Shute Shield 2013

[Dave Beat]

Experts like international front rowers and scrum coaches might give you the same answer as this.

Yep no doubt, and at times it can simply come down to game management.

 

[Bruce Ross]

At the Woods v Parra game last week the ref took this scrum farce to a new level - awarding free kicks on both the first and second scrum (against the scrum feed on both occasions) for early engagement and I would estimate that over half the scrums in the match were penalised for early engagement (there was hardly any collapses). The dominant Eastwood scrum was largely neutralised. If I was a SS coach I would seriously consider playing extra breakaways as props as the refs are too pedantic on engagement and have no idea who is responsible for scrum collapses.

If I was a SS coach I would seriously consider coaching my pack not to keep giving penalties away for early engagement. Adjusting to the referee's interpretation would seem to be the smart way to deal with the complexities of our game.

When I see a team that I'm supporting being continually penalised I tend to allow for the remote possibility that maybe they're just playing dumb football.

I expressed this view to the referee during the game from the clubhouse verandah but he didn't seem to pay any attention.

This blatant disregard of the superior wisdom of people on "the clubhouse verandah" is a perennial problem at Milner. I think there must be a localised problem with the acoustics there. Referees don't even seem to be able to hear the constant chant in unison of "Get 'em onside, ref" whenever the locals are in possession of the ball.
.

 

[Rob]

Rob, the current approach to early engagements is to take puntitive action (free kick or escalate to penalty). Managing the situation is not an option. Therefore if the players infringe at the first scrum, there will be a free kick. For mine, I would ask why the players infringe at the first scrum when they know what will happen. Therefore the players are either infringing or the referee is making a judgment error and I know which is more likely.

Referees do consider scrum dominace in their decisions but not in relation to early engagement, so I think the dominace of the Eastwood scrum is irrelevant in this situation.

The referee in this game is a Super Rugby referee so there should be consistency with the Super Rugby approach.

I did not see this game but I have heard that this was a good performance from the referee at scrum time where the players were the problem.

Therefore I would ask you whether you think the problem is the approach rather than the referee performance and how you think that the referee could have handled the scrum differently.

You must have heard it from the referee himself!

The referee in question may be a Super Referee but I have watched him at SS level on many occasions and consider him to be poor- particularly at scrums. It needs to be remembered that each pack normally weighs upward of 850kg. Timing engagement, particularly the first one is difficult as the timing of the refs calls is unknown. Scrums are being called for early engagement for the minutest (excuse the spelling) timing differences undiscernible to the naked eye.

The way he and others could improve their performance, is to make the calls quicker and reserve free kicks for the obvious infractions.

 

[the coach]

Why don't we get rid of scrum penalties alltogether and just award free kicks ie no shots at goal from scrum infringements? While we're at it let's also eliminate the option of setting another scrum after a free kick. Although the old frontrowers in the crowd may have orgasms from watching scrums (to roughly quote Campo) I'm happy see a good scrum contest to get play going again, but then get on with the game!

The 4th grade game between Wicks and Penrith on Saturday featured lots of scrums which suited the 4 or 5 very big but very unfit Penrith forwards who dominated the scrums, but held the game up every time a scrum or lineout was called whilst they trudged from the place the last set piece was held. A very boring game to watch.

The less scrums the better !!!

 

[Bruce Ross]

The 4th grade game between Wicks and Penrith on Saturday featured lots of scrums which suited the 4 or 5 very big but very unfit Penrith forwards who dominated the scrums, but held the game up every time a scrum or lineout was called whilst they trudged from the place the last set piece was held. A very boring game to watch.

The less scrums the better !!!

You don't happen to have a spare tape of the game by any chance, tc?
.

 

[Late Starter]

I have found that Australian referees in general seem to penalise a dominant scrum. This seems to be the case from 4th grade through to Super level.

 

[the coach]

You don't happen to have a spare tape of the game by any chance, tc?
.

Sorry, I think the camera man fell asleep whilst filming and he ended up with 50 minutes of his feet. Probably more entertaining than the game though.

 

[Eyes and Ears]

You must have heard it from the referee himself!

The referee in question may be a Super Referee but I have watched him at SS level on many occasions and consider him to be poor- particularly at scrums. It needs to be remembered that each pack normally weighs upward of 850kg. Timing engagement, particularly the first one is difficult as the timing of the refs calls is unknown. Scrums are being called for early engagement for the minutest (excuse the spelling) timing differences undiscernible to the naked eye.

The way he and others could improve their performance, is to make the calls quicker and reserve free kicks for the obvious infractions.

No, not from the referee himself. I take your point that there are too many marginal calls.

In terms of timing, the speed is determined by the readiness of the players to proceed. After several years, players should have adjusted to waiting for the referee's call rather than trying to predict the speed of the call as the calls are not necessarily supposed to be consistent from scrum to scrum.

The speed is an interesting area. Despite the heavy cirticism of the slower calls, they have actually reduced the number of re-sets and the removal of "Pause" seems to have helped even further. At the elite level, I think there have been some studies into the timing that creates the best results. Chris Pollock is particularly goood at it and I wouldn't have called his a quick call.

While there is blame on both sides, I still think it is more of a player issue than a referee one.

 

[the coach]

No, not from the referee himself. I take your point that there are too many marginal calls.

In terms of timing, the speed is determined by the readiness of the players to proceed. After several years, players should have adjusted to waiting for the referee's call rather than trying to predict the speed of the call as the calls are not necessarily supposed to be consistent from scrum to scrum.

The speed is an interesting area. Despite the heavy cirticism of the slower calls, they have actually reduced the number of re-sets and the removal of "Pause" seems to have helped even further. At the elite level, I think there have been some studies into the timing that creates the best results. Chris Pollock is particularly goood at it and I wouldn't have called his a quick call.

