Experiences of Crouch-Bind-Set-Yes 9

[Mike Whittaker]

exactly - see my post #144

The 6 referees I have watched so far (panel to L10 in friendlies) have all been consistently clear and audible with 'yes 9' and had no problems whatsoever.

I do of course still respect the views of those who wish for the SH putting in to be the only one who hears the call and look forward to seeing it in practice. Suspect I may have a long wait...

 

[Browner]

The 6 referees I have watched so far (panel to L10 in friendlies) have all been consistently clear and audible with 'yes 9' and had no problems whatsoever.

I do of course still respect the views of those who wish for the SH putting in to be the only one who hears the call and look forward to seeing it in practice. Suspect I may have a long wait...

It's accepted that there might not be any problem with a loud Y9 shout, certainly as scrums get used to the idea that they can't shove before the ball arrives it may work perfectly well. But my suspicion is that Y9 will become the catalyst for 'pressure to increase' ..... similar to 'take the strain' in tug of war, certainly coaches will try to squeeze every advantage they can ......... but we'll wait to see............Personally I can't see much downside to only the scrum halves being advised, is there one/any?

 

[Mike Whittaker]

Personally I can't see much downside to only the scrum halves being advised, is there one/any?

Well if you see it being done in a clear consistent manner so that only the SH putting the ball in hears the Y9 then do say. Practical observation may be of more value than theory?

 

[Browner]

We both know we'll hear audible Y9's , only because it's the 'instruction'! But then, I used to see a time lapsed 'Pause' which was then followed by a loud shout of 'PAUSE' (so that was a double pause then) & that was a poorly thought out instruction that everyone compliantly followed! Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.
Bertrand Russell

 

[OB..]

In theory the referee could give a hand signal. Obviously the tight forwards would not be able to see that.

However if they felt it was important to give an early warning, the opposition scrum half could shout "Ready", thus undoing the supposed benefit of the secret signal.

I think the current "Set" is in fact the equivalent of "Take the strain" in tug of war, which is why the delay by the scrum half should not be too long.

We are still seeing clubs work out how to fit into the new paradigm, so I am happy to wait a few weeks yet to watch it develop.

 

[Dickie E]

We were advised on 17th Sept that we would adopt the new CBS effective 21st Sept but only for 7-a-side. Attached to this communication was a video where the ref says "OK" to the SH

 

[Simon Thomas]

Last weekend, one of my report cards ( the ones I hand to each Captain/Coach ) gave me feedback that I was not insisting the front row are forehead to forehead on/after the Crouch call. Is this mandatory ? I read the above and it seems safer to me to allow front row heads to be to the left slightly , if only because they wont be able to "bind" properly in the next few seconds when I call "Bind!".

I've resorted now to trying to not give advantage to the defending side by saying "Yes 9 , when you're ready". Although the context is important here : I have explained to the 9's, pre-match, that I will penalise any "undue delay" putting the ball in but I don't paint myself into a corner by saying exactly how long this delay is. If I think it's "undue" then I will whistle for it.

Hope this is ok ?

No they should not be forehead to forehead ! You were right to want the heads inthe gap. Ear to ear or if they are messing about even cheek to cheek.

You are required to say "yes 9" whether it be quietly (not my preference) or as is done at Level 5 at a decent invitation volume (as I suggest all our Society's members should do).

 

[Simon Thomas]

The 6 referees I have watched so far (panel to L10 in friendlies) have all been consistently clear and audible with 'yes 9' and had no problems whatsoever.

I do of course still respect the views of those who wish for the SH putting in to be the only one who hears the call and look forward to seeing it in practice. Suspect I may have a long wait...

As it should be Mike for referees under our juristiction and Group, who were asked to say Yes 9 loudly. Jacko / Womble what were Panel recommended to do ?

 

[Phil E]

To expect a referee to say "Yes 9" in such a way that only the SH can hear is riduculous and unworkable I would have to almost whisper in his ear, which means I am now out of position.

 

[Browner]

To expect a referee to say "Yes 9" in such a way that only the SH can hear is riduculous and unworkable I would have to almost whisper in his ear, which means I am now out of position.

I wasn't advocating that 'only' the SH must hear Y9, but that he's the only person that 'needs' to hear it , so speak as loudly as is needed to achieve this. All scrum participants need to react to the ball leaving the scrum half's hands so they have no need to hear Y9.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

As it should be Mike for referees under our juristiction and Group, who were asked to say Yes 9 loudly. Jacko / Womble what were Panel recommended to do ?

Womble gets the 4th official to do it for him.

 

[Jacko]

As it should be Mike for referees under our juristiction and Group, who were asked to say Yes 9 loudly. Jacko / Womble what were Panel recommended to do ?

Not entirely sure they thought to clarify (if they did I don't remember it). Everyone is doing it at normal volume.

