Scrum Talk

[Sully]

Firstly the entire weight doesn't go through the prop. Each prop had a second rower and a flanker as primary and half the eight man as a secondary.
Secondly the backs are already 10 metres back from the scrum.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[kiap]

Is it time to drop one of the forwards from the scrum, and get the pretty boys back 5 metres from the last feet?

Are you advocating a return to the kiwi's 2-3-2 scrum of 100 years ago?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Firstly the entire weight doesn't go through the prop. Each prop had a second rower and a flanker as primary and half the eight man as a secondary.
Secondly the backs are already 10 metres back from the scrum.

I said it was voodoo maths. The whole scrum physics of where the forces go and what the effect to what magnitude is the subject of some very complex 3D vector calculations, but ignoring the precise magnitude of the figures, I reckon the forces in the scrum that the front row fatties are subjected to have increased by 10 to 15 % over a generation. Not sure that the ability of our biomechanical structure to absorb those forces has improved by that same amount over the same period.

I might need to brush up on my laws. I know that the Pretty Boys have to be back 10 metres at a lineout, but I thought that at scrum time the offside line was last feet.

 

[Almost 2 old]

@HJ... Go to the gym with these young kids in the off season and try and lift & push 60% for 60% of the time of what these kids of nowadays regularly knock out. They are so much stronger powerful and bigger than we ever were. HJ we forget that we are from those days when gym was spelt differently and he was a team mate..

 

[Hugh Jarse]

No problems with the strength of the lads, and the performances in other athletic events as well.

I'm just speculating as to the ability of the basic skeleton.

Muscles have certainly got much bigger, with increased capacity to deliver power.

Have the bones, cartlidges and tendons matched that capacity increase?

 

[Pfitzy]

I'll repeat what I've said earlier: tell the ref to get the fuck out of the way and let them sort themselves out

 

[Pfitzy]

Have the bones, cartlidges and tendons matched that capacity increase?

Bone density will be fine. Its the squishy bits in between - particularly discs in the lumbar region - that are suffering.

 

[Sully]

I said it was voodoo maths. The whole scrum physics of where the forces go and what the effect to what magnitude is the subject of some very complex 3D vector calculations, but ignoring the precise magnitude of the figures, I reckon the forces in the scrum that the front row fatties are subjected to have increased by 10 to 15 % over a generation. Not sure that the ability of our biomechanical structure to absorb those forces has improved by that same amount over the same period.

I might need to brush up on my laws. I know that the Pretty Boys have to be back 10 metres at a lineout, but I thought that at scrum time the offside line was last feet.

Shipmate your right about the 10. One of My brain snaps. I apologise.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk

 

[Lindommer]

10 metres/last feet? Law 20.12: 5 metres back from the feet of the back player in the scrum.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

If getting the defending Pretty Boys back 10 metres at scrum time would eliminate Will Genia's bloody chip kicking game, then I'm all for implementing that change.

 

[FilthRugby]

Talk about scrums, did anyone see the Rebels scrum get obliterated against the Brumbies?
Sensational from a forwards perspective.

 

[Quick Hands]

Those youngsters who don't believe how quick and easy scrums were, have a look at this footage from England v Wales 1964. No crouch, bind, set and having the ref managing the thing.

The scrum is awarded at 1 min 14 secs, the scrum is set, fed and ball comes out at 1 min 28 secs. No trick photography, they just got on with it. It's how scrums are supposed to be i.e. a quick and fair way to restart play after a minor infringement.

Watch and weep IRB.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

No farting around at lineout time either.

Good to see the first scrum to form often charged over the mark by about 4 metres before the scrum was finally set. Ref's didn't bugger around getting them back to the precise spot where the scrum was awarded.

Somethings don't change. The 6, 7, 8 were non pushing meerkats at scrum time.

Best thing was that the Soap Dodgers didn't win. I'm prepared to take ABE to all levels.

 

[Quick Hands]

If we had the whole game, it would be interesting to compare how much rugby was played in 80 mins in 1964 compared to 2014.

I think at test level we're now under 40 mins aren't we?

Note also that the wingers threw the ball in.

 

[JJJ]

It's a bit late but I have to say that I was impressed by the Rebels' scrum against the sharks. There were a few early ones where the sharks dominated them and I feared a yellow card might appear later in the match but as the game went on they turned the tables and probably could've milked some penalties of their own if they kept the ball in. As it was the 8 seemed caught on the hop a few times at how fast the scrum was moving forward.

Not sure who was responsible but good job Rebels!

 

[Hugh Jarse]

How is this a legal scrum from the white team?

There are four white players in the front row.
White 1 is packing in at an almost obtuse angle.

WTF has happened to Gold 2's binding?

 

[formerflanker]

Mike Penistone got it right when he said "pressure will be heaped on the IRB and referees to police the front rows in accordance with the laws." Cheika has already started that pressure with hints about having to learn to cheat like England.
Refs are being illogical by awarding penalties to the apparently dominant scrum. One major reason they become dominant is due to their infringements. No infringement, no dominance!
No wonder our scrum in the pic above was all at sea - multiple infringements by England led to their dominance.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

TMO should be watching the overhead vision at Twickers and The Arms Park, and other venues fitted with Spider cams, with the same powers as an AR to call in illegal front row (and second row) activities.

It is all well and good to have referees call the Crouch, Bind, Set sequence to improve front row safety at the point of engagement, but how is it safe for the Gold THP to have the White 5, 2, 1 and 7 all driving in on him from multiple angles? The White #2 appears to be the only White fat boy who is scrummaging in accordance with the Laws of the Game.

Not only illegal technique from the White team, but a rather unsafe practice.

The Gold Captain should be in the Referee's ear about the unsafe workplace practices that he is condoning.

It is easy to be appear to have a "dominant" scrum when you are cheating.

If you can't beat them, then AUS need to join them.

How soon before a prop is seriously injured from these illegal and unsafe practices? Who would be liable?

 

[formerflanker]

Are you advocating a return to the kiwi's 2-3-2 scrum of 100 years ago?

Thank you. I now understand the term "wing forward".

 

[Quick Hands]

How is this a legal scrum from the white team?

There are four white players in the front row.
White 1 is packing in at an almost obtuse angle.

WTF has happened to Gold 2's binding?

I pointed this out in the match thread as well. Compound that by allowing the white half to throw the ball in at 45 degrees and you don't have a ball winning contest as we're supposed to have but you have a penalty winning contest (which in this case went to the wrong team.)