Brendan Hume
Charlie Fox (21)
Free kicks should definitely be an option for referees when they aren't sure what's happened (which is pretty often).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Use it" call for scrums? Was a new law interpretation introduced to Super Rugby by Jaco Peyper during Blues vs Waratahs game last night.
Apparently the ball must be at the feet of the 8, and the scrum must be static, then Sir can call "Use it".
Failure to "use it" is a scrum feed to the opposition team. How did the lawmakers decide to speed up the time consuming boring scrum competition by having another scrum?
"Use it" call for scrums? Was a new law interpretation introduced to Super Rugby by Jaco Peyper during Blues vs Waratahs game last night.
Apparently the ball must be at the feet of the 8, and the scrum must be static, then Sir can call "Use it".
Failure to "use it" is a scrum feed to the opposition team. How did the lawmakers decide to speed up the time consuming boring scrum competition by having another scrum?
Cheika's comment after the game was pretty accurate, he thinks the rule makes a lot of sense, but he was frustrated that it was the first time it was used all season
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
"Use it" call for scrums? Was a new law interpretation introduced to Super Rugby by Jaco Peyper during Blues vs Waratahs game last night.
Apparently the ball must be at the feet of the 8, and the scrum must be static, then Sir can call "Use it".
Failure to "use it" is a scrum feed to the opposition team. How did the lawmakers decide to speed up the time consuming boring scrum competition by having another scrum?
The problem with the 'use it' call at the end of the first half was that the ball was still under the locks at that point and potentially there to be contested.
Palu could have foreseeably reached through to grab it but the onus shouldn't be on the number 8 to pick the ball up that early.
By the time the Tahs got the ball to the back and it was usable, Peyper blew his whistle.
Worth reading:
The second row generates the most force at the scrum (Scrum Science artice found by kronic)
Is it all in the Front Row?It is also interesting to learn who is contributing what to the scrum. In a separate article on the Biomechanics of Scrummaging, Milburn reported that the three members of the front row produced 38% of the forward force generated by the entire pack, the locks produced 42% and the loose-forwards 20%. The low force contributed to the total scrum by the loose forwards is attributed to the body alignment of the players when scrummaging, with the props and locks transmitting force directly forward, whereas the flankers push into the scrum at an angle. This might also be linked to a strength differential between the positions.
So when the props I played with always blamed the second-rowers they were right?[/quote]
Worth reading:
The second row generates the most force at the scrum (Scrum Science artice found by kronic)
Is it all in the Front Row?It is also interesting to learn who is contributing what to the scrum. In a separate article on the Biomechanics of Scrummaging,Milburn reported that the three members of the front row produced 38% of the forward force generated by the entire pack, the locks produced 42% and the loose-forwards 20%. The low force contributed to the total scrum by the loose forwards is attributed to the body alignment of the players when scrummaging, with the props and locks transmitting force directly forward, whereas the flankers push into the scrum at an angle. This might also be linked to a strength differential between the positions.
I wasn't aware of the 10 kN force and 38/42/20 split so for me it was an interesting article, albeit 2 years old.I don't want to seem like a prat, but surely this isn't news? I thought we knew this decades ago.