The ELV's and Club rugby

Danger_Dave

From the 1st August 2008, the IRB will be implementing a 12 month global trial of 13 Experimental Law Variations (ELVs). All ELV’s will be implemented by the IRFU in Professional and all Domestic competition. However, a decision on the IRFU’s implementation of ELV 17 (‘Pulling down the maul’) at Age Grade level will be made in early July 2008

LAW 6 - MATCH OFFICIALS

ELV Nr.1 - Assistant Referees are able to assist the referee in any way that the referee requires

LAW 17 - MAUL

ELV Nr.2 - In Maul remove reference to head and shoulders not being lower than hips

ELV Nr.3 - Players are able to defend a maul by pulling it down

LAW 19 - TOUCH & LINEOUT

ELV Nr.4 - If a team puts ball back into its own 22 and the ball is subsequently kicked directly into touch, there is no gain in ground


ELV Nr.5 - A quick throw in may be thrown in straight or towards the throwing team's own goal line

ELV Nr.6 - There is no restriction on the number of players from either team who can participate in the lineout

ELV Nr. 7 - The receiver at the lineout must be 2 metres away from the lineout

ELV Nr. 8 - The player who is in opposition to the player throwing in the ball must stand in the area between the 5-metre line and the touchline but must be 2 metres away from the 5-metre line


ELV Nr. 9 - Lineout players may pre-grip a jumper before the ball is thrown in


ELV Nr.10 - The lifting of lineout players is permitted


LAW 20 - SCRUM

ELV Nr.11 - Introduction of an offside line 5 metres behind the hindmost feet of the scrum

Download ELV Nr.11 in PDF format HERE

ELV Nr. 12 - Identification of scrum-half offside lines

LAW 22 - CORNER POSTS

ELV Nr. 13 - The Corner posts are no longer considered to be touch-in-goal except when the ball is grounded agains the post.

The ELV's are with us for at least one year. Ive noticed theres a good number of people who play rugby and who post on the rugby forum. I was wondering how people were going to adjust at club level to the ELV's .

How will are coaches change there approach the situation ? . For Example Rule 6 . no restriction on amount of players in the lineout. Will backrow's be permanently stuck to the opposing 10 when your defending a lineout unless and no longer forced to be in the defensive lineout.

Rule 4 the kicking out of the 22 gaining no ground, will the forwards just be expected to create a phase in the 22.

Rule 3 pulling down a maul , will be i feel massively important at j3/4 level for the fact that there are so many lineout/ mauls. Will we have to practice more at pulling them down and keeping them up? .

P.S I was initially annoyed about the new ELV's, however I am getting excited that there will be new stuff to try and get to grips with in the coming season.

Comments ?

Stev_o

Expect coaches to focus on aerobic fitness for a start. Its going to be more of a experimenting thing as no one has done this before so no one will now exactly what will work

shoutman

Definatley going to be a lot more running.....

Tim Robbins

shoutman wrote: »

Definatley going to be a lot more running.....

It's going to be a nightmare reffing the scum 5 meter line, with touch judges.
The reason why SH put it in not straight, is because refs are so worried about the front row. Now they'll have to check the 5 meter line.

Stev_o

Tim Robbins wrote: »

It's going to be a nightmare reffing the scum 5 meter line, with touch judges.
The reason why SH put it in not straight, is because refs are so worried about the front row. Now they'll have to check the 5 meter line.

Tim your a ref arent you? Tell me this then for under-age rugby is the assistant referee's going to be dropped as i can hardly see dads and the like being given more power to hassle referee's? Have you yourself been briefed on the rules by the IRFU?

Downtime

The assistant referee will only come into play where they have been officially appointent by a home union or branch. This is the same as flagging touch judges under current laws. So really youll only see assistant referees at AIL level, some Leinster League Division 1 games and televised schools games.

Tim Robbins

Stev_o wrote: »

Tim your a ref arent you? Tell me this then for under-age rugby is the assistant referee's going to be dropped as i can hardly see dads and the like being given more power to hassle referee's?

A potential mess alright. Dad will say "I'll do touch - judge". Then you'll have to explain you don't want him helping you with offside calls. Then he'll complain why not, "you just want me to call touch but not offside, why not, I know what off - side is?"

Even if he's sound enough to realise he can't make those calls, some other Dad who watches the Heineken Cup on Sky will be shouting at him to make them.

