[Scrum] Early Engage

[SmeejDad]

CROUCH - BIND - SET!

As I explain in my PMB every week - 'I want a definite controlled gap between the bind and the set call, please don't go early' - but obviously they do go early. So in the first instance I will usually blow the whistle and call a reset, and then reinforce the point. Often this will fix the problem at that particular scrum.

The problem then becomes that it keeps happening throughout the game, and I find myself resetting a lot of scrums without sanction. But here's my issue - if both teams are pre-engaging at the same time, sort of leaning onto eachother, which one do I sanction?

I am not willing to let them go when they please, they are capable of controlling it as they have shown in earlier scrums, but how do I award a free kick either way when they are both engaging early simultaneously?!

Thanks in advance,
SD

 

[Wedgie]

Ideally, yes, we want a gap and then shoulders together on SET (and that is in my brief). But down at L10/11 where I ref, many (most?) front rows are incapable of this even at the start of the match, let alone when they get tired. Thus if they both come together on bind and there is nothing else going on, I just let them get on with it - everybody wants a match. If it is continually only one team, then they get pinged.

 

[didds]

how do I award a free kick either way when they are both engaging early simultaneously?!

Thanks in advance,
SD

esepcially if they FK award is then taken as a scrum anyway.

didds

 

[TheBFG]

"Ear to Ear" at the bind, but as Wedgie said (no disrespected) I wouldn't worry too much at your level, as long as no side are getting an advantage from it!

That said, if you're saying you want it in your PMB you're going to loose a bit of cred if you don't enforce it, might be worth leaving it out, but using it as you move up the levels?

 

[Nigib]

It will carry on as long as you let it.

If you tell them at the PMB that it must happen, then don't enforce it, you will lose authority. I say that I expect to see shoulders apart on the bind, which enables me to let things go if they are obviously knackered. Another approach is to stop the scrum, encourage them to do it and suggest they put heads against shoulder on bind.

If you really can't tell who went first, you have to let it go or make a decision to ping one or other; be careful not to do that close to the goal-line

A saving grace is that 97% of the time you can see someone go first; the rest of the time no-one can see anyway, so can't question your decision, and both front rows will know they've gone early so can't grumble.

Stick to Ask/Tell/Penalise - ping early on and they are less likely to try it on continually. I find it also helps if you tell them it's a safety issue which could directly affect them if things go wrong.

 

[Rich_NL]

I suspect that if you say "I think Red was fractionally first; if Red engages early again it'll be FK to Blue" then you'll know that the next early engage (if any) will come from Blue

 

[Guyseep]

I find that early in the game the gap is kept but as the game progresses that gap disappears and there is shoulder contact at the bind stage.

As long as there is no pushing and everyone is square, and no team gets an advantage, this lack of a gap actually a good thing. If the idea behind changing the cadence to Crouch-Bind-Set was to eliminate the hit then having some pre-contact before the set makes it even more difficult to have a "hit" at the scrum.

I would look at the result of the scrum engagement and if it is square and stable, then get on with it. There's no reason to reset the scrum just to be pedantic.

 

[Nigib]

I suspect that if you say "I think Red was fractionally first; if Red engages early again it'll be FK to Blue" then you'll know that the next early engage (if any) will come from Blue

but if you saw it 'fractionally first' then you surely should ping it? I use the 'saw you move at the same time' approach as it warns you are looking, but didn't let anyone get away with it.

 

[didds]

I use the 'saw you move at the same time' approach as it warns you are looking, but didn't let anyone get away with it.

except presumably you let both of them get away with it as you cant FK both sides at the same time? Or you FK one side amnd lety thekm know their oppo did exactly the same as them but have won a FK (FWTW!)



didds

 

[Taff]

esepcially if they FK award is then taken as a scrum anyway.

It won't be an issue if the FK is awarded to the weaker side. Eg if Red are being pulverised at the scrum and are given a FK - their hardly going to opt for another scrum are they!

 

[didds]

It won't be an issue if the FK is awarded to the weaker side. Eg if Red are being pulverised at the scrum and are given a FK - their hardly going to opt for another scrum are they!

you'd imagine not. But you - like me - see teams/captains making the oddest decisions.

why does team that cannot buy a lineout kick for touch at a PK? defeats me!

didds

 

[ChrisR]

I find that early in the game the gap is kept but as the game progresses that gap disappears and there is shoulder contact at the bind stage.

As long as there is no pushing and everyone is square, and no team gets an advantage, this lack of a gap actually a good thing. If the idea behind changing the cadence to Crouch-Bind-Set was to eliminate the hit then having some pre-contact before the set makes it even more difficult to have a "hit" at the scrum.

