• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Refereeing decisions

Derpus

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Strewthcobber said:
Because, under the laws of the game, the scrum isn't over until the ball is out, and inevitably, if you get pushed back 5m someone has dropped a bind or isn't pushing straight and parallel.

Under the laws, if you have a dominant scrum you should be entitled to push the opposition back 80m and score a pushover.

If the opposition's offenses have prevented you from doing that, bearing in mind the referee must stop a scrum if they think it's dangerous, then you will be penalised



Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Interesting, i suppose the fact that pushing a scrum back 80m being essentially impossible is irrelevant? Seems like it could use some revision.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Strewthcobber said:
Because, under the laws of the game, the scrum isn't over until the ball is out, and inevitably, if you get pushed back 5m someone has dropped a bind or isn't pushing straight and parallel.

Under the laws, if you have a dominant scrum you should be entitled to push the opposition back 80m and score a pushover.

If the opposition's offenses have prevented you from doing that, bearing in mind the referee must stop a scrum if they think it's dangerous, then you will be penalised



Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That's become the interpretation of some. I'd question whether it's the correct interpretation based on either law or 150 years of precedent.

I'd also question how many pushover tries have been scored from anything other than a 5m scrum in the past 150 years.

If you're pushing, but the other team are just better and therefore are pushing you backwards, their reward for that should be possession of the ball, not a contrived penalty IMO. It's pretty much physically impossible to stay straight while going backwards when being pushed by someone else.

The purpose of a scrum is to restart play with a contest for possession after a minor infringement or stoppage.

https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=19
 
kiap

kiap

Steve Williams (59)
That's right, QH. And, despite seeing good Aussie scrums now (for the Reds it might be their only weapon) I don't want to see them being paid over the odds for it by referees.

Sure, in the red zone you want to see repeatedly dominant scrums there rewarded.

But otherwise a general focus on scrummaging for points by teams can make for a very stodgy game: scrum, collapse, reset, scrum, collapse, reset, scrum, collapse, reset …penalty shot, restart and ten percent of the match elapsed. Rinse and repeat.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
Quick Hands said:
That's become the interpretation of some. I'd question whether it's the correct interpretation based on either law or 150 years of precedent.

I'd also question how many pushover tries have been scored from anything other than a 5m scrum in the past 150 years.

If you're pushing, but the other team are just better and therefore are pushing you backwards, their reward for that should be possession of the ball, not a contrived penalty IMO. It's pretty much physically impossible to stay straight while going backwards when being pushed by someone else.

The purpose of a scrum is to restart play with a contest for possession after a minor infringement or stoppage.

https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=19
Click to expand...
It's shit I agree, but well supported by the laws. Unlike the U19 variations there's no maximum distance you can push in the full laws or requirement to move the ball on once it's controlled at the back (as long as the scrum is moving)

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Up the Guts

Up the Guts

Steve Williams (59)
On the rare occasion there is a dominant scrum that goes forward a few metres and isn’t penalised you never see the defending team retiring so as to stay five metres back while the ball is still in the scrum. That should be one of the real advantages of a dominant scrum, being able to attack a defensive line that is back pedalling.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Strewthcobber said:
Play has restarted once the ball is fed into the scrum, not once it leaves the scrum.

Ie the scrum is "play"


Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes, but it's purpose isn't to obtain a penalty. It's purpose is to decide possession after a minor infringement.

In fact the laws don't say that you MUST push. They say you MAY push and if you do it must be straight and level. I'd put it that going backwards isn't pushing and shouldn't be penalised according to the laws.

19 Players may push provided they do so straight and parallel to the ground. Sanction: Penalty
https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=19

I's add that the team going forward shouldn't have carte blanche without risk. If they want to keep pushing after they have clearly secured the ball then they risk it turning into a mess. I like the idea (advanced by Sully I think a year or so ago) that once the ball is at the feet of the No 8, then penalties are off the table except for offside and the other exception being at a 5 metre attacking scrum where there is an attempt at a pushover try.

Interestingly, the Waratahs could have been free kicked the last scrum as they took well over a minute to be ready for the last scrum.

