Surprise, surprise, the rules sort out some scrums
- Thread starter fatprop
- Start date
- Status
Lee Grant
John Eales (66)
Let's hope that this scrum epiphany can become a gospel that everyone observes. Something has to be done about the scrum and if it means that referees have to be like inquisitors enforcing the catechism of the engage commands, and burning them at the stake if they don't, so be it.
You never know: it may even work.
But I think that getting players to observe the engage commands is taking the scrum down the wrong path. I think we have to back up on the journey to the time when there weren't so many scrum collapses and start on a better path from there.
Folks may know that I am a long time critic of how the game has been allowed to be corrupted from time to time. There's no one reason for it: sometimes referees observed some laws but not others, and then we had to have a crackdown on observing the laws how they were written. Wrong path.
There are other reasons also: such as new practices that have been allowed to go on unchecked. In the last 5 years particularly, we have been down a path to a place where scrums are collapsing time after time, and some people don't even know why.
The major reason is because of the power hit. It has evolved slowly over about 30 years but became more pronounced in the professional era. Now we are seeing the disease that is spreading in our game, but we are using the wrong medicine to cure it. The scrum engage recital is like taking cough syrup for lung cancer and we need the equivalent of stopping smoking before it happens, instead.
Therefore let's go back to when the scrum engaged long before the ball was put in – even sometimes as the half back was picking up the ball. Then the packs would get ready, nice and steady in their engaged state, and push when the ball was put in as the laws prescribed – and still do. Sure sometimes they pushed early and were pinged, and there were a few scrum collapses too, but not many compared to now.
And you know what - there was a clear tunnel so that the ball could be put down the middle, because nobody was pushing before then. Defending hookers could hook for the ball and it was a fascinating contest which is now lost to the game - killed off by the power hit. RIP.
Some may say that the old method would not reward a dominant scrum, but those are folks who don't know what they don't know. Dominant scrums dominated in former days don't you worry, but they dominated after the put in, not before it. By contrast the 2011 dominant scrum is often disadvantaged by the referees wrong guesses as to what went wrong on the power hit.
I've heard all the arguments against this retreat to improvement, including how the game has to change with the times. The words come out smoothly but the incidence of scrum collapses argues against them. People can talk about improved scrum reset stats to the cows come home but I'd ask them: compared to when?
As for Blades' comment that it will be OK if it is controlled properly: well, that sounds a bit like a doctor arguing for the tobacco companies that smoking isn't harmful if it's controlled properly.
But hey – let's see if the cough syrup works first. You never know.
You never know: it may even work.
But I think that getting players to observe the engage commands is taking the scrum down the wrong path. I think we have to back up on the journey to the time when there weren't so many scrum collapses and start on a better path from there.
Folks may know that I am a long time critic of how the game has been allowed to be corrupted from time to time. There's no one reason for it: sometimes referees observed some laws but not others, and then we had to have a crackdown on observing the laws how they were written. Wrong path.
There are other reasons also: such as new practices that have been allowed to go on unchecked. In the last 5 years particularly, we have been down a path to a place where scrums are collapsing time after time, and some people don't even know why.
The major reason is because of the power hit. It has evolved slowly over about 30 years but became more pronounced in the professional era. Now we are seeing the disease that is spreading in our game, but we are using the wrong medicine to cure it. The scrum engage recital is like taking cough syrup for lung cancer and we need the equivalent of stopping smoking before it happens, instead.
Therefore let's go back to when the scrum engaged long before the ball was put in – even sometimes as the half back was picking up the ball. Then the packs would get ready, nice and steady in their engaged state, and push when the ball was put in as the laws prescribed – and still do. Sure sometimes they pushed early and were pinged, and there were a few scrum collapses too, but not many compared to now.
And you know what - there was a clear tunnel so that the ball could be put down the middle, because nobody was pushing before then. Defending hookers could hook for the ball and it was a fascinating contest which is now lost to the game - killed off by the power hit. RIP.
Some may say that the old method would not reward a dominant scrum, but those are folks who don't know what they don't know. Dominant scrums dominated in former days don't you worry, but they dominated after the put in, not before it. By contrast the 2011 dominant scrum is often disadvantaged by the referees wrong guesses as to what went wrong on the power hit.
I've heard all the arguments against this retreat to improvement, including how the game has to change with the times. The words come out smoothly but the incidence of scrum collapses argues against them. People can talk about improved scrum reset stats to the cows come home but I'd ask them: compared to when?
As for Blades' comment that it will be OK if it is controlled properly: well, that sounds a bit like a doctor arguing for the tobacco companies that smoking isn't harmful if it's controlled properly.
But hey – let's see if the cough syrup works first. You never know.
OK
Back to what Smith did that I liked.
He required each prop to actually be able to touch the shoulder point of the opposite prop and do so.
That did require the scrums to be consistently closer and lined up. That allows a hit, but not from miles way, that leads greater chance of over extension and the subsequent eating of grass when miss timed.
So you get a decent ability to hit and then stability.
To lock that stability they were required to bind on the body, and we got the scrums stable at the put in, with the ability to scrummage from there.
Back to what Smith did that I liked.
He required each prop to actually be able to touch the shoulder point of the opposite prop and do so.
That did require the scrums to be consistently closer and lined up. That allows a hit, but not from miles way, that leads greater chance of over extension and the subsequent eating of grass when miss timed.
So you get a decent ability to hit and then stability.
To lock that stability they were required to bind on the body, and we got the scrums stable at the put in, with the ability to scrummage from there.
Joe Mac
Arch Winning (36)
I think we Australians just need to man up and learn to scrummage. France, Wales, Italy, England and Argentina never seem to have any problems in the scrum department. I actually enjoy the added dimension scrummaging creates in the game. I like that different nations have different strengths and specialties that they can use to their advantage to win on the day.
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
Great post Lee, some excellent points superbly made.
Blue
Andrew Slack (58)
Like league.
Lee Grant
John Eales (66)
It is a bit like league now in that there is no hooking contest.
I want it back.
Joe Mac
A poor scrumming nation will have it worse if the settled engage was used without the power hit. Now, when power hits are used they benefit from the referees wrong guesses about who is at fault. In the old days it was clearer who was at fault and the dominant scrum dominated more than it does now, but as I wrote before: they dominated after the put in.
Australia's poor scrummaging has been pampered by referees in the power hit regime because they guessed in our favour more than we deserved. If the power hit stays it will benefit us more but as an old timer I would like to see us step up.
I want it back.
Joe Mac
A poor scrumming nation will have it worse if the settled engage was used without the power hit. Now, when power hits are used they benefit from the referees wrong guesses about who is at fault. In the old days it was clearer who was at fault and the dominant scrum dominated more than it does now, but as I wrote before: they dominated after the put in.
Australia's poor scrummaging has been pampered by referees in the power hit regime because they guessed in our favour more than we deserved. If the power hit stays it will benefit us more but as an old timer I would like to see us step up.
DPK
Peter Sullivan (51)
Before the 2009 Spring Tour, the ARU uploaded a bunch of videos from the 1984 Grand Slam Tour. While the focus of these videos is on the tries and the backline, there are a few occasions where there is footage of old scrums.
Just go to tv.rugby.com.au and scroll back through the old videos.
- Status