Scrum Talk

[en_force_er]

I feel like it's better to try to deal with the devil we know (the scrum hit) then the devil we don't (no engagement).

I don't think anybody could honestly say blokes aren't going to work out funny business and how to fuck with the system just because it's new.

 

[Rassie]

How can you penalize someone when the first offense was a crooked feed? How can you say it is a crooked feed when the scrum wasn't stable. How can the referee allow the ball to be put into a unstable scrum?
Now work it out yourself

 

[Scott Allen]

I've been watching the application of the variations to the scrum hit in the Pacific Rugby Cup.

Let's not forget that the variations are being trialled as a result of the IRB study showing 58% of catastrophic injuries in rugby come from the scrum hit. From a pure legal liability point of view for referees, clubs and unions around the world the hit cannot be left as it is.

The variations are obviously safer because the force of the hit is reduced. They have also resulted in far fewer scrum resets - I can't give you exact numbers but from my observation the reduction has been massive.

Talking to front rowers who have packed in these matches, they like the variations.

I agree it would be good to match up with straight feeds but the IRB have recently said they don't see the crooked feed as a pressing issue.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

If they policed the crooked feed law, then I would have to drop one adjective from my "yappy cheating little runt" halfback epithet.

Having reduced the power hit, did you observe genuine pushing and hooking contests at the scrums?

 

[Scott Allen]

If they policed the crooked feed law, then I would have to drop one adjective from my "yappy cheating little runt" halfback epithet.

Having reduced the power hit, did you observe genuine pushing and hooking contests at the scrums?

Genuine pushing, yes - appeared to be no change.

Hooking contests - what are they? No- haven't seen one of those since 2010.

 

[Rassie]

Maybe if we allow them to throw it in crooked the ball will come out at other end without a kazillion resets. Before that front rowers get a chance to try their dirty tricks the ball is already at the back then add a simple 5 second rule and off we go

Just a thought though

 

[Scott Allen]

This BBC radio special "The Scrum" is well worth a listen - covers all areas of the scrum.

Brian Moore and Phil Vickery main guests but Sean Fitzpatrick explains how the hit got started, various other coaches players and coaches on how tactics developed, comment from coaches, players and the IRB on how to fix the problems.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/5lspecials

 

[Scott Allen]

Some interesting points come from this show:

Only 37% of scrums in the recent Six Nations produced a result where the ball went into play. The balance were reset or play was pulled up due to an infringement. 26% of scrums resulted in a penalty and from 57% of those penalties a shot at penalty goal resulted.

John Jeffrey who is a member of the IRB Scrum Steering Committee is interviewed and says "If we take the hit out of it and put the ball in straight down the middle I genuinely believe we can solve this problem."

He says the committee has to still vote on it officially but as the interview goes on he makes it pretty clear that the IRB want to remove the hit by enforcing the passive engage being trialled in the Pacific Rugby Cup. He says that a global trial will be in place for 1st September in the NH and in 2014 for the SH. He says that enforcing the straight feed will not happen until the global trial of the passive engage.

Phil Vickery and John Jeffrey agreed that NH and SH teams are looking for completely different outcomes from the scrum - they agree that SH teams want to restart the game from a scrum whereas the NH teams are happy to win the scrum by penalty.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Great find Austin. Promising noises being made from the IRB.

 

[Scott Allen]

Mike Cron (also a member of the IRB Scrum Steering Committee) was interviewed.

He has been actively reviewing the trials of the passive engage being trialled in the Pacific Rugby Cup. The key is the props must bind on each other when "touch" is called. This means the props must start closer. Once they have engaged the props can then adjust their binds. This reduces the impact of the hit and he says the players he's spoken to say they feel much more stable and the referees feel much more confident about refereeing scrums under this method.

He says the results have been very positive and this is the way forward.

Brian Moore keeps arguing that there is no need for a global trial of the laws as they already exist and just need to be refereed correctly. Both Jeffrey and Cron agree but say the application of the laws involving no early shove and ball being fed straight will only be addressed in conjunction with the new engage laws.

Nigel Owens was interviewed and made the point that he misses the crooked feed because he's busy watching so many things at the scrum. He is also positive on the new laws being trialled.

Having listened to this show I have no doubt that this season is the last we will ever see of the power hit. I think that's a great thing and combined with the ball being fed straight will create a genuine contest in the scrum again.

 

[rugbysmartarse]

Thanks Scott. The pacific solution you discuss above is exactly what I have been banging on about to anyone who would listen, and it's good to see it is having the desired outcome. I hope it is adopted soon without too much English media beat up

 

[Rassie]

There is only one way to fix the scrums and rugby. Go into IRB offices and say the following to anyone you see working there.

 

[Sully]

Listen to the podcast Scott has suggested. There is light at the end of the tunnel. And I don't think it's a train.

 

[Rassie]

Listen to the podcast Scott has suggested. There is light at the end of the tunnel. And I don't think it's a train.

The problem started in 1996 when the Kiwi team captained by Fitzpatrick introduced a method and changed the way they scrummaged to gain an advantage. On the engage command, the All Blacks would hit and drive from good positions and started dominating teams. The technique required great coordination and practice.

