Rugby Scrums

[Wilson]

Maybe a good option would be that if a scrum stays legal through being pushed back 5m then there can't be a penalty. That means pushover tries are still possible but a heavily outclassed scrum just needs to stay straight for 5m to avoid getting penalised.

It's not a good spectacle when a heavily outclassed scrum draws a penalty every time and has a huge impact on the outcome of the game.

I don't mind if they're a bit quicker to award the penalty try in those situations, as it is it's pretty hard to stay legal under that kind of pressure and the scrum is pretty likely to collapse once it's on roller skates. Just don't take it to the excess of carding a player, the try is enough.

 

[Braveheart81]

I don't mind if they're a bit quicker to award the penalty try in those situations, as it is it's pretty hard to stay legal under that kind of pressure and the scrum is pretty likely to collapse once it's on roller skates. Just don't take it to the excess of carding a player, the try is enough.

I was more referring to scrums in other parts of the field not being able to create penalties if the weaker scrum was able to stay legal while it had been pushed back 5m. I made it 5m such that a rule change could still allow for pushover tries to be a thing.

 

[Pfitzy]

They used to be a way of restarting play and where the backs have a crack at their opposite backs.. now 90% of the time they are just some just Mickey Mouse penalty… a bore and blight on the game. Especially when the ball is at the locks feet and the half doesn’t pass but waits for the Mickey Mouse penalty from the ref who more often than not doesn’t insist he pass the ball..

 

[Pfitzy]

 

[Lightblue]

Personally what I think would make the game better regarding scrums.
Time off until ball put in.
The main goal should be for the ball to get out, either by 8 or 9 picking it up and passing it or obviously having a run.
NOT playing for a penalty.
Whatever the referee decides is an infringement and can’t be played at the back, it is a short arm penalty and a quick tap. No kick for touch.
If there are repeated collapses, then a full penalty but no shot for goal.
And no cards.
This would speed up game, have more game time and quick taps would get backs having a run against backs, and forwards out of play.

 

[Pfitzy]

I agree that we should start looking at what constitutes a penalty vs a short arm.

Stopping the clock just makes the whole game run longer, and gives props an incentive to fix their shoe laces every 5 minutes.

 

[Slim 293]

Some initial push back re: the scrum clock and safety concerns...

‘Someone will get injured’: Wallabies warning on scrum clock proposal

Plans to introduce a 60-second scrum clock have been criticised by leading Australian players, who say it would be potentially dangerous for front-rowers.

www.smh.com.au

While proposals to open up trans-Tasman player movement and to scrap yellow cards for knockdowns found support, Wallabies players Andrew Kellaway and Allan Ala'alatoa were far colder on the prospect of a 60–second scrum clock.
“We have to be careful, don’t we? It is a niche area of the game and we have guys doing a specialist skill,” Kellaway said.

“Outside backs and everybody else, we are asking these blokes to compress their spine for a living and someone in a suit has the nerve to ask them to hurry up.
“If I was Al, which I am not, fortunately, I would be pretty filthy about that. I think there are so many other areas we can pick up in a game, the breakdown to name one, before we start going picking on the scrum.”

Ala’alatoa, who has 52 caps for the Wallabies, said while players would always be supportive of changes to increase rugby’s entertainment value, he said forwards would need at least a year to train under a scrum clock before it was used in a game.

“We don’t want to set up a quick scrum and then engage because then we put ourselves at risk of injury [with] our neck or our back, just to name a couple for the front row,” he said.

“We need to implement that first at training or take one year to at least practice that, because I feel like if we don’t get it right, someone will get injured. If we don’t implement that at training we are probably going to be high-risk come game time.”

 

[D-Box]

Some initial push back re: the scrum clock and safety concerns...

‘Someone will get injured’: Wallabies warning on scrum clock proposal

Plans to introduce a 60-second scrum clock have been criticised by leading Australian players, who say it would be potentially dangerous for front-rowers.

www.smh.com.au

There can be some nuance to this though. I agree with the players that rushing the set up and engagement could cause injuries. However it is when does the clock stop. If you made the clock to be from whistle to probs binding with their own hooker you don't have the safety issue, but you get rid of the standing around.