Removal of the Scrum Engage Hit is coming

[Gnostic]

I was listening to the Shute Shield this afternoon and the commentators mentioned that there will be a trial of Scrums with the "Old" type engagement with the front row engaging without the hit.

I missed the lead in part but I am assuming that the trial will be Shute Shield only. Anybody get the rest of this comment, or could perhaps ask the NSWRU what the go is?

 

[Gnostic]

Sorry Lee the Rats getting destroyed at scrum time by Manly.

 

[TOCC]

I applaud them for there initiative, but this could be bad for Australian rugby if other countries don't perform the trial and it doesn't get introduced...

Australia's 'premier' grassroots competition not practicing the engage... i hope no aussie prop plans on coming back from injury through the shute shield in the RWC year

 

[Lee Grant]

Sorry Lee the Rats getting destroyed at scrum time by Manly.

Was at the game ; so it wasn't a news flash. We don't have a decent prop in the whole club and the size of our forwards generally is puny. I don't know how we beat Randwick, but that must have been a one off somehow.

I also watched a tape of the game (call me masochistic). You stole my thunder and I was going to put that scrum trial thingo in the non-set pieces thread; so shame on you. That remark by Robilliard, IIRR, said there was going to be a trial later in the year in South Africa. I'm guessing that if the comment was correct then it would mirror the experiment at Stellenbosch a few years ago.

I was calling for an ELV after the RWC at the Shute Shield level after consulting with players and ex-players, including those who played before the hit virus. This scrum ELV should suspend laws 20.1 (f), (g) and (i) and replace them with something else.

I can't remember when the referees commands were introduced at scrum time but there is a case for not having any initially, just to see.

As usual: every objection to taking out the power hit has a rebuttal. Sure it is an exciting movement if the forces meet when aligned but the price of 6 minute scrum and reset episodes is too high a price to pay for the spectacle.

Some folks may be nostalgic for such things as the scrum contest being depreciated by early engagements, but I suspect that most people will want to have scrums decided by the players after the ball is put in, not by a guessing ref.



PS 1 - the best thing about that match at Manly Oval yesterday was the duet singing of the national anthem by two young lasses - magic.

PS 2 - I had to laugh at the feral Manly yobbos at the northern end as I was going towards that exit. They were in prime form. After Manly's 2nd last try one wag advised the Rats players to stay behind the posts. Ouch - but it was good advice.

 

[Scott Allen]

Here's a video showing what the SARU have done in 2013 to reduce the hit - covers schoolboy and senior up to reserve grade

Front row must bind and be 'ear to ear' before there is an engage call so a very limited hit.

This is in response to the studies released late in 2012 which showed the hit is what increases the risk of catastrophic injury. According to Brett Gosper IRB are currently considering the impact of those studies before making a decision.

 

[farva]

So we will have "crouch, touch, pause, ..."
Both scrums then continue squatting and waiting.

 

[Blue]

Yeah let's chuck the hit. And stop the contest after 1.5m.

Oh dear.

 

[Lee Grant]

Thanks for posting that Scotty - and you were very good to find this thread to post it in.

One had mentioned before that crouching temple-to-temple, or alternatively making the "touch" with necks rather than hands, would force the front rowers to get closer - and the hit would be de-powered ipso facto - but ear-to-ear as a description will do nicely.

It is well that this kind of thing is being introduced at junior and lower levels of senior rugby, but these are not the levels that the scrum has its major problems. Can't be helped though - it's the way to go.

We will have to wait to see what the outcomes are at these lower levels. I will be interested to see how getting the scrums closer on the crouch (because of ear-to-ear) makes any difference to how it was before, and ditto for the requirement for all four props to have their elbows not lower than the shoulder line on the bind.

This latter requirement seems like a good idea on the face of it because at best it will help to provoke a long bind by LHPs. At worst it will give the referees yet another easy "out"; but let's see.

There will be a be a few old timers of around my age asking why any commands are needed at all. To them they just introduce more incidents of likely non-compliance that can get pinged - or excuses to stand up if things are not to the satisfaction of one player. Commands equal delays to old fogeys.

In the old-timers' day scrums just folded into each other and waited for the scrummie to pick the ball up and put into the middle of a stationary scrum.

Then anybody who delayed forming a scrum could have been pinged I suppose, like players are now for delaying a lineout throw, but I can't remember as a player or spectator that it happened much. They just crouched and bound.

The command "scrum" by the ref would be a laughing matter at the Rugby Old Timers Home because the players used to decide when the scrum started - when the scrummie put the ball in. That was the (unspoken) scrum command.

But since the lawmakers have introduced preparatory commands like "crouch" "touch" and "set", the modern players, especially the posturing pro players, will be like headless chooks and probably need someone to tell them when a scrum should start.

