Experience with the non-verbal

[crossref]

but are we supposed to be working out what non-verbal signal works for us, or are we supposed to be following the guidance we were given (a tap)

 

[Ian_Cook]

What a crap comparison, He's better than you. A better comparison would be the 100m , One competitor gets a 'notice' that the gun is about to go off, resulting in him getting his feet out of the blocks before his opponent ! [hereafter to be known as "going on the 'B' of the Bonnet" The feed advantage is sufficient in having your hooker closer to the ball. That's enough. Additional notifications created additional advantages ....... I'm arguing that it is against the 'spirt' of the TLoTG.

& having the opposition get the advantage of feed is sufficient punishment. Where does Law say one team gets a signal to give advance notice of feed to one side?

Lets take your position to its logical conclusion shall we?

:sarc: We should do away with line-out calls, since its manifestly unfair that the players in the throwing team have the advantage of knowing who the thrower is going to throw to, while their opposition don't.

:sarc: We should make it illegal for teams to have pre-planned backline moves. Its so unfair that they are allowed to have the advantage by planning to do something that the opposition don't know about.

:sarc: We should make it illegal for teams to do something tricky at the kick off/restart/drop-out, such as kicking in a different direction from where the forwards have lined up. They are gaining an unfair advantage by doing so.

:sarc: Dummy-passing and no-look offloads should be illegal, since you know you are going to do it and your opponent doesn't, so that's not fair!

Perhaps these will make you realise that your standpoint is ridiculous and completely untenable, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Browner]

A crap comparison, now compounded by some extremely tenuous linking. But for the sake of 'sport' i'll play along. :sarc:1. could also fall into the same thinking [indeed line out calls used to be verbal & available to all ears [even code breaking ones] , before secretive huddling became vogue] , it is a restart it should require a fair contest for possession, the key fairness is that both teams can equally see when the Hooker commences his re-introduction of the ball, and this differs in the scrum because only one hooker 'feels' the commencement. You're bright, you'll understand the subtle difference, 'hopefully' . :sarc:2 = isn't a restart, it's game play. :sarc:3 = no hidden commencement :sarc:4=isn't a restart, it's game play.

 

[Browner]

If it had been left to me to decide what I wanted to do, this is exactly what I would have gone with.

My asylum, has a few memberships available ! :biggrin:

 

[crossref]

but Browner a scrum is designed so that one team has an inbuilt advantage over the other. that's how it is supposed to be.

'fair' doesn't mean designed to give a 50/50 chance. Otherwise the ref would have to put it in (after spinning a coin perhaps to decide which side)

 

[Browner]

but are we supposed to be working out what non-verbal signal works for us, or are we supposed to be following the guidance we were given (a tap)

IRB have shown it's a trial that is still subject to 'improvement' ... [although where they get their 'quality' feedback from is anyone's guess] Try it & see, some of us are old enough to remember scrums before Y9, Tapping & suchlike........Toby says it makes his lanky life difficult, so why not find a better [workable?] alternative......... as an aside I'd also have the non feeding scrumhalf an arms length away from the feeder , he can quickly make up this ground 'post feed' & it removes all pre-feed jostling, treading on feet, stepping across space or sneaky tapping, with the added incentive of improving vision of binding.................. Try this out chaps in friendlies, then decide on whether it improves or worsens scrum management.

 

[Browner]

but Browner a scrum is designed so that one team has an inbuilt advantage over the other. that's how it is supposed to be.

'fair' doesn't mean designed to give a 50/50 chance. Otherwise the ref would have to put it in (after spinning a coin perhaps to decide which side)

Scrum construction [hooker closer if you choose so] is fundamentally different than covert advantage creation, think it through CR matey.

 

[crossref]

it's different, yes, but i don't see it as fundamentally different, in both cases they give an advantage to the team putting in.

another advantage by design is the slightly different offside law that applies to the two SHs. (2 feet/1 feet beind ball)

all these things contrive to mean that the side awarded the scrum have inbuilt advantages and are most likely to win it . that's by design.

the clever thing is that these advantages are not overwhelming : the other team still have a chance!

 

[OB..]