4 Teams must be ready to form the scrum within 30 seconds of the mark being made. Sanction: Free-kick.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
Which team wouldn't immediately collapse every scrum once the ball was at the back?

Just put the U19 variations in if you want to change it. (Can't push more than 1.5m, have to use it as soon as it's controlled at the back.) Same result, without more dangerous collapses

NB neither your suggestion or mine above will ever be sanctioned by World Rugby

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Derpus

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
Strewthcobber said:
Which team wouldn't immediately collapse every scrum once the ball was at the back?

Just put the U19 variations in if you want to change it. (Can't push more than 1.5m, have to use it as soon as it's controlled at the back.) Same result, without more dangerous collapses

NB neither your suggestion or mine above will ever be sanctioned by World Rugby

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Perhaps they can just encourage refs to allow the game to flow? I mean, where the ball is at the back and the scrum has been pushed forward 5 metres, maybe instead of penalizing the defending team they just use their discretion and tell the attacking team to use it.

This discretion exists in all the other facets of play.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 
cyclopath

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
I think the focus should be on the scrum to re-start play. If a team is repeatedly, and maybe deliberately collapsing / wheeling, then fine, penalise. If a scrum is just weaker it seems harsh to penalise because they go back. I mean, take it to the extreme and a team with a dominant scrum could call scrum for every FK or penalty and gradually get half the other forward pack yellow carded by repeatedly pushing the scrum back. Not to mention potential safety issues with a weak scrum being rolled back on itself. I think the ball should be played once at the back. I'm sure many others will disagree! :D
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Strewthcobber said:
Which team wouldn't immediately collapse every scrum once the ball was at the back?

Just put the U19 variations in if you want to change it. (Can't push more than 1.5m, have to use it as soon as it's controlled at the back.) Same result, without more dangerous collapses

NB neither your suggestion or mine above will ever be sanctioned by World Rugby

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If they got the ball out and played it, it woudn't matter would it?

It used to be the way rugby was played until teams started to be rewarded for playing for penalties.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)

Why would you want to take this out of the game?

Edit
Seriously though, I am on record as saying that scrum collapses/penalties causing delays are the single biggest issue facing the game in this country - but it's a law of the game issues, not a referee issue, and there is no desire up north to resolve it. Especially if it's a bunch of us Aussies trying to make that change.
 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
Strewthcobber said:

Why would you want to take this out of the game?

Edit
Seriously though, I am on record as saying that scrum collapses/penalties causing delays are the single biggest issue facing the game in this country - but it's a law of the game issues, not a referee issue, and there is no desire up north to resolve it. Especially if it's a bunch of us Aussies trying to make that change.
Click to expand...

What I hate, and more importantly isn't in the spirit of how rugby was always played is this scenario. France clearly win the scrum and have front foot ball available to use - the only reason that they hold it in and keep pushing is to play for the penalty. They have no intention of pushing England 50m for a try.


Contrast this to a scrum from this Wales v England match in 1964 - the whole thing is over in the blink of an eye and the ball is out being played. (first scrum is called at 1.14 and fulfilled its purpose of deciding possession after a minor infringement/stoppage - no nonsense about playing for penalties because the referee wouldn't have rewarded it)

 
Quick Hands

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
The Honey Badger said:
Why not adopt the WSR law. 1 min clock, 1 reset only. After that must take the short arm penalty.



Sent from my MHA-L09 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I think that the simplest remedy and the one which will maintain the importance of the scrum, while eliminating contrived penalites, is a very minor tweak to the laws. (Insert a guideline for referees that after the "use it" call the only penalties to be applied are offside and foul play)

My additions in red.

Law 19 (26)

When the scrum is stationary or moving forward and the ball has been is available at the back of the scrum for three-five seconds, the referee calls “use it”. The team must then play the ball out of the scrum immediately. Exception - a 5 metre attacking scrum where the attacking team is attempting a pushover try.Sanction: Scrum.
 
Strewthcobber

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
U19 variation for Dangerous play
Scrum law 38
Other restricted practices at a scrum include:
  • Keeping the ball in the scrum once it is heeled and controlled at the base of the scrum.
Sanction: Free-kick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top