Crusaders scrumming illegally?

[Baylion]

[FONT=Lucida Grande, Trebuchet MS, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]According to Jonathan Kaplan:[/FONT]

Quote:
Once again, I have issues with the way the Crusaders and Crockett achieve their ascendency. I do not doubt their power, but I’ve never been convinced that the angles used are always legal.

http://ratetheref.co.za/2015/03/17/kaplans-comments-no-action-taken/

According to John Mitchell:

Quote:
The Crusaders are still scrumming illegally
The Lions complained privately to Sanzar about the Crusaders' scrumming technique following their round-five defeat in Christchurch, but it had little effect as the Kiwi franchise did exactly the same thing against the Cheetahs on Saturday. Crusaders loosehead prop Wyatt Crockett once again scrummed in at an angle, as did his replacement Joe Moody. In his analysis of the Saders scrum after the match, SuperSport's John Mitchell said they had set up the scrum with their loosehead on the outside of Cheetahs tighthead prop Coenie Oosthuizen, allowing the loosehead to get leverage and under the ribs of his direct opponent. Apart from creating an immediate angle, added Mitchell, the loosehead grabbed his direct opponent with a straight arm and then pulled himself forward to create momentum upon the engagement. Australian referee Andrew Lees and Kiwi assistant referees Kane McBride and Jamie Nutbrown were oblivious to all of this, with Oosthuizen receiving a yellow card after a series of scrums in which Moody went in at an angle. The tighthead looked bemused as he left the field, with the Kiwi commentators agreeing that he had been very hard done by.

http://www.sarugbymag.co.za/blog/details/what-weve-learned80

 

[Ian_Cook]

According to Jonathan Kaplan:

Quote:
Once again, I have issues with the way the Crusaders and Crockett achieve their ascendency. I do not doubt their power, but I’ve never been convinced that the angles used are always legal.

http://ratetheref.co.za/2015/03/17/kaplans-comments-no-action-taken/

According to John Mitchell:

Quote:
The Crusaders are still scrumming illegally
The Lions complained privately to Sanzar about the Crusaders' scrumming technique following their round-five defeat in Christchurch, but it had little effect as the Kiwi franchise did exactly the same thing against the Cheetahs on Saturday. Crusaders loosehead prop Wyatt Crockett once again scrummed in at an angle, as did his replacement Joe Moody. In his analysis of the Saders scrum after the match, SuperSport's John Mitchell said they had set up the scrum with their loosehead on the outside of Cheetahs tighthead prop Coenie Oosthuizen, allowing the loosehead to get leverage and under the ribs of his direct opponent. Apart from creating an immediate angle, added Mitchell, the loosehead grabbed his direct opponent with a straight arm and then pulled himself forward to create momentum upon the engagement. Australian referee Andrew Lees and Kiwi assistant referees Kane McBride and Jamie Nutbrown were oblivious to all of this, with Oosthuizen receiving a yellow card after a series of scrums in which Moody went in at an angle. The tighthead looked bemused as he left the field, with the Kiwi commentators agreeing that he had been very hard done by.

http://www.sarugbymag.co.za/blog/details/what-weve-learned80

Well colour me surprised Jonathan. That is how they are supposed to set up. Its why the loosehead prop is called a loosehead prop; because his head is loose on the outside the head of the tighthead prop who is so called because his head is "tight" between the opposing prop's head and the opposing hooker's head.

Does the scrum analyst for Super Sport actually know anything about scrummaging?

 

[RobLev]

Well colour me surprised Jonathan. That is how they are supposed to set up. Its why the loosehead prop is called a loosehead prop; because his head is loose on the outside the head of the tighthead prop who is so called because his head is "tight" between the opposing prop's head and the opposing hooker's head.

Does the scrum analyst for Super Sport actually know anything about scrummaging?

Could he have meant that Crockett is lining up outside where he should be lining up to engage straight with the tight head? Because he lines up outside that line, he gets an angle boring into the tight head. The only scrum in which Crockett is visible in the Lions Rd 5 highlights video, for example he seems to do precisely that. He ends up forcing the TH up with his head under the TH's breastbone - and gets a PT in his favour...

 

[Ian_Cook]

Could he have meant that Crockett is lining up outside where he should be lining up to engage straight with the tight head? Because he lines up outside that line, he gets an angle boring into the tight head. The only scrum in which Crockett is visible in the Lions Rd 5 highlights video, for example he seems to do precisely that. He ends up forcing the TH up with his head under the TH's breastbone - and gets a PT in his favour...

