Experiences of Crouch-Bind-Set-Yes 9

[winchesterref]

I think you are trying to read far too much into a bit of law that is anyway going to be rewritten if the experiment becomes substantive. To me "undue delay" impies "over and above normal procedure", which in this case includes a reasonable opportunity to communicate. We need to be pragmatic because I for one want this experiment to succeed.

I think we're agreeing OB!

 

[didds]

I think you are trying to read far too much into a bit of law that is anyway going to be rewritten if the experiment becomes substantive. To me "undue delay" impies "over and above normal procedure", which in this case includes a reasonable opportunity to communicate. We need to be pragmatic because I for one want this experiment to succeed.

As ever, Ob is the voice of reason. It is MADNESS to suggest communication can;t occur becasue a S/H holds the ball low to begin with rather than high.

I too want this to succeed - if only so the iRB stop playing silly buggers with the engagement every couple of years when their most recent super-solution has failed along with all its predecessors.

didds

 

[Na Madrai]

My apologies - nothing to say

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

My apologies - nothing to say

Good track!

View attachment 2621

 

[SimonSmith]

Good track!

View attachment 2621

Anderson's on tour next year. And the remastered version is just...

*gets anorak* *stands in the corner waiting for other proggies and folkies to turn up*

 

[Coach Klein]

This was raised at our society meeting and I said much the same thing as Ian and OB.
Manage it, and be sensible.

Give the SH time to tap his Hooker and then put the ball in. If he starts fannying about, throwing his arms in the air, scratching his bum, having a chat with the other SH, then ping him.

Like most laws, this is just common sense (a much under-rated skill).

I like this! (esp the common sense bit)

Is anyone finding you are getting much more wheel from the non-putting in loosehead's side? (as putting in side's LH and hooker are stable and want static, stable ball while hooker is striking?)

 

[wrighty]

Not yet reffed my 1st game yet, but observed three matches and every game the props bind on the crouch, before referee called set.Not seen a problem yet, but are we heading towards a crouch & bind instruction similar to a crouch and hold of a few years ago ?Or will referees get a direction to look more closely at this trend already happening preseason.Obviously it's easy to spot referees side of scrum, but not easy on the far side.
Do you ping it, even if the scrum is relatively fair ?

 

[Browner]

Is anyone finding you are getting much more wheel from the non-putting in loosehead's side? (as putting in side's LH and hooker are stable and want static, stable ball while hooker is striking?)

I found this, ...... today, the players need to work it out, I bet they will in time. 1[SUP]st[/SUP] outing of the season, my self appraisal / observations:
1] Players were toofar apart at the crouch request
2] When they became Ear2Ear they then were engaging before ‘Set’ [sorted it out, but it was a ball ache tobegin with] maybe too slow with FK.
3] I initially calledY9 too quickly, and as i got slower withmore of a binding/straightness check the scrums went better
4] the defendinghooker really went after one strike against the head, he twisted & swungfor the ball the result was his side collapsed onto him - I reset, but should have PK probably.
7/10 for me
5-19 at half timeturned into 36 – 19 result, enjoyed it.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I like this! (esp the common sense bit)

Is anyone finding you are getting much more wheel from the non-putting in loosehead's side? (as putting in side's LH and hooker are stable and want static, stable ball while hooker is striking?)

I'd say, if the wheel is legal, i.e. a push around wheel, not a walk around or "whip" wheel, and it starts after the ball is put in, then where is the problem? Wheeling is a one of only two legal means of disrupting the opposition's scrum; the other being pushing them backwards.

There is no problem with one team trying to disrupt the other team's scrum, so long as we start with a stable, square scrum, the disruptive techniques used are legal, and they don't begin before the ball goes in.

 

[crossref]

So I reffed my first game with crouch bind set yesterday (the previous week we had uncontested scrums)
It was the first time for all the players as well
My observations
.. The crouch has to be very close . much closer than the front rows felt natural with . we had some scrums where the gap was too wide , and this meant that when they bound , they fell into each other, and pretty much set. Standing closer in the crouch cured this
.. But the biggest change is yes9 - the ref calling the ball in . this is the thing more than anything that removes the hit, and the early shove. There is no point in either now, as the ball isn't coming in

Question for all of you : should yes9 be loud enough for everyone to hear, or simply loud enough for the scrum half to hear ?

