[Scrum] Feeding

[mcroker]

Watching the Eng-SA game it looks like we have given up on any pretence of a straight feed. Some of the SA put-ins were direct to the back row (England may have been as bad but I didn’t notice).

 

[ChrisR]

Yep. The overhead shots left no doubt, didn't they. Sad!

 

[Zebra1922]

Another difference between the TV game and ‘real’ rugby. Keep enforcing it wherever you referee and all will be right with the world. Bloomim’ annoying they can’t enforce something so simple at the top level. A free kick would solve a lot of those reset scrum problems.

 

[mcroker]

Here's an example ... not even sure it was the worst https://youtu.be/i0UFrqBSd5I?t=180

 

[CrouchTPEngage]

For me , the most clear and obvious aberration from the laws in this game. Constantly ignored.
Is there no way to compete for the ball ?

 

[Pinky]

Even with this feeding, the scrum has become a contest to win a penalty, and not just a restart to the game after a minor infringement.

 

[Arabcheif]

When I'm on the side lines watching my team play, I see blatant feeding happening at grass routes too. From our 9 too tbf. Although he generally throws it in just behind the hookers foot, rather than really far back. When I'm in the scrum I see an early strike from the opp hooker, so it's prob to counter this. That being said, most against the head scrums I've seen are through the defending team driving the team with the put-in back, so I don't really see the issue with feeding, would it be sorely missed if were no longer in the laws?

 

[mcroker]

Well I think scrums should be a contest... although it's not that easy to manage on my own at grass-roots level when you are simultaneously managing the rest of the scrum, and the offside lines. I tend to focus on the binds/shove etc. which are all more of a safety-issue.

 

[Arabcheif]

I agree, contests are great. But it's mainly a driving contest so a slight feed wouldn't really be gain a massive advantage as long as it's not directly to the No 8.

 

[didds]

other than if the slight feed takes away any chance of a strike by the oppo hooker so you now are back to the oppo all driving ... which may or may not create other problems

didds

 

[ChrisR]

The game has changed and perhaps it's time to take a hard look at where we're at, what is salvageable and what is not.

Much as I would like to return to the days when scrums were a contest of skill and a front row could win the ball against the head that time is past. And it's not coming back. Even if the "offset SH" was rescinded it wouldn't change feeding or the defensive 8-man shove. They are simply ingrained into the game and won't go away so let's accept that fact and deal with the more important issue of scrums failing to go to completion and being a penalty engine.

I remember a prominent coach remarking that they no longer bother to work on play from scrums because it was a waste of time as they couldn't rely on the scrum going to completion. I thought at the time that was sad then my next thought was to wonder how much time his team spent working on disruptive tactics in the scrum to deny their ops clean ball.

I do think that with the change to scrum engagement that things are improving. We've come a long way from this:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXmC_fku15Y

and I really don't want to go back there.

 

[Dickie E]

Well I think scrums should be a contest... although it's not that easy to manage on my own at grass-roots level when you are simultaneously managing the rest of the scrum, and the offside lines. I tend to focus on the binds/shove etc. which are all more of a safety-issue.

make sure scrum is stationary & square before letting SH feed. If it is, then the only thing you need to be looking at is the feed.

 

[didds]

The game has changed and perhaps it's time to take a hard look at where we're at, what is salvageable and what is not.

Much as I would like to return to the days when scrums were a contest of skill and a front row could win the ball against the head that time is past. And it's not coming back. Even if the "offset SH" was rescinded it wouldn't change feeding or the defensive 8-man shove.

Well, I hear what ChrisR is saying and I sympathise.

But all the time the oppo hooker/FR are not in any likely position to be able to attempt a strike successfully against the hwead then their only legal tactic is a defensive 8 man shove, or whatever other disruptive tactics are available. Its that simple.

Maybe its time to consider the U19 1.5m shove max law/reg? It would be a sad day IMO as an old time prop forward but needs must when the devil drives maybe. Whether it would make any difference we'd have to see of course!

didds

 

[Arabcheif]

Perhaps my skill level is low. Or not being a hooker myself may be the reason I'm not getting the 8 man shove tactic. I thought the defending hooker must attempt the strike too?? At least that's what our refs tell us on Saturday afternoons. If he's striking he can really effectively push??

 

[Decorily]

Perhaps my skill level is low. Or not being a hooker myself may be the reason I'm not getting the 8 man shove tactic. I thought the defending hooker must attempt the strike too?? At least that's what our refs tell us on Saturday afternoons. If he's striking he can really effectively push??

I seriously doubt that multiple refs are telling you that both hookers must strike for the ball!
I suspect you are misunderstanding.

 

[Dan_A]

I thought the defending hooker must attempt the strike too?? At least that's what our refs tell us on Saturday afternoons.

Law 19.22 The hooker from the team which threw in the ball must strike for the ball. Sanction: Free-kick.

https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=19

 

[didds]

Perhaps my skill level is low. Or not being a hooker myself may be the reason I'm not getting the 8 man shove tactic. I thought the defending hooker must attempt the strike too?? At least that's what our refs tell us on Saturday afternoons. If he's striking he can really effectively push??

They're wrong.

Only the side putting in hooker "must strike".

didds

 

[didds]

Another difference between the TV game and ‘real’ rugby. Keep enforcing it wherever you referee and all will be right with the world. Bloomim’ annoying they can’t enforce something so simple at the top level. A free kick would solve a lot of those reset scrum problems.

well (Long playing record time...)

- unless inside one 22 or the other - maybe - a FK is useless. So it generally ends up as a scrum....

of course multiple scrum offenses via ATP ends up as a PK - eventually... presumably... but for repeated offending.

didds

 

[Arabcheif]

I seriously doubt that multiple refs are telling you that both hookers must strike for the ball!
I suspect you are misunderstanding.

I suspect I may be misunderstanding given the law quoted above.

 

[Decorily]

I seriously doubt that multiple refs are telling you that both hookers must strike for the ball!
I suspect you are misunderstanding.

I suspect I may be misunderstanding given the law quoted above.

Possibly you have been told that both hookers MAY strike for the ball as indeed MAY any of the props once the ball is in the tunnel ie no feet up/forward before the ball is in!