[Scrum] Has "Bind" become the new "Set"?

[ChrisR]

We've touched on this before but during the WRWC final Joy Neville reset a scrum after they engaged at 'bind' and insisted on maintaing a gap before "Set".

This is in sharp contrast with what I've seen in the NZ vs. Oz matches. Was NO addressing this at the second scrum? If so nothing changed.

I'm OK with no gap as long as stability isn't compromised.

 

[Guyseep]

At the level I ref at, I find that early in the game there is a clear gap between bind and set. However, into the second half I find that the teams develop a rhythm and the gap disappears. There is still a slight hit on the set, but the gap is not really there.

To be honest I am ok with this. As long as the scrum is stable, there's no early push and the ball is put in straight, I say we just get on with it.

 

[ChrisR]

Likewise. The only issue would be if one side were taking the gap and putting their ops on their heels. However, I think that would show up as an 'early shove'. That could become a tactic as the SH can now 'quick feed' the ball on set.

 

[Phil E]

Q - Has "Bind" become the new "Set"?

A - Only if you let it.

NB: ignore what happens on TV

 

[tim White]

If you are checking the 'crouch', 'bind' and 'set' at each stage before you proceed to the next ("as quickly as you allow me to") that should prevent early shoves. Do not ignore players taking control of the engagement because you can see things that they cannot, and if they take control of this aspect of the game they will try the same tactic all over the pitch