England noticed this and decided force should be met with force and the hit was born. From then on in they started with messing with the laws and changed anything from binding to using commands which almost had a Avenger Assemble ring to it. The more laws and regulations they brought the more unstable the scrum have become.

Neither team wants to be identified and show the referee that they are the weaker scrum so they would go down rather than backwards. Its just the nature of players always looking for the competitive edge. So its understandable.

The scrum is not the only thing that is the problem. IRB tried all different tactics to increase the ball in play time. To them slow ball at every ruck = ball more in play time. Which just prove how stupid and useless that is. When is the last time people saw decent quick ball? They had to make laws year by year as every year players found a new way to cheat. I say cheat because breaking the laws on purpose to see how much you can get away with it is basically cheating.

Off course all the problems were created when they took controlled rucking away. If they remove the hit bring back controlled rucking. You will have less players trying to punch each others faces off and more quick ball without these unnecessary through the gates and sealing jargon.

 

[Ruggo]

Mike Cron (also a member of the IRB Scrum Steering Committee) was interviewed.

He has been actively reviewing the trials of the passive engage being trialled in the Pacific Rugby Cup. The key is the props must bind on each other when "touch" is called. This means the props must start closer. Once they have engaged the props can then adjust their binds. This reduces the impact of the hit and he says the players he's spoken to say they feel much more stable and the referees feel much more confident about refereeing scrums under this method.

He says the results have been very positive and this is the way forward.

Brian Moore keeps arguing that there is no need for a global trial of the laws as they already exist and just need to be refereed correctly. Both Jeffrey and Cron agree but say the application of the laws involving no early shove and ball being fed straight will only be addressed in conjunction with the new engage laws.

Nigel Owens was interviewed and made the point that he misses the crooked feed because he's busy watching so many things at the scrum. He is also positive on the new laws being trialled.

Having listened to this show I have no doubt that this season is the last we will ever see of the power hit. I think that's a great thing and combined with the ball being fed straight will create a genuine contest in the scrum again.

I thought what Topo was saying made the most sense. Simplified it down to the dilemma of getting all those individual components working in tandom. Doesn't take much for it to come undone.

Cheers for the link. Bloody good find that one.

 

[Gnostic]

Maybe with these changes we will actually get to see push over tries again.

One of the unintended consequences may well find out that many of the top "scrummaging" props aren't all that good at scrummaging, they excel at the hit and dominant their opponent there. It will be very interesting indeed to see what happens.

At least with Brian Moore et al pushing for these changes it can't be labelled and Australian conspiracy as an excuse to get rid of good revisions.

 

[Jonesy]

Brian Moore's BBC article. Finally someone talking sense, analysing the issues intelligently. Calling for a reversion back to the old interpretation of unchanged rules/refereeing of the scrum we might finally close the Pandora's box!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/21952652

Go back to the old ways: forwards engage but don't push until ball's in (penalise those who do). Ball in straight - feed coordinated between hooker/scrum half (penalise crooked feed). Hooker's feet remain on ground until ball's in (penalise lifting of the foot), then actually hooks (or competes). Ball channelled back to No.8, who can control (if pack has forward momentum) or release to scrum half ....

Yes, ABs developed the snap-shove which helped them drive packs off the ball and win ball against the head. In response, packs that were driven backwards would either need to meet the force, or wheel beyond 90degs - calling for a reset and/or collapsing the scrum. How about this? The AB snap-shove is a genuine tactic. If packs cannot counter it through resistance, and are forced backwards - why should this attacking tactic be denied? If a weaker "on the backfoot" side must resort to deliberate (and dangerous) defensive wheeling - penalise them. Reward the scrum with forward momentum.

Cadence, winning the hit, emphasis on power - all have led to unecessary rule interpretation band aids aimed at trying to bring balance back to the scrum and counter what essentially was a novel tactic developed by ABs. There should have been a better response from the IRB - i.e. no response. Teams/scrums should simply get better. It didn't and shouldn't need the interference of IRB to sort something out that natural development of tactics/counter-tactics would have resolved anyway.

 

[nomis]

He says the committee has to still vote on it officially but as the interview goes on he makes it pretty clear that the IRB want to remove the hit by enforcing the passive engage being trialled in the Pacific Rugby Cup. He says that a global trial will be in place for 1st September in the NH and in 2014 for the SH

So this means that the Wallabies will start the trial on the end of year tour?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

http://www.taluebookstore.com/featured/the-art-of-scrummaging.html

Has anyone read Topo Rodriguez book "The art of scrummaging"?

Is it worth buying? Is it useful for a junior village club coach, subbies park level coach, 1st XV schoolboy, village club battler, Colt or Grade Player or all of the above?

 

[topo]

http://www.taluebookstore.com/featured/the-art-of-scrummaging.html

Has anyone read Topo Rodriguez book "The art of scrummaging"?

Is it worth buying? Is it useful for a junior village club coach, subbies park level coach, 1st XV schoolboy, village club battler, Colt or Grade Player or all of the above?

Yep, read it. It's a bit weird and, at times difficult to read. The language is very formal. It's interesting in a scrum academic sense ( if there is such a thing), but you have to do a lot of reading to pull out the stuff that a coach might use. And then probably only a serious coach. It's good for the old props to read and quietly nod in agreement every now wind then.
Bottom line: I was disappointed. 2.5 stars.