Refereeing decisions

[JRugby2]

tell us you know nothing about scrums without telling us...

 

[Tomthumb]

I would put my knowledge on scrums up against yours any day

 

[JRugby2]

Ok champ well so far you think the best way forward is having 900kg packs going at it in a free-for-all so you're off to great start.

 

[Tomthumb]

No, but refs slowing his calls down directly leads to more collapses, as expecting 900kgs packs to hold in an unnatural position for numerous seconds is stupid. On top of that refs guessing on every penalty as they don't even know what they are looking at

The "hinging" call is the most obvious example. There is no logic nor benefit behind a loosehead bending down like that, and yet time and time again they are penalized, as opposed to the tight head that actually collapsed it

But sure man, tell us all about your scrum knowledge

 

[JRugby2]

I'm sorry mate but this just screams arm chair critic - maybe you do have a great scrum IQ but none of the above is anything but your own opinion

No, but refs slowing his calls down directly leads to more collapses, as expecting 900kgs packs to hold in an unnatural position for numerous seconds is stupid.

Calls generally go as fast as players showing stability - so this is a player issue, not the the referee.

On top of that refs guessing on every penalty as they don't even know what they are looking at

This is a wild assumption (and ironic considering it itself is a guess)

The "hinging" call is the most obvious example. There is no logic nor benefit behind a loosehead bending down like that, and yet time and time again they are penalized, as opposed to the tight head that actually collapsed it

You assume here that the referee is penalising a player for "intentionally" hinging and that the referee is penalising them for not only collapsing a scrum but their intent to do so. Are you saying that front rowers can't accidently collapse? What if a prop doesn't have the strength to hold their side up under pressure, or has gone too low to begin with? You're also making a wild claim here that the majority of times when a scrum collapses its the LHP that is penalised over the THP - other than it being what you reckon do you have anything to support this?

 

[LeCheese]

The benefit to intentional hinging is collapsing the opposing scrum, either drawing a penalty or painting a picture for the referee

 

[Tomthumb]

Calls generally go as fast as players showing stability - so this is a player issue, not the the referee.

This is the problem. People don't get more stable the longer they remain in an off balance position. Again, showing the fact you've never been in a scrum

This is a wild assumption (and ironic considering it itself is a guess)

Not an assumption at all. I watch the scrum, and refs constantly penalize the wrong team. The fact you think I'm guessing again shows a lack of understanding

You assume here that the referee is penalising a player for "intentionally" hinging...

I'm not assuming annoying. Please, I'm happy to tell you the techniques around the loose and tight head positions, but you seem to be so confident in something you obviously know so little about

 

[JRugby2]

...but you seem to be so confident in something you obviously know so little about

The irony...

 

[Tomthumb]

The funniest part of this is if a Loose head ever did try and collapse a scrum if would look nothing like it currently does. He's under the tight head's chest, so if he did try and pull it down, how does the tight head end of completely flat on his stomach with no loose head under him?

 

[Sully]

ANd you are both done.

 

[JRugby2]

yeah it's weird it's almost like they can move?

 

[LeCheese]

The first part of this video gives a good demonstration of it

The rest is just the result of physics

 

[Tomthumb]

Oh Jeez, seriously?

First of all the loose head is in good position there, so why would he even contemplate collapsing?

Second of all, a loose head is under a tight head, therefore his head is lower to start with. His hips with bend more no matter who collapses it, as the tight head can simply just drop his body weight on top of him

 

[liquor box]

It seems most issues happen on the side that the referee is NOT standing on, could an easy solution be to bring on a touch judge to stand next to the scrum at the time of it being packed?

If there is a run or kick down the touchies side the the video ref can make an assessment.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Two refs a good thing? Depends if you want to see twice as many penalties as you do now, or not?

 

[LeCheese]

Oh Jeez, seriously?

First of all the loose head is in good position there, so why would he even contemplate collapsing?

Because a) it's a demonstration, and b) as mentioned before, there are some potential advantages if you can get away with it.

Second of all, a loose head is under a tight head, therefore his head is lower to start with. His hips with bend more no matter who collapses it, as the tight head can simply just drop his body weight on top of him

As demonstrated in the video, the loosehead angling down will also destabilise the tighthead and bring them down. A bit of slippage and fracturing thereafter and you get the pancaking you were querying before.

Anyway, it's a very fluid dark art and a bit of a guessing game for referees as we know. There'll never be certainty in decision making at scrum time.

 

[JRugby2]

...could an easy solution be to bring on a touch judge to stand next to the scrum at the time of it being packed?

This happens already - but they don't come infield as I think you're suggesting.

 

[Tomthumb]

The problem with that is all it would require is a Tight head release his bind and he wouldn't go down and the Loose head would end up down and looking foolish. A good tight head would have this figured out pretty quick

It's the same as when a loose head goes really wide and tries walking around a scrum (the Wyatt Crockett experience), a good tight head just quickly drops his bind, meaning the loose head will then just stand up and be completely out of position or penalized

 

[JRugby2]

Anyway, it's a very fluid dark art and a bit of a guessing game for referees as we know. There'll never be certainty in decision making at scrum time.

It is and at the same time it isn't. It's not true to say that referees don't ever guess, but to say they are always guessing is also not true.

Referees look for cues in body position/ shape/ stability both pre engagement and in the movements after the set +/- feed and will make decisions based on that.

I feel sorry for Tomthumb as they've clearly had some shit referees before but the binary inference here that referees are always wrong, and scrums would be safer/ quicker/ more effective without them is a laughable as someone suggesting they are always right.

 

[LeCheese]

In some respects, yes, but there are more points of contact and bind between the two (and therefore manipulation) than just the tighthead's bind on the loosehead.

Anyway, I'm going to bow out now, but hopefully that helps to answer your initial query about a loosehead intentionally hinging being both possible and potentially advantageous.