Also, for junior and youth matches where people help out at schools or their local clubs, fellow members who help out touch judge will want to make the calls and as a ref you'll have the same hassel.

It's going to be a tough year reffing.

Have you yourself been briefed on the rules by the IRFU?

We'll be briefed pre - season.

Tim Robbins

Downtime wrote: »

The assistant referee will only come into play where they have been officially appointent by a home union or branch. This is the same as flagging touch judges under current laws. So really youll only see assistant referees at AIL level, some Leinster League Division 1 games and televised schools game.

You're absolutely right. But most people won't understand that.
They'll have a problem understanding they can mark where the ball went out but not call an offside.

Refs miss a lot of offsides, at all levels it's fact of the game and the Scots and NZ built defenses on it. So you'll have the over zealous going mad.

Stev_o

Tim Robbins wrote: »

You're absolutely right. But most people won't understand that.
They'll have a problem understanding they can mark where the ball went out but not call an offside.

Refs miss a lot of offsides, at all levels it's fact of the game and the Scots and NZ built defenses on it. So you'll have the over zealous going mad.

Your going to have a nightmare aswell with touch judges about the where you can pass back into your 22 and kick straight out

Tim Robbins

Stev_o wrote: »

Your going to have a nightmare aswell with touch judges about the where you can pass back into your 22 and kick straight out

Especially when loads of clubs don't even mark the 22.
But I am more worried about the offside, I 've seen this on the tv thing.

[Jackass]

Some I like, some I dont.

From a non-reffing point of view, I like the touch judge allowance to be used more, I like the offside at scrum rule as the likes of scottish and NZ defence rushing up, very arguably offside drives me mental to watch and is a great rule for opening up set-piece moves and enabling baks rugby, so I'm a big fan of this one.

The laws I really don't like are the passing back into your own 22...I can see this being a nightmare to begin with and I like running rugby and all, but forcing a player to run from deep in his own 22 is taking the p!ss a bit when a measured kick isn't on. Will lead to very loose games imo, but not in a good way, messy open field scrappy plays and will no doubt increase error counts of straight out kicks, not releasing if isolated in 22, offsides from players tracking back from infield kick and could just get very messy and defeat it's own purpose in a way (potentially).

I also really don't like the collapsing rule, a rolling maul is an art form! Look at the likes of Munster and Leicster through the years, they had games built around this, plus there's nothing more exciting than a rolling maul pushing over for a try...it's a great aspect of the game that has been killed and is a shame imo. Not to mention it's extremely dangerous and I've already read one story of a kid who has broken his neck as a result of this rule change. (Maul collapsed on top of him.)

All in all, I'd say i'd say slightly more with "not a fan" camp on the ELVs, although it will make for a lot more open rugby, I don't think that it will mean better rugby.

Will be interesting, suppose we'll just have to wait and see it in real terms to make a decision on if it's good for the game or not. Haven't seen nearly enough super 14 rugby to have an informed opinion.

ssmith6287

unless munster sign some forward pace this year i can see an early exit. these new rules for the maul are a joke

Tim Robbins

[Jackass] wrote: »

I also really don't like the collapsing rule, a rolling maul is an art form! Look at the likes of Munster and Leicster through the years, they had games built around this, plus there's nothing more exciting than a rolling maul pushing over for a try...it's a great aspect of the game that has been killed and is a shame imo. Not to mention it's extremely dangerous and I've already read one story of a kid who has broken his neck as a result of this rule change. (Maul collapsed on top of him.)

All in all, I'd say i'd say slightly more with "not a fan" camp on the ELVs, although it will make for a lot more open rugby, I don't think that it will mean better rugby.

Will be interesting, suppose we'll just have to wait and see it in real terms to make a decision on if it's good for the game or not. Haven't seen nearly enough super 14 rugby to have an informed opinion.

In fact the new law on the maul will make it more skillful. If the mauling team get the ball to the back, instead of up the jumper at the front, when the front is collapsed, they'll still have the ball and can set it up again.

Stev_o

[Jackass] wrote: »

Some I like, some I dont.

From a non-reffing point of view, I like the touch judge allowance to be used more, I like the offside at scrum rule as the likes of scottish and NZ defence rushing up, very arguably offside drives me mental to watch and is a great rule for opening up set-piece moves and enabling baks rugby, so I'm a big fan of this one.

