If you want it done properly, do it yourself

The Reds can do us Saffers an enormous favour tomorrow by beating the Waratahs. Neither the Stormers nor the Sharks have what it takes to win a semi overseas so if we're to have any meaningul say in this competition, the 'Tahs have to lose: which they won't.

It's an annual predicament for South Africans: the hope that a few balls bounce oddly enabling us to squeeze a side into the playoffs. It's pathetic and should stop.

The Crusaders booked their playoff berth weeks ago becuase they did the hard work up front. They're in such a commanding position that even another slip up tomorrow has no material effect. This notion that you only need win during the "bussiness end" of the competition is nonsense. If the Stormers had started the season with any sembalnce of spunk, they'd already be earning interest on the semis money.

The value of bonus points has also been highlighted. The Crusaders have seven which is almost two extra wins - for free! Trust me, the Sharks will rue not scoring more tries this season.

Only one South African side will make the semis tomorrow and my money's on the Stormers. The Sharks should blame themselves for missing the playoff party, considering their position but a month ago. Yet either side's longevity in the competition is pointless: neither will make the final.

But it didn't have to be that way.

Short shorts and memories

In rugby, only Luke Watson’s pants are shorter than fans’ memories. A mere eight weeks ago I was describing the Stormers as a “genuinely bad team” and had them inked in at the bottom of the table, alongside compatriots the Lions and Cheetahs.

How things change.

A sixth-straight win on Saturday could see the Stormers end up second overall – good enough to host a semi-final. It really is champagne stuff, even if the picture is slightly skewed.

Of their last five opponents, only the Horrorcanes are a potential championship side. The other four simply make up numbers and in that I include the Brumbies whose forwards and halfbacks have been appalling.

The warning signs have been clear. A succession of deplorable, sometimes scoreless, second-half displays and an inability to finish chances have cost the Stormers at least three bonus points.

Such details are laughingly ignored as the Newlands faithful have quickly gotten used to winning. “A win’s a win” is uttered far too often in Cape Town. They used to say that in Durban too.

A curious Cape Times rugby writer claimed this week that the Stormers have what it takes “to go all the way”. Nonsense like that only serves to infuriate me and hide the fact that, for example, JD Moller is way out of his depth, or that Jean de Villiers’s distribution is substandard.

The unfounded hype is likely to cease at the weekend when the tournament’s second best side highlights brutally the growing chasm between the haves and have-nots of the Super 14.

Razzle Dazzle What?

We are halfway through the Blooper 14 and I’ve had two months to have a good look at the much-debated ELVs.

Thankfully, and sometimes people forget this, but the ELVs are being implemented on a trial basis. They are not the Official Laws of the Game of Rugby Football and, in this form at least, they never will be.

With notable exception, the ELVs have been a success. The more open style of play has produced a far more appealing product than in yesteryear without taking anything away from the set pieces. Scrums are again an integral part of the game (instead of just being a method of restarting play) and the lineout count is sure to increase when Victor Matfield and Chris Jack come home.

The most resounding argument for the ELVs is that we’re seeing tries scored where previously teams would (justifiably) kick at goal. Much kudos to the powers that be for that.

But the notable exception is the pussy pimple on rugby’s otherwise pristine complexion: the breakdown. The IRB’s primary objective when drawing up the ELVs should have been to explicate the breakdown; remove, as far as possible, the daunting grey areas. Instead the curious bunch in Dublin did quite the opposite.

Now more than ever the breakdown (and just to be irreverent I will not call it the tackle area) is a lottery. Free kicks are sometimes penalties and vice versa. How is anyone meant to enjoy a game where the rules change ad infinitum? Already we have seen a match decided by a referee awarding a penalty for repeated infringement. How many infringements constitute repetition? Must they occur within a certain amount of time?

What’s most damning is that I was asking these questions months ago. Where is the control at the IRB? These issues should have been dealt with before trialling the ELVs at Super 14 level. Try the ELVs on goats – the results would probably be consistent. No one really cares about animal testing anyway.

Subjectivity is unquestionably the game’s greatest foe and until its direct influence is minimized, rugby will not grow into the global game so many of us want it to become. The first step would be sorting out the chaos that is the ELVs. So it’s old rules again next year?! Never!