Scrum Talk

[Sully]

I was saying the same thing to mrs Sully the other night. She asked why the scrums I packed didn't collapse all the time. Besides all the power hit crap I said that the way I bound was completely different to today's props. I thought the difference was simple because I'm old. But you're saying it's bad technique?


Sent using Tapatalk

 

[Athilnaur]

I'm ignorant in the ways of scrums, but bio-mechanics I get, and that picture tells a big story Teach, thanks for posting it. I made a little diagram on it, hope you don't mind, the angles might be off a little?

Please post more stuff like this Teach, I love reading insights about the darkways from peeps like you and Thomond, gives me a real appreciation of the skills involved.

 

[teach]

I just stole that photo from some random website. I would guess that the blue loosehead smashed the TH in green. He has a perfect body position. He is driving forward, and in towards the hooker. The green TH is going up and most probably backwards.

Thats my opinion and I am sticking to it. I reckon the refs look for whichever prop is not bound properly to decide who to penalise. It is very difficult for a props head to be driven into the ground if he has his arms up and bound as per the picture in my post. If fact i would go so far as to say impossible. So any prop who's hand touches the ground, no matter how momentarily, is going to be deemed at fault.

But modern rugby has these guys so finely balanced, to get the split second advantage, it can be hard to get the bind on the engage, and it is possible to stop your oponent getting a proper bind, depending on you wily your scrum coach is.

How many school boys scrums do you see collapse that can't be explained by feet slipping? I am certain Super 15 and above have much higher rates though I have never bothered to do a count.

If you can bring yourself to do it, re watch the game and see how many times the WB loosie is improperly bound by my definition. I also thought he had his head lower than his hips a couple of times, which can only mean he is going straight down.

 

[Lee Grant]

Very good posts teach.

That thing that Rich Loe does is just one of many examples of how NZ does things smarter than us and at low cost.

Good remarks about the long bind too. Referees should ping the lack of a long bind more often.

The more I have seen scrums in the last 5 years the more I think that the power hit should be outlawed and that the scrum should be decided more by the power push after the ball is put in. There is no need to change the law, just to observe that section which prohibits charging on the engage. It won't help poor scrummagers as the power hit does now when they get 50/50 calls on referee guesswork, or when they get a lucky early engage by the other team, which is often guessed also.

No, getting rid of the power hit will benefit good scrummagers. It will also reduce the amount of collapses by at least 50% IMO. These two things go together because the more dominant scrum will get more opportunities to be rewarded for their superiority because referee guesswork will be reduced.

It will also get rid of the spawn of the power hit: the free kick for the early engage. There will still be a few sanctions against early pushes, as in the old days, but, like collapses, there will be fewer of them by comparison.

 

[fatprop]

Yeah, I have no great propping skills, but a long bind always made me more stable

 

[teach]

Getting rid of the power hit is easy. Just get the scrums packing closer. You will see some scrums where there is enough gap between the front rows for the ref to walk thru. Others where the opposing front rows heads are overlapping. You don't get the big hit. I teach my boys that when they are up against some 15 year old, 18 stone hillbilly. Set the scrum as close as the ref will let you. Get down as low as you can (which you should be doing anyway) and don't allow them to smash in. Often the big front rowers have poor position. Rather than crouch, they simply bend at the waist, then it is xmas for any prop worth his salt.
I turned one of my flankers into a prop this year. His first game he was up against a loosie 6 foot tall compared to his 5'2", and a good 15kg heavier. He was shitting bricks, when as a flanker he would no hesitation in smashing him. I simply reminded him to get low and make him come down, don't go up to meet him. The smile on his face when he f***d him up brought a tear to an old props eyes.
What is also not appreciated just how hard a wily old prop can make it for a less experienced front rower. Thats why I suspect woodcock got the nod over Crockett. Crocket got a working over by a cunning old italian prop last year, Dickinson, eventually yellow carded Crockett. GH probably knows this well. I doubt very much there will be any young bucks propping here. Age and wisdom is the key to the front row. I certainly was able to make it hard for younger, fitter, stronger props than me. I also got taught a few lessons too.