The laws I really don't like are the passing back into your own 22...I can see this being a nightmare to begin with and I like running rugby and all, but forcing a player to run from deep in his own 22 is taking the p!ss a bit when a measured kick isn't on. Will lead to very loose games imo, but not in a good way, messy open field scrappy plays and will no doubt increase error counts of straight out kicks, not releasing if isolated in 22, offsides from players tracking back from infield kick and could just get very messy and defeat it's own purpose in a way (potentially).

I also really don't like the collapsing rule, a rolling maul is an art form! Look at the likes of Munster and Leicster through the years, they had games built around this, plus there's nothing more exciting than a rolling maul pushing over for a try...it's a great aspect of the game that has been killed and is a shame imo. Not to mention it's extremely dangerous and I've already read one story of a kid who has broken his neck as a result of this rule change. (Maul collapsed on top of him.)

All in all, I'd say i'd say slightly more with "not a fan" camp on the ELVs, although it will make for a lot more open rugby, I don't think that it will mean better rugby.

Will be interesting, suppose we'll just have to wait and see it in real terms to make a decision on if it's good for the game or not. Haven't seen nearly enough super 14 rugby to have an informed opinion.

1. Yes it gives backs extra room but your forgetting that with that rule you can have the worst scrum in the world and still give the backs space to run at.

2. Exactly it will lead to a pointless kicking duel that goes nowhere which is disgusting to watch

Tim Robbins

Stev_o wrote: »

1. Yes it gives backs extra room but your forgetting that with that rule you can have the worst scrum in the world and still give the backs space to run at.

2. Exactly it will lead to a pointless kicking duel that goes nowhere which is disgusting to watch

I wonder if one scrum shoves another, will the defending line have to retreat so that they are five behind the eight (or hindmost foot). If they do, that's going to be difficult to enforce. As defenders will walk back "slowly". If they don't, what's the point of shoving a scrum ever again as you will never have a defense on the backfoot?

Downtime

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I wonder if one scrum shoves another, will the defending line have to retreat so that they are five behind the eight (or hindmost foot). If they do, that's going to be difficult to enforce. As defenders will walk back "slowly". If they don't, what's the point of shoving a scrum ever again as you will never have a defense on the backfoot?

They must be back 5 metres until the scrum is over so if there is a shove they must retreat.

Tim Robbins

Downtime wrote: »

They must be back 5 metres until the scrum is over so if there is a shove they must retreat.

That's going to be a nightmare to ref.
Watching:
1. About 15 different things in front rows
2. Flankers not breaking binds early
3. Scrum Halfs staying onside
4. Plenty more
and now offside lines which are not in the line of vision of the scrum.

Disaster.

Also, why would teams really want to drive a scrum forward. This used to be a biggie because the retreated defense would be on the back foot but now if there are 10 meters extra between defense and attack, by the time the ball comes their way, they'll be on the front foot again.

Comments?

Danger_Dave

Tim Robbins wrote: »

That's going to be a nightmare to ref.
Watching:
1. About 15 different things in front rows
2. Flankers not breaking binds early
3. Scrum Halfs staying onside
4. Plenty more
and now offside lines which are not in the line of vision of the scrum.

Disaster.

Also, why would teams really want to drive a scrum forward. This used to be a biggie because the retreated defense would be on the back foot but now if there are 10 meters extra between defense and attack, by the time the ball comes their way, they'll be on the front foot again.

Comments?

Just on pushing the scrum at club level, and at my level you can only push it back 1.5 meters correct?.

I totally agree its going to be terrible for refs at scrum time, and i can see a large proportion of teams pushing offside when the ref is not looking.

A Direct Question to you Tim as a Ref. If a team brings down a maul and it looks to be dangerous play, will you award a penalty to the team who created the maul. What would constitute a dangerous take down of a maul?

Tim Robbins

Danger_Dave wrote: »

Just on pushing the scrum at club level, and at my level you can only push it back 1.5 meters correct?.

Correct. Unless you are playing at high level, that's it.

I totally agree its going to be terrible for refs at scrum time, and i can see a large proportion of teams pushing offside when the ref is not looking.

A Direct Question to you Tim as a Ref. If a team brings down a maul and it looks to be dangerous play, will you award a penalty to the team who created the maul. What would constitute a dangerous take down of a maul?