If the referee has to say anything, I don't mind the crouch and bind commands so much, but let's not have "scrum" command please; let the scrummie start the scrum with the put in - as the laws state now.

Not having a "scrum" command by the referee will force the front rowers to look sideways at the scrummie and at the ball in his hands so they know when they are permitted to push. This is not theory: it's how it used to be.

Then players won't be able to guess on the cadence of the referee's recital and get pinged for an early shove, which will be as bad as early engages are now.

This will steady the scrum even more - to as it was before the power hit virus.

We could see, literally, real scrum tunnels uncorrupted by the forces created by the power hit. Therefore we could experience the enforcement of the straight put-in and wonder of wonders - the delight of the hooking contest.
.

 

[mark_s]

I cant help but think that the power hit would already be gone from the game if Aus had snuck home in the 2003 world cup grand final given the subsequent amount of focus there would have been on penalties to Aus from collapsed scrums.

 

[Moses]

Good find Scotty,

Nice how they get the props to "bar up" prior to the bind

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Yeah let's chuck the hit. And stop the contest after 1.5m.

Oh dear.

This is for schools and U19s. There is still a 'hit' just not to the same extremes. The contest continues which is the point of the scrum. It will come down to the collective power and technique of the scrum to compete. It's how it should be, I have no problem with these initiatives as I actually played under the exact rules up until I was 16.

 

[Dan54]

Couldn't agree with Lee's comments more. Perhaps because I'm getting long in the tooth and played when scrums sorted themselves out. I not saying go completely back to how we did it, but feel a scrum (and game at times) shouldn't be decided on just the hit. And for those who worry about sanitising game to much, be assured there is still plenty of room for gamemanship in these scrums, you still require very strong props, with a fair bit of nous on moving/twisting opponents body into a position it is hard to push from.

 

[Piggy]

Brian Moore has been having a running argument of sorts with rugby refs over scrums for a while now - to the point that he became a ref to better understand how their minds work. He's been a fan of moving back towards the front-rows forming together with less impact.

I like his thoughts in the following...

http://www.rugbyrefs.com/wiki/index.php/Brian_Moore's_Scrum_Tips

 

[Lee Grant]

Dan 54

Exactly right Dan, and there is something else that I have been banging on about for the last 5 years on rugby forums - that now the dominant scrum is dudded time after time by skinny referees who have no feel for what is going on.

It's not really their fault because of the problems that arise after a sprint across a very short distance with 900kgs on either side. Things happen so suddenly that the referees are at a loss to understand what happened. Instead they look for things that can be pinged so that their restart ratios are favourable - things like a hand on the ground or a slipping bind.

Many times these things had nothing to do with why the scrum collapsed or players stood up but the referees congratulate themselves for being skilled enough to spot an "out".

Anybody who saw the game between Leicester and Gloucester a few weeks ago will know what I mean. Leicester were dudded by Andrew Small, who had no feel for what was going on - but is otherwise a good referee. Closer to home: did anybody else squirm when the Poms were here in 2010 and we held on in the scrums through luck and a bit of trickery?


Under the old system when the scrum bound and had to be steadied before the ball was put in so the shove could start, the dominant scrum was allowed to dominate.

There was no place to hide for teams who gambled on guessing the hit and getting a series of free kicks against them and eventually penalties. Nor could they rely on 50/50 calls when a scrum collapsed.

Sure, in the olden times there were early pushes that were pinged but they were from a static position and if the other side hooked the ball anyway it was play on. And there were a few scrum collapses too even from a stationary start, but very few compared to now. And there was no standing up by players if their jock straps were uncomfortable.


Don't get me wrong - most things in our game are better now than what they were back in the day.

But the scrums are the exception - they are palpably worse now - and in the process of becoming worse they have reduced the amount of rugby that would otherwise be played, corrupted the scrum tunnel thereby enforcing the crooked feed, which thereby killed the hooking contest.


Too high a price to pay for the power hit?

I think so too.
.

 

[It is what it is]

Whatever happened to channel 1 ball?
It was great ball to launch a 1st phase attack from and required very cohesive scrummaging from the whole pack.

 

[Lee Grant]

Brian Moore has been having a running argument of sorts with rugby refs over scrums for a while now - to the point that he became a ref to better understand how their minds work. He's been a fan of moving back towards the front-rows forming together with less impact.

I like his thoughts in the following.

http://www.rugbyrefs.com/wiki/index.php/Brian_Moore's_Scrum_Tips

Thanks for that - I will give it a good read later.

Brian Moore is an ex-England hooker and solicitor who is one of the growing crowd of ex-international front rowers who are appalled by the modern scrum.

He wrote an article about it a few months ago and I commented on it in a blog:


http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com./irb-kill-the-power-hit/
.