Scrum Talk

[cyclopath]

I agree Dan54 this is a great thread. Where else can you talk scrums before work. Awsome. On the engage, however, the point I was trying to make earlier was that the calls are too slow, and it is probably drawing penalties. Your point was a good one, if there is a hand on the ground before the ball goes in, who cares, let the the player get his bind back on, then put the ball in, then...well scrum away.

Also agree this is a great thread - and I'm a back!! I love scrums, I have to admit. But I don't love the amount of wasted time associated with them currently. And I don't like the often random penalty-giving that occurs.
On the hand down, I can see your point; if it stabilises the scrum and lets it stay up, then good. A prop told me elsewhere that he would use this for that reason sometimes, but also to reset and drive up under the tighthead if he was playing LHP, so it can be nefarious too! But mostly, it seems more good than bad.

 

[Lee Grant]

A prop told me elsewhere that he would use this for that reason sometimes, but also to reset and drive up under the tighthead if he was playing LHP, so it can be nefarious too! But mostly, it seems more good than bad.

Yes they do that. Olo Brown even did it as the THP !! How he got away with it is anybody's guess.

The RWC referees were instructed to allow occasional hand downs but if they thought it was a ploy to drive up from it, or whatever, the act should be sanctioned.

 

[Dan54]

It is actually quite legal to put hand down before ball goes in,just not after, it is a law a lot of people seem to be unaware of. I also understnd where you coming from re the slow calls. I also like the suggestion of ref going crouch ,touch, engage,then either ready or pause etc, so scrum hit is settled before ball goes in.
Hey fellas, you think we can get hotline to IRB???

 

[XVProps]

I'm sure the IRB Boffins think there's nothing broken, and besides we'd have to try and get them between lunches.

 

[Lee Grant]

Many will be like that. Many not.

Not quite to the point, but I mentioned some ex-props who were for getting rid of the power hit, but there are just as many who think there is nothing wrong with it if scrums are done properly - like Richard Harry and Richard Loe.

That doesn't really answer anything though - scrums are not being done properly often because of the shock of the power hit - and around in circles we go.

And we have scarcely asked how the power hit affects the health of players. I am sure that prop Ben Darwin and hooker Matthew Rees would have an opinion on that.
.

 

[MrTimms]

Not quite to the point, but I mentioned some ex-props who were for getting rid of the power hit, but there are just as many who think there is nothing wrong with it if scrums are done properly - like Richard Harry and Richard Loe.

I have spoken with plenty of former and current props on both side too, Fuse and Bladesy were dead for keeping it, just working with the engagement process to simplify things.

And we have scarcely asked how the power hit affects the health of players. I am sure that prop Ben Darwin and hooker Matthew Rees would have an opinion on that.

I wonder about this. You will probably know the history better than me, but why did League de-power the scrum? My understanding was because of injury. I am also not sure of timing, but surely this was BEFORE rugby had introduced the "power hit". If that is the case, probably not a valid reason to argue for the outlawing.

 

[Gagger]

I have spoken with plenty of former and current props on both side too, Fuse and Bladesy were dead for keeping it, just working with the engagement process to simplify things.

Yeah, but I reckon that's like asking the turkeys to vote for christmas. Look at all the TV attention props now get on the engage vs back in the day - we get about 10 extra minutes of it each game - unfortunately!

 

[Running Rugby]

I think the IRB's hand will be forced regarding slightly de-powering the scrum. It may be fine at international and first class level but the power hit in the scrum would be disliked on many levels by insurance companies who get greater say in the rules (at club level) than they probably should. If it is shown by any investigation that injury has increased or the chance of injury is increased by the power hit it will be outlawed. I wonder if changing the calls to crouch- touch- engage with the props maintaining the touch and thus the limited distance would help de-power the hit and bring scrum technique back into play?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Adidas jerseys a problem - Franks

There is talk (and it makes a bit of sense) that these fancy new synthetic jumpers make it too hard for many props to get and maintain a good bind.

Comments from any current or recently retired props?

Do we need to see special jumpers for the front rowers so that opponents can get a bind?

Here is a comment from a current prop from the NZ Herald By Christopher Chang
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby-world-cup-2011/news/article.cfm?c_id=522&objectid=10754684

Sonny Bill Williams and the All Blacks' backline may be enjoying the new slimline adidas jerseys, but prop Ben Franks says they are not ideal for a scrummaging front row.

Franks told Radio Sport that while the skintight jerseys were not solely to blame for scrum problems, they were making it difficult for the forwards to bind.

"Especially for a loosehead it's a lot harder to get that initial bind - there's nothing really to grab so you're kind of grabbing for skin!"

"[The forwards] are usually the last ones to be thought of. I'm pretty sure the props didn't put in an order for super-tight jerseys from the get-go."

Franks gave Sonny Bill Williams plenty of stick for his wardrobe malfunction in the opening game of the Rugby World Cup. Williams joked the prop was "a little jealous", and Franks admitted the jerseys are more suitable for the backs.

"They are the ones that sell the jerseys. The front rowers just tag along."

The scrum has been a major focus for referees at the World Cup and Franks can empathise with fans' frustations over the constant resetting of scrums.

"As a player you want to be playing and we enjoy the scrums. But no-one wants to see four or five scrums in a row. The referees can only do so much - you don't know what the other team is trying to do, whether they've turned up the scrum or not...

"The weekend was a good one with France. You saw two teams who wanted to scrum and the scrums were good."

Crusaders prop Wyatt Crockett, who narrowly missed the cut for the All Blacks' World Cup campaign, came under scrutiny for being penalised at scrum time during the All Blacks' Tri-Nations campaign. He told Radio Sport it seemed to be a problematic area for fans and players.

