[Scrum] Front row collapse

[ChrisR]

Watching this:

Full replay - North Harbour v Counties-Manukau

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nl2UW87X1wI

At 15:20 on the YouTube clock. Scrum to White, ball goes in but front row goes down. Peep! PK to White.

My thoughts:

Scrum still squirrelly when the ball goes in, ball is at the back and I'd play advantage (as per law changes 2016) and let the ball get away or reset to White (as per 20.3 that's still on the books).

If you agree with the PK, what is your call?

 

[Pegleg]

PK is the right call for me. Yes advantage could be played. But: You can't say you'd call PK or reset its either an offence if so it is PK or advantge or no offence so it is reset or play on.

In the position I would say a PK was the right option.

 

[ChrisR]

Hmm. I don't see a C & O infringement by the LH. Yes, he goes down and in but the TH is getting a lot of leverage on his arm (tho not binding directly on it) and the TH is almost on his knees pulling down. The TH gets pats on the head for winning the PK.

I think that the game is better served by getting the ball away instead of rewarding negative play by the front rows.

 

[Pegleg]

LHP initiates the collapse.THP has nowhere else to go.

 

[Chris_j]

At about 20:00 on the game clock no one strikes and the ball rolls into the second row without contact. My whistle would blow.

 

[DocY]

I was actually looking at the other side - looked like red TH angling in to me (though I don't think that's what the penalty was actually given for).

In terms of playing advantage, I think he could have done, but it goes back to the second-guessing the players debate from a few weeks ago. I can't see any team in that situation not wanting the penalty.

 

[ChrisR]

LHP initiates the collapse.THP has nowhere else to go.

This is good example of why scrums are a problem. We both see the same thing, with the benefit of slomo/freezeframe and arrive at different interpretations.

The referee on the spot has to make that decision in a second. By trying to eradicate front row mischief by penalty I think we've made it worse. When the TH gets pats on the head from his mates that tells me something.

 

[DocY]

By trying to eradicate front row mischief by penalty I think we've made it worse. When the TH gets pats on the head from his mates that tells me something.

Indeed - it's just too much as a penalty generator.

I heard of a ref once saying "I'm not going to give any penalties against the FR, so stop looking for them!" and apparently it worked. Not sure how much truth there is in it, but I doubt a televised ref could get away with it!

 

[Camquin]

It has to come from the top.
The problem is really only at professional level - in 90% of games scrums work.
But those games are not on TV.
So the public impression is rugby is about waiting around while big men mess about and a penalty is given for reasons nobody understands.

One possible solution is to de-power the penalty, for example to ban place kicks and/or go back to turning over possession at lineouts following a penalty.

 

[Pegleg]

At about 20:00 on the game clock no one strikes and the ball rolls into the second row without contact. My whistle would blow.

Now your being silly. Are you inventing some sort of not straight law now?

 

[Pegleg]

I was actually looking at the other side - looked like red TH angling in to me (though I don't think that's what the penalty was actually given for).

In terms of playing advantage, I think he could have done, but it goes back to the second-guessing the players debate from a few weeks ago. I can't see any team in that situation not wanting the penalty.

For me the position the LH ends up in is sugesting he has not been turned. In real time it happens so quick. So I can see the PK beign given either way.

 

[Pegleg]

This is good example of why scrums are a problem. We both see the same thing, with the benefit of slomo/freezeframe and arrive at different interpretations.

The referee on the spot has to make that decision in a second. By trying to eradicate front row mischief by penalty I think we've made it worse. When the TH gets pats on the head from his mates that tells me something.

The pat on the head Can easily suggest that also it can, and often does, say that you've go the better of him and he had to go illegal to defend.

 

[Pegleg]

I heard of a ref once saying "I'm not going to give any penalties against the FR, so stop looking for them!" and apparently it worked. Not sure how much truth there is in it, but I doubt a televised ref could get away with it!

Happy days! Illegal all day and the fools is going to do nothing about it! Mayhem generator.

 

[ChrisR]

The pat on the head Can easily suggest that also it can, and often does, say that you've go the better of him and he had to go illegal to defend.

The TH did get the better of the LH. However, what is the LH's offence? He's not boring in. He gets his head pulled down and can't recover. He's at fault (head below hips) but the cause is the LH. Should his failure get him PK'd?


If it's only a problem in the pro game then the solution has to come from the organizers. If resets, FKs and PKs are a blight then they are diminishing the value of the entertainment and that will cost the organizers $$$. By fining teams for collapses (and teams passing this on to players) then players ultimately will pay for their mischief.

 

[Pegleg]

He's pulling down from the start. He's also the firsrt one going in. Look at his body position at the end. It's controlled.