You have to take it down by gripping between the hips and shoulders, anything else would be dangerous play.

Danger_Dave

Tim Robbins wrote: »

You have to take it down by gripping between the hips and shoulders, anything else would be dangerous play.

Yes but for example a maul that recognizes a soft center and push through. If the opposing team starts to pull down the maul at speed even with the correct technique will a referee consider this dangerous play? .

Tim Robbins

Danger_Dave wrote: »

Yes but for example a maul that recognizes a soft center and push through. If the opposing team starts to pull down the maul at speed even with the correct technique will a referee consider this dangerous play? .

Will have to be clarified. There may be something like the tackle law i.e. responsibility to bring the player to ground. There is another law regarding just dangerous and unsporting play which a ref can always use, just in case.

Good question.

Downtime

Tim Robbins wrote: »

That's going to be a nightmare to ref.
Watching:
1. About 15 different things in front rows
2. Flankers not breaking binds early
3. Scrum Halfs staying onside
4. Plenty more
and now offside lines which are not in the line of vision of the scrum.

Disaster.

I disagree. I think it will be easy enough. Most penalties for front row are given at engagement or just after when you are standing at the side of the scrum so you a less worries about the 5 metres there. Once the ball is won you move backwards to identify the flankers and their binds. Easy enough to check the five metres and SH here as well. it is not going to add much more difficult to refereeing the scrum as it.

Tim Robbins

Downtime wrote: »

I disagree. I think it will be easy enough. Most penalties for front row are given at engagement or just after when you are standing at the side of the scrum so you a less worries about the 5 metres there. Once the ball is won you move backwards to identify the flankers and their binds. Easy enough to check the five metres and SH here as well. it is not going to add much more difficult to refereeing the scrum as it.

Props will cheat once they know you aren't looking. Drop the head, bore in, etc. My concern would be the safety aspects with this.

Snickers Man

I help out with the coaching at my son's school. I'm very much an assistant, ie I've done the IRFU's mini rugby coaching course but am essentially just a Dad.

This morning I get an e-mail from the director of rugby at the school outlining some basic common strategies and coaching techniques for the senior school. (My lad is just moving from primary to secondary next year).

Now all this is well and good, and a fine example of the school trying to encapsulate some retained "knowledge" from the professional coaches who know what's what for the benefit of the willing and enthusiastic but of necessity less knowledgeable people such as myself so that we can pass on best practice to the kids.

The trouble is that they make no reference at all to the new law changes. Now at my vintage the laws of the game have gone through two major changes (use it or lose it in the early 90s and now these ELVs) since my illustrious playing career ended.

It is not unknown for me to see matches that are reffed by and large by the 'Old' ie pre 1992 laws by somebody of similar age to myself. For example, they give the scrum to the maul deemed to be going forward instead of insisting on use it or lose it.

This is understandable. After all, these were the basic laws on which the guy was probably raised on. But if the task of inculcating all the implications of the first set of new laws has proved very hard to pass on to a generation of dad coaches even after 15 years, how the hell are we going to cope with an entirely new set?

How do you coach kids in the legalities of a maul when the laws have changed as much as they have? Do we even know what set of laws kids will be playing under next season? What sort of program has the IRFU put in place to educate the coaches/dads so that they can pass on the full and necessary lessons to the kids?

I think this is a total mess. Rugby is not a "street game" like soccer. It needs to be taught and taught properly. For that, the teachers need to know what they're about. But teaching the teachers is going to be a mammoth task.

Unless of course we just forget about these ELVs for under age rugby. Which would be my preference.

Does any one know what laws the young lads (ie 15 and under) will be playing to in schools and club matches next year?

Danger_Dave

Snickers Man wrote: »

Does any one know what laws the young lads (ie 15 and under) will be playing to in schools and club matches next year?

From the 1st August 2008, the IRB will be implementing a 12 month global trial of 13 Experimental Law Variations (ELVs). All ELV’s will be implemented by the IRFU in Professional and all Domestic competition. However, a decision on the IRFU’s implementation of ELV 17 (‘Pulling down the maul’) at Age Grade level will be made in early July 2008

I looked on the website. It seems they have not made a decision either way. Although Id say they will not be implemented at under 15 level. I would be crazy, someone could get seriously hurt.