"Referees have got a big part to play. You see some games, where there are two Tier One countries going at it, and the scrum seems to be a bit better. But where there are mismatches then there are a lot of resets and it's frustrating for the viewers.

"When you watch the All Blacks against Japan and our scrum is really dominant, but our guys are still getting penalised as much as them, that's just ridiculous."

 

[Braveheart81]

Maybe they need to put scrummaging handles on the props' jerseys?

They'd need to be pretty low profile so they don't become easier to tackle though.

 

[James Buchanan]

Maybe they need to put scrummaging handles on the props' jerseys?

They'd need to be pretty low profile so they don't become easier to tackle though.

From my experience with props and ball running, avoiding tackles is not an issue.

 

[DPK]

It'd give Quade something easy to grip when he jumps on for the ride.

 

[XVProps]

I have spoken with plenty of former and current props on both side too, Fuse and Bladesy were dead for keeping it, just working with the engagement process to simplify things.



I wonder about this. You will probably know the history better than me, but why did League de-power the scrum? My understanding was because of injury. I am also not sure of timing, but surely this was BEFORE rugby had introduced the "power hit". If that is the case, probably not a valid reason to argue for the outlawing.

League scrums were always a mess and too upright. It was more of a wrestle than a scrum, and contributed to the injuries. Not to mention by the end of the Alfie Langer era the ball was going straight to the lock any way and from then scrums were just a formality. This is what seperates the two codes. We all love the first scrum of the game, and the contest throughout. That is also the reason we are hear talking scrums.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

From my experience with props and ball running, avoiding tackles is not an issue.

Harsh but regrettably fair. Love your work.

 

[Lee Grant]

I wonder about this. You will probably know the history better than me, but why did League de-power the scrum? My understanding was because of injury. I am also not sure of timing, but surely this was BEFORE rugby had introduced the "power hit". If that is the case, probably not a valid reason to argue for the outlawing.

It had little to do with injuries IMO; more with marketing their game. The scrum contest in league was killing them because the players were fighting all the bloody time and they couldn't fix all the scrum infringements. Rather than fix the scrum, they neutered it and made scrums uncontestable, in effect. But they still wanted all the forwards together to give the non-offending side a space uncluttered by 6 blokes from each side. The role of the hooker changed to that of dummy half.

Union will never take that step because set pieces are part of the fabric of the game, as is contesting for the ball.

Unfortunately the power hit has introduced instability to the front row and the tunnel is compromised quite often as feet move all over the place quite often. Few people have remarked that the more prevalent the power hit has become the more prevalent crooked feeds have become, because of the missing tunnel. They go hand and hand like Prohibition and gangsters, and you can't really blame this generation of referees, for being pragmatic about a problem started by their forebears.

The crooked feed is a horrible practice and was prevalent in the other code before the League neutered the scrum. Now the half back is told to put the ball under the last guy's feet. Is that where union is going?

I mentioned that contesting for the ball was part of the fabric of the union game but the contest of hooking for the ball has unravelled from it as the defending hooker rightly assumes he will have no chance to contest for the ball so he will put his utmost into the power hit instead.

If this continues I can foresee that the hooker will eventually become known as the thrower.

Yeah, but I reckon that's like asking the turkeys to vote for christmas.

I liked it. :lmao:

 

[DPK]

I think the crooked feed issue may be resolved if the laws are changed in the way I currently understand they will.

With the proposed changes, wouldn't the scrum begin when the ball is fed? This would changed the focal point of the scrum from the engagement to the feed, in which case crooked feeds would probably be as common as crooked throws in lineouts.

 

[Lee Grant]

Actually the law already states that the scrum starts when the ball leaves the scrummie's hands; so there is nothing to change there. It also says that the front rows should not form at a distance and charge in. Just take the words "at a distance" out as there could be dispute about how long a distance is and - problem solved; a short charge is still a charge.

Why the power hit was consecrated in the laws, and the IRB tried to manage it with the CTPE catechism, instead of outlawing it, beggars belief. The problems it has caused have not been worth the spectacle of the hit. We have purchased the spectacle at the price of having more collapses and fewer minutes of rugby. A poor bargain, and moreover good scrums have been dudded with the consequences of this artificial pre-start engagement.

The physicality of the old scrum was intense but it commenced from a stable position after the put in, the official start of the scrum. The power was from the shove after the scrum was (and is) supposed to start. Now we have a power hit before the official start of the scrum and its problems.

Madness.

 

[Swat]

Lee, If only I could agree more

 

[Ash]

Regarding the "distance" bit, anyone else see some games where the scrum packs with the heads of the front rows greatly overlapping, and other games with them not overlapping at all? Almost without fail, the former games have less scrum collapses and resets. It's also team dependent, quite often - some like to be further away prior to the hit. You don't often enough hear refs say to the front rows "pack closer".

I wish I had a penny for every time I've said "this scrum will collapse" and been right when I've seen the distance between the front rows simply by judging the overlap (or lack thereof) of the front rowers' heads.

 

[Lee Grant]

You and me both Ash and when Alexander is far away it's a moral certainty that he will hinge down. I had some hopes for him this year when he actually popped up which driving up will do and a good scrum, like the Northampton Saints, does a bit of. But those days have gone a'glimmering.

As one suggested earlier, the new pre-start to the scrum, replacing the macho power hit, could be for the refs to call conversationally (and definitely not as a mantra - and not even based on law, but as a suggestion): "Crouch, touch and bind," but with the touch being neck on neck as the bind took place. Then "ready" would be a signal for the scrummie to start the scrum by putting the ball into it.