally. Referee is not obliged to act on intervention.

Inside the 22-metre line: A player who passes or takes the ball back inside will be liable for the following:

If the ball is then kicked directly into touch, the lineout is in line with where the ball was kicked.

If a tackle, ruck or maul is subsequently formed or an opponent plays the ball and the ball is then kicked into touch, the lineout is where the ball crossed the touchline.

Lineout: A quick throw can be straight or backward. The receiver must stand two metres from the lineout. There is no maximum number of players in a lineout but the minimum is two. If the lineout throw is not straight the opposition get a free kick.

Breakdown(tackle/post tackle): When a tackle occurs there are immediate offside lines. A tackled player must immediately play the ball and may not be prevented from doing so by any player off his feet. If the ball is unplayable, the side that did not take into into contact gets a free.

If the ball is received directly from a kick, a tackle occurs immediately and the ball becomes unplayable, the free kick is given to the team who received the kick.

Penalty offences at the breakdown: There are only three penalty offences (not including dangerous play) at the breakdown: offside for not coming through the gate; offside where defenders are in front of the last man on their side; players on the ground preventing the playing of the ball. A scrum option is available for all free kicks.

Maul: Defenders may pull down the maul. If a maul becomes unplayable, the team not in possession at the start of the maul gets a free kick. The "truck and trailer" is no longer an offence.

Scrum: The offside line for players not in the scrum and not the scrumhalf is five metres behind the hindmost foot of the scrum.