 

[RedsHappy]

As a prop of 17 seasons senior rugby, both sides of the scrum, now coach, I feel qualified to stick my oar in. ....Here in NZ, the scrum is regarded as extremely important. To counteract a lack of props in country rugby a few years ago, ex All Black Richard Loe helped set up the Front row factory. Training for coaches to improve the skills of young props, and help convert young players into the front row. This is now run in every province. I personally have converted plenty of locks and loosies into props over the years. As an ex front rower you know the little tips and tricks that make a huge difference in how effective a prop is.

Thanks teach for the good input. fp and DPK: you may just remember that last year we debated (here) and agreed that something like the above excellent-sounding initiative in NZ was badly needed for top Aus front row and forwards development in general. And it'd sit on top of or in addition to the general state or national coaching programs that were already in place.

 

[Dan54]

Great posts Teach, I would add that at times in OZ there is an aversion to scrummimg , especially at lower levels of club rugby, I think this eventually causes problems all the way as not the same pressure put on forwrds to hold their spot with good tighties coming through lower grades to pressure them. Case in point for me is the number of times I have seen in first and second f
grade in Brisbane, as soon as some teams have been getting dominated in scrums, they simply pull the old prop injured no front rowers trick and end up with uncontested scrums, it unfortunately easy way out of problem. I recall a game in first grade last year where team did it against our team, when I (who is known to get agitated with things like this) pointed out to their coach after game I thought it was outside spirit of game, he laughed and said don't show your hand so early in game. I am surprised over the last few years how many teams in lower grades(including colts) simply start games with uncontested scrums.
I also agree with your comments re body positions, when I coached both here and in NZ the very first thing I always insisted on was body position, both in scrums and second phase, I stated in another thread I believed the Wallabies allowed Irish to get under them in rucks, and I always put a most forw3ards in front row on a a scrum machine to try and get body positions in all phases, as I think it important for front row to always bend from hips, and think the same helps in rucking etc.

 

[teach]

In the Canterbury schoolboys competition, if you turn up to the semis and finals without a front row and reserves, it is an automatic forfeit (or so I have been told). down here in Otago I am pushing for that, mainly because we got jumped in the quarter finals by a school that turned up with a forward pack full of loose forwards and pulled the whole injured front row thing.

I like hearing the mysteries of the front row called the Dark arts. There is a whole lot more to it that I have neither the time or inclination to write about. But it is simplistic to just blame the front row. A crappy lock can make you look very bad. Flankers who hang off scrums and don't realise just how critical their push, and the angle of their push is, can also mess it up.

That was part of the problem too with the Aussie scrum. at times there was 8 irish forwards against 5 guys doing the work and 3 loosies hanging off, waiting for the 8 to detach. and he didn't. Once you are going backwards, it is extremely difficult/impossible to stop.

All you need is experience, skill, strength, deviousness, the right coaches/mentors and back up from the other forwards. Nothing to it.

 

[Lee Grant]

Getting rid of the power hit is easy. Just get the scrums packing closer.

In my Don Quixote quest to get rid of the power hit through the forum I have mentioned this before but there has been no response by the authorities; yet I thought G & G was required reading at all levels of the IRB.

One of my variant suggestions was to keep the "touch" command in but the players had to touch with their necks; so they had to be close enough to do so before they crouched.

"Crouch, touch and bind" could be one conversational command, said I, then when the ref was satisfied necks were touching and players had a long bind he would call "pause". On hearing this command the scrummie would put the ball in without delay. The present laws would prevail - feet could not be raised to hook the ball, nor the scrum pushed, before the ball was thrown in.

It may be naive to suppose that we can get professional players to do what test level amateurs did about the time of the first RWC, but it is a more worthy endeavour than what they are attempting to do now: controlling the power hit. That is trying to get the tail to wag the dog.

The old timers didn't need all that stuff I mentioned above but it could bring modern players back to the future in a way they would understand. The old timers just folded into each other and waited for the scrummie to put the ball in before they pushed. They still played silly buggers on the push, but at least they were doing so from a position of stability.

It resulted in a beautiful contest and the straight put in was refereed as the much more difficult throw to the lineout is refereed now. Therefore the defensive hooker had a reasonable though slight chance to hook the ball.

The power hit and the crooked feed have destroyed the hooking contest and I demand to have it back. "Demand," I say - are you there IRB? Helloooo ?
.