Downtime

Snickers Man wrote: »

Do we even know what set of laws kids will be playing under next season? What sort of program has the IRFU put in place to educate the coaches/dads so that they can pass on the full and necessary lessons to the kids?

There are courses running over the next few weeks to introduce these ELVs to clubs and schools coaches for this very reason. There has been no decision made on the legality of pulling down the maul but it is unlikely that this will be implemented at U19 level. They're ging to make a decision fairly soon on it in plenty of time for pre - season. The IRFU are doing a good job on education of these ELV's - there is a full site on the IRFU website wihth links to the laws and videos of them in operations and they are running extensive courses on them - what else can they do. There are not that many changes that will affect the way the game is coached with the big one obviously being the maul. I am sure the coaches that attend those courses will pass on the knowledge from them. I know my club intend to attend the course, their referees will attend the course and we intend to hold a full evening meeting on them.

Snickers Man

Thanks Downtime.

I've heard nothing about any of these from school or club. But the summer is but young.

And I wasn't criticising the IRFU or anybody else. Just pointing out that putting reforms into effect as opposed to putting them on the law books is a very different and difficult task.

Downtime

It is a difficult task all right but I think a lot of people seem a bit frightened by these law changes when there is not much to them. here is the link to the irfu site http://www.irishrugby.ie/895_12561.php

Danger_Dave

Downtime wrote: »

It is a difficult task all right but I think a lot of people seem a bit frightened by these law changes when there is not much to them. here is the link to the irfu site http://www.irishrugby.ie/895_12561.php

or you could just read the first page of this thread

Ulstermell0

decent article on the rules

jbmb2000

Have read on telly text on UTV that the ARU are pissed becaused they've been to a IRB meeting in Hong Kong and Ireland, Wales and England said they won't trial the ELV's.

Anyone know if there's any truth to this or is it just "papertalk"?

toomevara

jbmb2000 wrote: »

Have read on telly text on UTV that the ARU are pissed becaused they've been to a IRB meeting in Hong Kong and Ireland, Wales and England said they won't trial the ELV's.

Please, please let it be true, has sense finally prevailed????

[Jackass]

Downtime wrote: »

There are courses running over the next few weeks to introduce these ELVs to clubs and schools coaches for this very reason. There has been no decision made on the legality of pulling down the maul but it is unlikely that this will be implemented at U19 level. They're ging to make a decision fairly soon on it in plenty of time for pre - season. The IRFU are doing a good job on education of these ELV's - there is a full site on the IRFU website wihth links to the laws and videos of them in operations and they are running extensive courses on them - what else can they do. There are not that many changes that will affect the way the game is coached with the big one obviously being the maul. I am sure the coaches that attend those courses will pass on the knowledge from them. I know my club intend to attend the course, their referees will attend the course and we intend to hold a full evening meeting on them.

http://www.leinsterrugby.ie/members/index.asp?docID=2265

Leinster branch are holding a workshop on Thursday in Old Belvedere and then 6 or so "information" meetings for people involved in the coaching / refereeing side of things to attend if people are interested.

thehighground

jbmb2000 wrote: »

Have read on telly text on UTV that the ARU are pissed becaused they've been to a IRB meeting in Hong Kong and Ireland, Wales and England said they won't trial the ELV's.

Anyone know if there's any truth to this or is it just "papertalk"?

Seems to be a bit more than paper talk:

O`Neill warns of global split
Monday 14th July 2008
One side of the fence: John O'Neill
Rugby Union

Australian Rugby Union chief executive John O'Neill has warned the game risks being split in half and played under separate rules if northern hemisphere countries refuse to embrace the Experimental Law Variations.

O'Neill has returned from an International Rugby Board meeting in Hong Kong furious that his counterparts in England, Ireland and Wales have rejected plans to trial the ELVs. ..........

More here from Planet Rugby http://www.planetrugby.com/Story/0,18259,3551_3816621,00.html

[Jackass]

Meh, I wouldn't heed it. Sure they have already been accepted and the trial is 100% accepted and underway in all of England, Ireland & Wales. Hence the training for coaches and refs being run in old Belvo paid for by the IRFU & Leinster Branch (and no doubt all over the country in respective provinces).

What agreements will be reached after on continuation of the laws is another matter, but the associations have voted and accepted this already.