 

[OB..]

Womble gets the 4th official to do it for him.

:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

 

[menace]

I don't like the "Yes 9" aspect of the new scrum engagement. It gives the opposing side a heads up as to when the ball is coming in, thereby losing some of the advantage of having the throw in. It also encourages the tight-five to push early.

In the "old days" it was the hooker who indicated that he was ready to have the ball in by tapping his lucy on the shoulder as a signal to the SH. The SH and the hooker would have a pre-arranged cadence, something like TAP - TAP - IN.

IMO, the "Yes 9" should be an invitation to feed the scrum, not an instruction to do so.

From what I have seen so far in last niughts test and this weekend's ITM Cup matches in NZ, referees are still getting SH to put the ball in when the scrum is still moving and not square

Crossref take a look at this link, especially para 3, it'll answer your question

http://www.armyrugbyunion.org.uk/wp...rs-Coaches-and-Referee-Update-August-2013.pdf

The 'Yes 9' is only an invitation, therefore, the putting in team still have an element of surprise (all be it very small) with which to feed the ball in

Sorry to drag this up..but it didn't seem to get answered as I hoped it would (or I missed in in the 193 posts).... But WHY the need for 'yes 9' at all? After the 'set' you have exactly what we have (in the south) now...ie a scrum set waiting for the ball. We've allowed the SH latitude when it's S&S to decide when the ball goes in, and only when SH delays will we instruct the SH to put the ball in (assuming we've not pulled it up for some reason).

So why not let that continue to happen and that at the PMB to instruct the SH that ball is not to go in until S&S and once it is then no delay. Why not manage that rather than add a new 'instruction' in? Appreciate if someone could enlighten me.

(I can only think that the Y9 is to prevent the SH putting the ball in the very instance the 'set' is said and a team tries to hit and drive of the ball?).

The reason I bring this up is because NO penalised Nic White last week for putting the ball in before he said Y9! Even though the scrum was S&S - so the FK looked overly officious!

 

[OB..]

(I can only think that the Y9 is to prevent the SH putting the ball in the very instance the 'set' is said and a team tries to hit and drive of the ball?).

Yes. It makes it clear that the referee is happy with the scrum, which seems better than leaving it to the scrum half to decide.

 

[menace]

Thanks OB...is that the only reason?

 

[crossref]

Sorry to drag this up..but it didn't seem to get answered as I hoped it would (or I missed in in the 193 posts).... But WHY the need for 'yes 9' at all? s!

The short answer is because we have been told to
But i would love to lnow Something weird happened over the summer, the yes 9 command was very much a last minute afterthought , after the training materials and best practice videos were made. We even had RFU trainer visiting our club in august who didn't know about it .
Would love to know how that happened, and really like to know whether yes9 has ever been trialled anywhere

 

[beckett50]

It puzzles me as well.
Having played 9 I never had a "Yes 9". It was the engage then down to me to signal the hooker i was ready and wait for his tap.
Perhaps it's symptomatic of society's desire to take responsibility away from people?!

 

[ddjamo]

Sorry to drag this up..but it didn't seem to get answered as I hoped it would (or I missed in in the 193 posts).... But WHY the need for 'yes 9' at all? After the 'set' you have exactly what we have (in the south) now...ie a scrum set waiting for the ball. We've allowed the SH latitude when it's S&S to decide when the ball goes in, and only when SH delays will we instruct the SH to put the ball in (assuming we've not pulled it up for some reason).

So why not let that continue to happen and that at the PMB to instruct the SH that ball is not to go in until S&S and once it is then no delay. Why not manage that rather than add a new 'instruction' in? Appreciate if someone could enlighten me.

(I can only think that the Y9 is to prevent the SH putting the ball in the very instance the 'set' is said and a team tries to hit and drive of the ball?).

The reason I bring this up is because NO penalised Nic White last week for putting the ball in before he said Y9! Even though the scrum was S&S - so the FK looked overly officious!

US we are instructed to stay out of it if the 9 can handle the task properly.

no instruction from canada yet on the y9 - mandatory or not.

 

[OB..]

Thanks OB...is that the only reason?

It puzzles me as well.
Having played 9 I never had a "Yes 9". It was the engage then down to me to signal the hooker i was ready and wait for his tap.
Perhaps it's symptomatic of society's desire to take responsibility away from people?!

In order to get rid of the hit, which was aimed at destabilising the scrum, you MUST have a pause after the engagement. If you allow the scrum half to determine that, you will get the hit return through the back door. The referee needs to determine when the scrum is steady and correctly aligned. That is best done by giving some indication to the scrum half that he may now throw the ball in.

It looks as though they were originally happy to leave it to the referee to decide how to do that, but I have no problem with a standard phrase - the precise wording does not really matter.