 

[Dixie]

Question for all of you : should yes9 be loud enough for everyone to hear, or simply loud enough for the scrum half to hear ?

My own view is that even eye contact with the #9 is adequate in practice - though the powers that be will doubtless disagree. The feeding #9 is the only person who needs to know that he may start his routine to introduce the ball. Arguably the hooker too, but if you're going to yell so that he can hear with his scrumcap on and his ears wedged into a prop and his oppo, you'll be hoarse at the end of the game.

 

[Simon Thomas]

cross ref

best crouch position is ear to ear, or if they are messing about close up to cheek to cheek. any further apart and a fold in collapse is likely.

I prefer the Yes 9 to loud enough for all to hear, including coaches on touchline !

and if they are not static before Yes 9, either penalise the offenders, or if a mess or both to blame, blow it and reset.

zero tolerance is needed to get it right

 

[Mike Whittaker]

Agree with Simon. The best communicators only need to be miked up to the observer so he can keep tabs on the 'quiet word' that may spoken from time to time. (unless crowd noise excessive!!) Everything else is for all to hear and know.

 

[didds]

and if they are not static before Yes 9, either penalise the offenders, or if a mess or both to blame, blow it and reset.

??

but surely "yes9" can't happen until the scrum IS static (S&S) ?????

confused of devizes.

 

[Simon Thomas]

??

but surely "yes9" can't happen until the scrum IS static (S&S) ?????

confused of devizes.

Exactly Didds - if not static Yes 9 should NOT be called. And either FK/PK the offending early pusher/wheeler/non binder etc, or reset with appropriate management reminders.

I have this lunchtime at a warm up match watched a club referee get it totally wrong on almost every scrum. He knew all the correct calls but failed to either manage or sanction anything. After Q1 he was "chasing" the SET with it merged with BIND as the FR decided they were going anyway. It was perfectly safe so I stayed out of it, but was very unimpressed.

Just as bad was his tackle management where he penalised second and even third offence, not the first. Lamentable.

He declined a "helpful chat" over a beer in the bar, saying he had been reffing for years and knew the Laws, so didn't have any problems.

 

[Stuartg]

I also go for the ear to ear closeness. One of the coaches yesterday said I was the first this season to demand this. Once they had set and there was evidently some movement I waited for them to stop. Told them I'd wait 5 mins if needed for there to be a static, square and stable scrum. They soon learned that it wasn't worth pushing early.

One fk for not straight. The sh said that the scrum wasn't stationary! Which fk do you want then? Not straight or your guys pushing early?

 

[winchesterref]

Why does the whole scum need to hear "yes 9"?

 

[Phil E]

In my PMB I stated ear to ear.
First scrum, crouch, peep, stand up, not close enough. Crouch, peep, still not close enough, remember the brief, ear to ear.
Once they got it right the first time, we were good all game.

Yes 9 was nice and loud. Why not?

 

[matty1194]

Question for all of you : should yes9 be loud enough for everyone to hear, or simply loud enough for the scrum half to hear ?

I have tried both so far this early into the season and find that some of the scrums have triggered on a loud Y9 call so as soon as the 9 goes to insert the ball they have tried to anticipate the ball entry. When i have called it just for the 9 to hear considering he is just stood next to me I have found the scrum to be much more stable as teams cant anticipate.

As an aside on the set I have allowed both packs time to adjust their feet if needed to find that stable position they require as each prop/pack sets their feet differently and needs to find that stable drive position but no call of Y9 untill S&S.

 

[Taff]

?? but surely "yes9" can't happen until the scrum IS static (S&S) ????? confused of devizes.

As I see it some problems can arise after the ref shouts Yes 9".

Eg in last nights Treviso v Ospreys match a number of scrum were S&S when ref called "Yes 9" but then the fancying around started in the time it took the SH to put the ball in. This is why I reckon the refs call should be an immediate instruction and not an invitation.