See here

Ulstermell0

http://www.supersport.co.za/rugby/article.aspx?id=261624&headline=%60Rugby%20law%20variations%20going%20ahead%60

"Somebody has grabbed the wrong end of the stick. The experimental rugby laws will be applied worldwide from August 1, says André Watson.

Watson, SA Rugby's manager of referees, responded on Tuesday to a statement attributed to Australian Rugby Union CEO John O'Neill.

O'Neill was reported to have said England, Wales and Ireland were unwilling to try out the experimental laws.

"The International Rugby Board decided that the experimental laws would be applied worldwide for a year from August 1," Watson said.

"England, Wales and Ireland were party to the decision. They are not opposed to the experimental laws. "

Ulstermell0

What shoddy journalism - most of the SH press and half of the NH (presumably just copying what they read in oz papers) reporting that England Wales and Ireland were not going to trial the laws!

Ulstermell0

and now this, http://www.planet-rugby.co.za/Story/0,18259,3551_3824992,00.html, this is getting confusing.

Snickers Man

It's not really.

The IRB voted earlier this year to introduce a set of new experimental laws to be trialled around the world. These were a subset of those discussed and experimented with earlier, largely at Stellenbosch University in South Africa.

A different (and larger) subset of those laws were already being trialled in the Southern Hemisphere, specifically for the Super 14 and Tri Nations tournaments. The IRB said that the SANZAR countries would continue to play with those laws so as not to confuse their players.

So the SANZAR countries would experiment with one set while the rest of the world would experiment with a smaller set.

The only other issue was that it was originally agreed that a single first class tournament in Europe this year would play with a third subset of the ELVs, in effect a subset similar to that already in use in the SANZAR countries. So there would now be three different sets of experimental laws in trial.

What has now happened is that the European countries have decided NOT to try out this third set of experimental laws. It was widely hinted that the Anglo-Welsh Cup would have been the tournament used as a test bed. They reckoned, reasonably enough, that to have players playing to two different sets of laws at the same time would have been ridiculously complicated and confusing.

What is upsetting the Southern Countries, by which I mean Australia, is that the crucial difference between the experimental laws they are using and the ones to be used everywhere else is that they have got rid of the full penalty for just about everything except offside and foul play, whereas the rest of the world is retaining the penalty for most of the existing technical offences.

The experimental laws that would have been used in the single competition in Europe would also have done away with the full penalty for most technical offences.

Hope that's reasonably clear.

Ulstermell0

Snickers Man wrote: »

It's not really.

The IRB voted earlier this year to introduce a set of new experimental laws to be trialled around the world. These were a subset of those discussed and experimented with earlier, largely at Stellenbosch University in South Africa.

A different (and larger) subset of those laws were already being trialled in the Southern Hemisphere, specifically for the Super 14 and Tri Nations tournaments. The IRB said that the SANZAR countries would continue to play with those laws so as not to confuse their players.

So the SANZAR countries would experiment with one set while the rest of the world would experiment with a smaller set.

The only other issue was that it was originally agreed that a single first class tournament in Europe this year would play with a third subset of the ELVs, in effect a subset similar to that already in use in the SANZAR countries. So there would now be three different sets of experimental laws in trial.

What has now happened is that the European countries have decided NOT to try out this third set of experimental laws. It was widely hinted that the Anglo-Welsh Cup would have been the tournament used as a test bed. They reckoned, reasonably enough, that to have players playing to two different sets of laws at the same time would have been ridiculously complicated and confusing.

What is upsetting the Southern Countries, by which I mean Australia, is that the crucial difference between the experimental laws they are using and the ones to be used everywhere else is that they have got rid of the full penalty for just about everything except offside and foul play, whereas the rest of the world is retaining the penalty for most of the existing technical offences.

The experimental laws that would have been used in the single competition in Europe would also have done away with the full penalty for most technical offences.

Hope that's reasonably clear.

as mud! haha, no cheers it is clearer, but those stories in the SH press were indicating Eng, wales and ireland were refusing to take on any of the Laws, which didnt help.

Trojan

Good clarification SM. I'm totally opposed to this removable of the penalty for most offences as it changes the game massively, probably more than any other rule. Delighted that it's not being introduced - I think the NH unions have seen the mess it's made of the S14 and aren't touching it with a bargepole.