I would look at the result of the scrum engagement and if it is square and stable, then get on with it. There's no reason to reset the scrum just to be pedantic.

Yes and Yes!

CBS was introduced to eliminate the 'hit' and get control of the scrums post engage. If the scrum is stable, square and stationary after "Set" then why break it up and start all over again? To exercise your authority? If one side takes a step back on "set" then their ops are getting an edge and so step in. Otherwise, let it be.

 

[beckett50]

CROUCH - BIND - SET!

As I explain in my PMB every week - 'I want a definite controlled gap between the bind and the set call, please don't go early' - but obviously they do go early. So in the first instance I will usually blow the whistle and call a reset, and then reinforce the point. Often this will fix the problem at that particular scrum.

The problem then becomes that it keeps happening throughout the game, and I find myself resetting a lot of scrums without sanction. But here's my issue - if both teams are pre-engaging at the same time, sort of leaning onto eachother, which one do I sanction?

I am not willing to let them go when they please, they are capable of controlling it as they have shown in earlier scrums, but how do I award a free kick either way when they are both engaging early simultaneously?!

Thanks in advance,
SD

Why dig yourself a hole?

As others have said, if you say you want it in your brief and then don't enforce it any credibility starts to evaporate - especially at scrum time.

Better to either leave it or tell them how you will call the engage.

How about something along the lines of "I'll try and keep the timing as constant as I can so let's all work together"

Happy whistling

 

[The Fat]

Try getting in the pre-engage position, a front row player is expected to hold, with a couple of other refs or mates away from your game during the week. It is easier now with CBS than it was with CTPE, but it does get tiring especially for lower grade players.

How quickly/slowly are you making your calls? i.e. are you holding them in the C & B positions longer than necessary?

I know there seems to be a lot of things to check at each call. Maybe you are taking too long to go through that check list?

Crouch: Height & alignment, head positions, props' hips straight, stable etc etc etc.
You need to get a picture of what a good "crouch" set up looks like so you don't hold them there while you're going, "Head positions? Check. Height and alignment? Well maybe red are a bit too low/ Are their heads below their hips? I'll just get a better look at that", yadda yadda yadda. If you have a good mental picture of what you want, you will pick the item/items that aren't right very quickly.

Bind: Same deal. A good mental picture. Nice long binds on the body (not on the shorts or an arm). Allow a little shuffling of feet for them to settle and when stable go to final "set" call.

You need to have those pictures in your mind so you can get through the C & B calls without too much dicking around. After the "set" call, you can talk them through getting square & stable and you have a little more time up your sleeve.

Gap: If they are both going early, the gap may be too great between the FRs and they may simply be over extending on the "bind" call and can't physically hold in the pre-engage position. Consider getting them to close the gap just a little prior to the "crouch" call. It's just a quick word to the hookers during their set up, "Just a little closer thanks guys".

Stability is your goal. Get a stable scrum and you'll have a pretty good day.

 

[Decorily]

Another approach is to stop the scrum, encourage them to do it and suggest they put heads against shoulder on bind.

I would strongly advise against suggesting this! !!

 

[Dickie E]

The 2 front rows might be standing too close to each other prior to "crouch". Try opening the gap.

 

[Drift]

CROUCH - BIND - SET!

As I explain in my PMB every week - 'I want a definite controlled gap between the bind and the set call, please don't go early' - but obviously they do go early. So in the first instance I will usually blow the whistle and call a reset, and then reinforce the point. Often this will fix the problem at that particular scrum.

The problem then becomes that it keeps happening throughout the game, and I find myself resetting a lot of scrums without sanction. But here's my issue - if both teams are pre-engaging at the same time, sort of leaning onto eachother, which one do I sanction?

I am not willing to let them go when they please, they are capable of controlling it as they have shown in earlier scrums, but how do I award a free kick either way when they are both engaging early simultaneously?!

Thanks in advance,
SD

Non feeding side is usually a good place to start.

 

[Rich_NL]

but if you saw it 'fractionally first' then you surely should ping it? I use the 'saw you move at the same time' approach as it warns you are looking, but didn't let anyone get away with it.

If it's not clear and obvious, but you have your suspicions, you can better warn than ping on the assumption, surely?

 

[Phil E]

How about something along the lines of "I'll try and keep the timing as constant as I can so let's all work together"

The timing is entirely up to them.

 

[Decorily]

The timing is entirely up to them.

Maybe not entirely. ..but very good point.