Well, its isn't what he said. I don't believe there is anything wrong with the way the Crusaders scrummage, and even if Crockett does what you say (and I don't believe he does) there isn't anything in the Law to prevent this. The only reference to prop head position is this

[LAWS]Law 20. 1 (f) Front rows coming together. First, the referee marks with a foot the place where the
scrum is to be formed. Before the two front rows come together they must be standing not
more than an arm’s length apart. The ball is in the scrum half’s hands, ready to be thrown
in. The front rows must crouch so that when they meet, each player’s head and shoulders
are no lower than the hips. The front rows must interlock so that no player’s head is next to
the head of a team-mate.
Sanction: Free Kick[/LAWS]

I'm sure that Crockett's head is not lower than his hips. What I have noticed is that the Crusaders tend to pack a bit higher than other teams and don't allow themselves to be forced lower. Its not by much, but that little extra height makes it easier for the Hooker to hook the ball

 

[RobLev]

Well, its isn't what he said. I don't believe there is anything wrong with the way the Crusaders scrummage, and even if Crockett does what you say (and I don't believe he does) there isn't anything in the Law to prevent this. The only reference to prop head position is this

[LAWS]Law 20. 1 (f) Front rows coming together. First, the referee marks with a foot the place where the
scrum is to be formed. Before the two front rows come together they must be standing not
more than an arm’s length apart. The ball is in the scrum half’s hands, ready to be thrown
in. The front rows must crouch so that when they meet, each player’s head and shoulders
are no lower than the hips. The front rows must interlock so that no player’s head is next to
the head of a team-mate.
Sanction: Free Kick[/LAWS]

I'm sure that Crockett's head is not lower than his hips. What I have noticed is that the Crusaders tend to pack a bit higher than other teams and don't allow themselves to be forced lower. Its not by much, but that little extra height makes it easier for the Hooker to hook the ball

I thought the LHP boring in was illegal?

 

[Ian_Cook]

I thought the LHP boring in was illegal?

Not specifically. By that I mean that there isn't a Law that describes boring in and bans it. A prop who is boring in is breaching....

[LAWS]Law 20.8 (g) Twisting, dipping or collapsing. Front row players must not twist or lower their bodies, or pull opponents, or do anything that is likely to collapse the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

In fact there is a Law against forcing an opponent up....

[LAWS]Law 20.8 (i) Lifting or forcing an opponent up. A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air, or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards. This is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

....but for some reason, we PK props/hookers for standing up in the scrum when there is no such Law. What we really PK them for is dropping or releasing their bind.


I dont see this as any different. If the LHP has his head low and under the THP's shoulder (but not below his own hips) and is driving flat and straight (i.e. he does not lift his head and shoulders) and this results in the THP lifting up then that is not the LHP's fault. If the THP is not strong enough to counter this (which he can do by getting lower) then he has no business wearing the No. 3 jersey at that level.

 

[RobLev]

Not specifically. By that I mean that there isn't a Law that describes boring in and bans it. A prop who is boring in is breaching....

[LAWS]Law 20.8 (g) Twisting, dipping or collapsing. Front row players must not twist or lower their bodies, or pull opponents, or do anything that is likely to collapse the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

In fact there is a Law against forcing an opponent up....

[LAWS]Law 20.8 (i) Lifting or forcing an opponent up. A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air, or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards. This is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

....but for some reason, we PK props/hookers for standing up in the scrum when there is no such Law. What we really PK them for is dropping or releasing their bind.


I dont see this as any different. If the LHP has his head low and under the THP's shoulder (but not below his own hips) and is driving flat and straight (i.e. he does not lift his head and shoulders) and this results in the THP lifting up then that is not the LHP's fault. If the THP is not strong enough to counter this (which he can do by getting lower) then he has no business wearing the No. 3 jersey at that level.

But the fact that he's not pushing straight and that as a result he's got his head under his opponent's breastbone is the reason the THP has been forced upwards out of the scrum.

 

[Ian_Cook]

But the fact that he's not pushing straight and that as a result he's got his head under his opponent's breastbone is the reason the THP has been forced upwards out of the scrum.

But he is pushing straight and he doesn't have his head under his opponent's breastbone (and in reality, that is impossible to achieve if the THP was originally engaged in the correct position (unless, of course, the LHP has an 18" neck and a double hinged shoulder joint so that he doesn't lose his bind).

 

[RobLev]

But he is pushing straight and he doesn't have his head under his opponent's breastbone (and in reality, that is impossible to achieve if the THP was originally engaged in the correct position (unless, of course, the LHP has an 18" neck and a double hinged shoulder joint so that he doesn't lose his bind).

He's not pushing straight - he sets up at an angle (so is pushing diagonally inwards) and having got underneath him then pushes up as well. By the time the THP comes up Crockett's head is level with his breastbone.

Look from 3:37 onward in this video:

http://www.superxv.tv/video/crusaders-v-lions-rd-5-2015-super-rugby-video-highlights_aa0d6980b.html

 

[Pegleg]

Agreed Rob he is pushing inward from the set up. Does a prop have to push straight?


Ian quotes:


Law 20.8 (g) Twisting, dipping or collapsing.

Front row players must not twist or lower their bodies, or pull opponents, or do anything that is likely to collapse the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Furthermore theree is:

20.2 FRONT-ROW PLAYERS’ POSITIONS
(a) All players in a position to shove. When a scrum has formed, the body and feet of each
front row player must be in a normal position to make a forward shove.
Sanction: Free Kick

which requires to be in a position to push forward. Does this preclude forward and across? Does it preclude players not trying to shove?