& having the opposition get the advantage of feed is sufficient punishment. Where does Law say one team gets a signal to give advance notice of feed to one side?

It does not comment on the possibility, so no conclusions can be drawn.

When I started playing it was standard practice for the scrum half to say "Ball coming in ... NOW". His hooker would know the timing. Fairly soon it became the practice for the hooker to tap when he was ready. That has been going on for many years. It is therefore sanctioned (in the other sense) by custom. You are swimming against the tide.

 

[Toby Warren]

conceptually, what's against you standing further back & the scrum half turning his head to see the same signal that you give when on the non feed side of the scrum......... in other words why is SH looking at the scrum so important, referee decides it's S&S enough not him & the 0.25s that it takes for him to turn back won't ruin things? ....just a thought.

Good idea but can't do it as it's against the express guidance I have on the topic.

 

[Ian_Cook]

cornwall just called....

:biggrin:

 

[Browner]

It does not comment on the possibility, so no conclusions can be drawn.

When I started playing it was standard practice for the scrum half to say "Ball coming in ... NOW". His hooker would know the timing. Fairly soon it became the practice for the hooker to tap when he was ready. That has been going on for many years. It is therefore sanctioned (in the other sense) by custom. You are swimming against the tide.

Yep, tapping the hand was definitely invented by someone, as was ...."hit & walk at scrum", "hinging", "screen running", "bridging", "saddle rolling" "SH picking the ball out of scrum-rather than no8 stepping over it" ................... & just because they are used it doesn't make their use Lawful.

 

[Browner]

Good idea but can't do it as it's against the express guidance I have on the topic.

I used it again today in a U17's friendly match [top6 CB standard] with the agreement of both coaches beforehand, neither scrum half had an issue with it - it worked perfect, afterwards they both agreed that them "looking at me" mean't consistency on both sides of the scrum ...... interestingly one of the coaches said " and it stops their 9 tapping ours !! .......... my PMB [which included the coaches] included my words of "it allows me to stand further back & get a better view of not straight feeds and hookers foot up too early"..... guess what , not a single FK for either during the match. ............. both coaches thought it helped improve things .......................... Y9 was a trial, Tapping is still a trial, consider the subject gents !

 

[OB..]

Yep, tapping the hand was definitely invented by someone, as was ...."hit & walk at scrum", "hinging", "screen running", "bridging", "saddle rolling" "SH picking the ball out of scrum-rather than no8 stepping over it" ................... & just because they are used it doesn't make their use Lawful.

Are you trying to argue that tapping is illegal? Or just trying to muddy the waters?

 

[Browner]

I'm showing that your argument that things have become 'custom' is irrelevant. The Hooker flapping his hand to signal i'm set & ready - is fine. The SH9 tapping the hooker to signal 'i'm about to put it in' should be stopped, as such 'preferential notice' is contrary to fair play principals for restarting play. ........................ we all acknowledge your history referencing ability OB, so - when did this practice start, who started it?

 

[ChrisR]

Browner, you're talking rubbish.

 

[Browner]

Browner, you're talking rubbish.

the sum total of that contribution ! :booty:

 

[OB..]

I'm showing that your argument that things have become 'custom' is irrelevant.

Hardly. You are simply making a claim.

The Hooker flapping his hand to signal i'm set & ready - is fine. The SH9 tapping the hooker to signal 'i'm about to put it in' should be stopped, as such 'preferential notice' is contrary to fair play principals for restarting play.

Both signals are unknown to the opposing forwards, so what do you see as different? In both cases the opposing scrum half can see what is happening and can shout if he wishes. I see no basis for you belief that it is unfair. Do you penalise players for doing it?

........................ we all acknowledge your history referencing ability OB, so - when did this practice start, who started it?

No idea. Don't care.

 

[Browner]

"Sanctioned by custom" an interesting phrase OB, as were unstraight feeds for 10 years ? Nah.

 

[OB..]

"Sanctioned by custom" an interesting phrase OB, as were unstraight feeds for 10 years ? Nah.

Are you seriously saying that nobody complained about crooked feeds?

I have never heard anyone but you argue against the tap signal.