While there is blame on both sides, I still think it is more of a player issue than a referee one.

IMO many of the calls for an early engagement are totally unnecessary as no advantage has been gained, especially given the fractions of a second we are talking about. Sure it's a breach, but if no advantage why not play on. The referee could always signal an advantage but play on anyway, instead of that they blow the whistle immediately. To make it more frustrating for the spectators the non-offending team then very frequently calls for another scrum anyway.

 

[the coach]

Does anyone know if any replacements were named for the 3 players who withdrew from the Argentine tour apart from McDougall?

 

[Rob]

IMO many of the calls for an early engagement are totally unnecessary as no advantage has been gained, especially given the fractions of a second we are talking about. Sure it's a breach, but if no advantage why not play on. The referee could always signal an advantage but play on anyway, instead of that they blow the whistle immediately. To make it more frustrating for the spectators the non-offending team then very frequently calls for another scrum anyway.

Agree re many of the calls being totally unnecessary. Refs seem to be looking for a reason to blow a free kick rather than seeing if there is a reason not to.

 

[Dave Beat]

The referee could always signal an advantage but play on anyway, instead of that they blow the whistle immediately. To make it more frustrating for the spectators the non-offending team then very frequently calls for another scrum anyway.

Great idea, as often the free kick reverts to a scrum anyway.

 

[fatprop]

IMO many of the calls for an early engagement are totally unnecessary as no advantage has been gained, especially given the fractions of a second we are talking about. Sure it's a breach, but if no advantage why not play on. The referee could always signal an advantage but play on anyway, instead of that they blow the whistle immediately. To make it more frustrating for the spectators the non-offending team then very frequently calls for another scrum anyway.

Disagree, getting a good early hit under the current rules allows them to take a step and the 9 just puts the ball in and it appears at the back.

On their feed, they are going backwards under a decent hit = pressure = collapses = penalties or tight heads

Now if you take away the penalty sanction "some (Eddie Jones influenced)" coaches with shit scrums will just play for giving the free kick and keep moving.

 

[the coach]

Disagree, getting a good early hit under the current rules allows them to take a step and the 9 just puts the ball in and it appears at the back.

On their feed, they are going backwards under a decent hit = pressure = collapses = penalties or tight heads

Now if you take away the penalty sanction "some (Eddie Jones influenced)" coaches with shit scrums will just play for giving the free kick and keep moving.

As I suggested, if they do gain an advantage then sure award a free kick, but don't blow the whistle immediately before determining whether there is any advantage.

Personally, I'd be happy to see a free kick and keep the game moving if one scrum is obviously far inferior to the other rather than endless penalties and kicks at goal.

 

[Zander]

Are the Argentinean players missing this round?

 

[the coach]

Are the Argentinean players missing this round?

Yep, this round and the next, back for the last round

 

[Des]

Des, I know your post was a positive idea and I hate being negative on it however I'd have some concerns as per below,

So another form of recruitment is it, quality stays, rest return to the west?

I don't have answers, but a different thought you have put forward.
Along way to travel, cost, even more so with work commitments, peak hour etc.

Why not send Uni Players out west to train etc. for a couple of training sessions, our hours each week, I think that may have more success as it would be a team environment.

Is there varying facilities out west still in operation were money got spent with the Olympics.

I'd love to see the west developed, I do think there is potential. Yes, BUT, why aren't the other codes succeeding out their either?????
Huge potential, BUT, Penrith haven't been in finals contention for a while, GWS is in line for the spoon, I ask, where is the talent going then?

There we go, even HJ made reference to raiding parties - at least I wasn't first.

 

[Des]

Dave - he was genuinely concerned that without assistance in some way Penrith players would rightfully get very disheartened. This was evidenced by Penrith only having 12 players on the paddock in two's for at least all the 2nd half against Uni (only arrived at 1/2 time). Not sure what facilities are out west these days but Uni certainly don't need more players.
It is my experience that players are attracted to Sydney University Rugby for what it has to offer as a club and that does NOT include poaching off other clubs.

 

[Dave Beat]

Dave - he was genuinely concerned that without assistance in some way Penrith players would rightfully get very disheartened. This was evidenced by Penrith only having 12 players on the paddock in two's for at least all the 2nd half against Uni (only arrived at 1/2 time). Not sure what facilities are out west these days but Uni certainly don't need more players.
It is my experience that players are attracted to Sydney University Rugby for what it has to offer as a club and that does NOT include poaching off other clubs.

Des, Uni does have something that other clubs can not offer. I don't hold that against them, and if they make use of their resources and sets examples good on them. Other clubs are emulating what Uni has done with varying approaches. But we can still all hate Uni, it's called tribalism.

Penrith colts have given up their home ground game this week and are hoping on the club bus to play at Manly. I don't know if another club would do that and I'm sure Manly will very hospitable to the Emu's this weekend.

As much as players may like to take advantage of Uni's facilities, trying to get a whole team there - travel, work, costs etc would / maybe difficult.

The West, potential yes, how, I don't know.

 

[Bruce Ross]

Rather than have the players trying to cope with extended trips throughout the ever growing nightmare of Sydney traffic, I still believe that the best means of assisting Penrith would be for the ARU to make a commitment of at least three years to employing an experienced professional coach to base himself there as Director of Rugby. He would need to have a reasonable budget for support services but there should be no leakage of the ARU expenditure for player payments. The Director's total emphasis should be on player and team development.

To the extent that expenditure on paying players is thought necessary it should be the responsibility of the Club itself.

It would be entirely appropriate for the ARU to make such an investment in order to avert the permanent loss to rugby of such an important catchment area. It's time for Penrith to be Pulverised.
.