The consensus of refs would seem to be that driving across is illegal by inference if by specific wording. But are we right?

 

[Ian_Cook]

Agreed Rob he is pushing inward from the set up. Does a prop have to push straight?


Ian quotes:


Law 20.8 (g) Twisting, dipping or collapsing.

Front row players must not twist or lower their bodies, or pull opponents, or do anything that is likely to collapse the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Furthermore theree is:

20.2 FRONT-ROW PLAYERS’ POSITIONS
(a) All players in a position to shove. When a scrum has formed, the body and feet of each
front row player must be in a normal position to make a forward shove.
Sanction: Free Kick

which requires to be in a position to push forward. Does this preclude forward and across? Does it preclude players not trying to shove?

The consensus of refs would seem to be that driving across is illegal by inference if by specific wording. But are we right?

If a prop is not allowed to push in any direction other than directly forwards and parallel to the touchlines, then how is it possible for a scrum to turn. Every scrum ought to be a PK unless to is pushed ramrod straight.

Screwed scrums almost always turn to the right. Why? Because it is natural for a scrum to turn that way. The longitudinal centrelines of each pack are NOT aligned, they are offset to the left by half the width of a player. This is an obvious fact, the consequences of which do not occur to people who don't know Jack Schmidt about scrummaging. When two, evenly matched scrums push against each other, there is a natural clockwise turning force.

I do not believe Crockett pushes at any more of an angle than any other LHP. Did you watch Joe Marler and Vince Debaty on the weekend. How about Cian Healy and Rob Evans earlier in the day. The were all driving inwards to some degree at just about every scrum.

 

[Womble]

He's not pushing straight - he sets up at an angle (so is pushing diagonally inwards) and having got underneath him then pushes up as well. By the time the THP comes up Crockett's head is level with his breastbone.

Look from 3:37 onward in this video:

http://www.superxv.tv/video/crusaders-v-lions-rd-5-2015-super-rugby-video-highlights_aa0d6980b.html

Look at how the red loose head sets up, hides his right shoulder behind the hooker so pulling the blue tight head across & opening him up, simple to spot & easy to rectify .

 

[RobLev]

If a prop is not allowed to push in any direction other than directly forwards and parallel to the touchlines, then how is it possible for a scrum to turn. Every scrum ought to be a PK unless to is pushed ramrod straight.

http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread...ot-jargon-quot&p=295394&viewfull=1#post295394

To which you can add - the LHP pushing at an angle will also increase the turning moment.

Screwed scrums almost always turn to the right. Why? Because it is natural for a scrum to turn that way. The longitudinal centrelines of each pack are NOT aligned, they are offset to the left by half the width of a player. This is an obvious fact, the consequences of which do not occur to people who don't know Jack Schmidt about scrummaging. When two, evenly matched scrums push against each other, there is a natural clockwise turning force.

I do not believe Crockett pushes at any more of an angle than any other LHP...

You were quite clear earlier that he was pushing straight.

 

[Ian_Cook]

You were quite clear earlier that he was pushing straight.

No, that isn't what I said

"If the LHP has his head low and under the THP's shoulder (but not below his own hips) and is driving flat and straight (i.e. he does not lift his head and shoulders) and this results in the THP lifting up then that is not the LHP's fault."

The allegation is that he gets is head under the opponents breastbone, not that he is boring in

Rob, you need to go learn something about scrum dynamics. Pick a scrum, any scrum you like, and look at it from directly above. You will be very lucky if you find many where the props are all parallel to the touchlines, and with each other and not pointing in. That is because the lovely ideal of all players in the scrum being perfectly parallel to each other bears no resemblance to reality. The front rowers are shoulder to shoulder or closer but their hips are forced apart by the heads of the two locks. The only way your ideal scrum would be possible is for...

1. All front row players to be exactly the same height and size as each other, and exactly the same width across the shoulders and the hips

2. The three front row players' combined shoulder widths = their combine hip widths plus the head widths of their two locks.

Here is one example of what I am talking about

See how the heads of the locks push the hips of the props away from the hips of their hooker. The spines of Red 1 and 3 are not parallel to Red 2 or each other; the spines of Gold 1 and 3 are also not parallel to Gold 2 or each other. There is simply no possible way they can be.

..and here's a whole lot more

https://www.google.com/search?q=rug...3IKQAQ&ved=0CCQQsAQ&biw=1173&bih=743#imgdii=_

I played LHP for enough years to understand the dynamics, and a few years back, I attended a scrummaging clinic at IRANZ run by Mike Cron, NZ's foremost scrum coach. It was fascinating. I wish I knew when I was a player and a referee what I know now. I would have been a lot better at both.

 

[OB..]

If a prop is not allowed to push in any direction other than directly forwards and parallel to the touchlines, then how is it possible for a scrum to turn. Every scrum ought to be a PK unless to is pushed ramrod straight.

I don't think the underlined bit is a criterion after the scrum starts because of the problem you identify. For me the front row should maintain a straight(ish) line when wheeling - just like a wheeling platoon of well trained marching soldiers.