 

[grievous]

How come Ireland can do it, Healy was struggling last 6nations, how can SA can do it who we did well against in recent seasons...how can Romania do it smashed the Argies on the weekend.
I think we need to start again from junior level and review coaching at every level

 

[da_grubster]

Yeah, I have no great propping skills, but a long bind always made me more stable

always amazes me when we see props trying to bind on the arm and is a big reason form collapsing. As a LHP, I was always taught to bind along the torso, which gave you a very good bridge from the back of your spine through your shoulder and arm. it allows you to push up into a thp but also to put pressure and turn in against your ball.

 

[Thomond78]

There is one thing I notice refs don't pay enough attention to. As soon as a TH goes elbow-up, he's thinking about collapsing. When you have your elbow up, you open your ribs to the LH; which you do NOT want to do. The ONLY reason to have your elbow up in the bind is to push down and collapse. If it goes down, ping the TH, and tell him why.

 

[Thomond78]

I just stole that photo from some random website. I would guess that the blue loosehead smashed the TH in green. He has a perfect body position. He is driving forward, and in towards the hooker. The green TH is going up and most probably backwards.

Thats my opinion and I am sticking to it. I reckon the refs look for whichever prop is not bound properly to decide who to penalise. It is very difficult for a props head to be driven into the ground if he has his arms up and bound as per the picture in my post. If fact i would go so far as to say impossible. So any prop who's hand touches the ground, no matter how momentarily, is going to be deemed at fault.

But modern rugby has these guys so finely balanced, to get the split second advantage, it can be hard to get the bind on the engage, and it is possible to stop your oponent getting a proper bind, depending on you wily your scrum coach is.

How many school boys scrums do you see collapse that can't be explained by feet slipping? I am certain Super 15 and above have much higher rates though I have never bothered to do a count.

If you can bring yourself to do it, re watch the game and see how many times the WB loosie is improperly bound by my definition. I also thought he had his head lower than his hips a couple of times, which can only mean he is going straight down.

Green TH is in trouble. Blue LH is under him, and driving him up. He's shifted his bind onto the armpit, elbow up, and is trying to push Blue LH down. Too bloody late, mate! :yay

 

[grievous]

Scrum problems? What scrum problems? :Nucifora

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/u...-fine-says-david-nucifora-20110920-1kiz7.html

Says it all really, except afterwards when we get our arse handed back to us the coaches and senior players proclaim, "Well we certainly learnt some lessons out there today" DUH!

Our placekicking is top notch too, let me get in with that before Deans does

 

[StonerJack]

Front row was noticibly higher than the Irish. Poor technique from TPN was the main cause of that. Moore comes back in problem solved.

 

[JKB]

Scrum penalties: the next major rule change

Scrum penalties are ruining rugby union as a spectacle. They encourage negative tactics and the IRB needs to change the way they are officiated.

If a scrum is dominant after the ball is fed and the weaker scrum collapses or stands up etc, a penalty should be awarded.

However, on the engagement, where most of the penalties are awarded, the referees are flipping a coin as to who is penalized. Bryce Lawrence awarded a penalty to Ireland on the weekend when the Irish prop had his arse 4 feet in the air and his face 10 inches under the ground, while kepu was not yet in contact with the turf.
How is collapsing on the engagement a penalty offense? No team has an advantage or disadvantage. The ball is not yet available. At most it should be a short arm like numbers in the lineout etc.

It's a part of rugby that encourages negative play and reduces the likelihood that a team will run the ball and attempt to score this thing call a try(look it up NH teams).

Fuck the drop goal off too. It should be worth 1 point.

 

[Jay]

How is collapsing on the engagement a penalty offense? No team has an advantage or disadvantage.

Just cause not advantage/disadvantage is apparent doesn't mean it doesn't exist. A front rower who has lost the hit may collapse the scrum immediately so it appears to be incidental.

I'd prefer to see the hit removed entirely - the scrum would still be a contest, but I suspect collapses would reduce considerably.

 

[Ash]

A frustration of mine is a rock stable scrum, not moving, but the attacking team takes 3 or more shunts. Finally the scrum will go down. To me, that's almost like "use it or lose it" in a maul.

Italy, for example, I am looking at you. If you have stable ball, you shouldn't be able to keep shunting until a collapse trying to milk penalties.

 

[Lee Grant]

JKB - sorry I merged your thread with another as there was discussion about scrums in it and some posts are to the point that you raise.

Cheers LG