[Scrum] "Modern" interpretations of scrum dominance.

[didds]

I suppose this is prompted by SAs's demolition of England yesterday but I don't want this to appear sour grapes - I just think it warrants a discussion. Neither am I looking for any solutions necessarily, or changes... just a chat.

So. there are two scrum PK laws in particular involved in my opening of debate.

* pushing straight. Introduced to prevent boring in particular ie to cmabt negative and potentially dangerous play

* all 8 bound all the time - introduced to keep backrows attached to provide space for backs to attack in .

However... what we have seen for several years (and at least since 2012 when England demolished Ireland at scrum time) that the two laws are used to PK a team that gets destroyed at the scrum. As indeed SA destroyed England yesterday. The dominant scrum shoves the oppo back and inevitably given the natural wheel on the loose head often turns the oppo with sheer power. The back row comes disjointed not because they choose to unbind but because when your prop gets shoved back into your face and you double up as you feet can t move quickly enough backwards - or your prop disappear in front of you and you cant keep up. So that's a PK. But its nothing to do with the BR choosing to unbind to gain an advantage in defence. its just cos they cant move quickly enough So they are not PKd for the reason the law was intended. Meanwhile as the scrum screws those on the right side are getting shoved backwards typically into a position of unable to shove properly (feet get caught up underneath them). So now they get done for not pushing straight - but not because they are trying to negate the opposition shove but because of it.

In short, I've been disquieted by the move that has made the scrum a penalty machine. I have said this for many many years now, its not just cos England got smashed! I'm uncomfortable with it because the scrum is intended to restart the game after a minor "infringement" or error. Not to provide 3 poiunts.

I balance that concern over a thought that the dominant side deserve their just rewards - but here I do feel that those just rewards are that the oppo are stuffed and out of position when the ball comes free. Maybe that should be reward enough.

Thoughts?

didds

 

[L'irlandais]

This discussion French scrums may interest you. I am convinced that scrums are reff’d somewhat differently here in France. Leading Jérôme Garcès to reward the dominant scrum.

 

[beckett50]

didds I understand the points you are trying to make but find that I am not in agreement.

With regard to the back rows unbinding on a scrum going backwards, if it can be achieved at grassroots level then the professionals should be capable of so doing. Taking your argument to its logical conclusion the Front Rows and the Locks should also not be able to remain bound because of the swift movement of their feet - unless I am seeing a different picture that which you are trying to paint.

I was comfortable with the manner in which the Penalties were achieved by RSA in the Final, but I did think that the first Joe Marler scrum should have been a PK to England, but then I am only going on the TV feed.

I do have a problem with the dominant LH moving across once his scrum get the 'go forward' at scrum. IMO this puts pressure on the neck of his opposite number and only serves to drive this player to stand up. Ironically it is illegal for a FR player to drive their opposition up, and yet we see this all the time from eh dominant scrum going forward. Sometimes we, as referees, will spot it and penalise it but very often we are looking at the external picture and making decisions based upon these.

 

[crossref]

Perhaps PK from a scrum should not allow a kick at goal

Or perhaps scrums should have maximum 5m travel .. so any team can stay on feet

 

[CrouchTPEngage]

I have some sympathy with this view. Indeed I found myself saying "Scrums are not Penalty Generators !" to the captian of the dominant scrummaging team at my last game. He was under the opinion that his team should automatically get a PK becasue they went forward a bit in the scrum.
If the weaker team are still bound and not standing up and not deliberatly wheeling, then its hard for me to award a PK just for dominance.
I find U19 law of 1.5 metres max push a bit hard to police. 8 guys, bound together going forward cannot stop on a sixpence.!

I really liked that idea of a special "Scrum PK" where you can't kick at goal. Would need to think that though a bit to see what the implications are.

 

[Dickie E]

I agree with Didds. If a team gets monstered at a maul and disintegrate, it is play on. Maybe similar for scrums?

Radical idea: maybe if a team commits a PK offence at the scrum (collapsing, unbinding, etc) the opposition scrum should be allowed to pick the ball up and turn it into a rolling maul.

 

[TigerCraig]

I don't like the "second shove" being used to win penalties.

You've already won the ball, you are 30 metres out so pushover try is out of the equation. Just get the ball out and get on with the game.

IMO all scrum penalties should allow kick for touch and throw in, but no kicks at goal (but then I would also make all kicks at goal drop kicks, so penalties in the red zone are still kickable, but 40m out would take something special)

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

(but then I would also make all kicks at goal drop kicks, so penalties in the red zone are still kickable, but 40m out would take something special)

At last - a viable reason to stop picking Eliot Daly!

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Give a time limit for the ball to be in a scrum / ruck / maul. Make as much ground as you can in X seconds. You have "go forward " ball etc.

Pushovers allowed within Y distance of the goal line.

The fatties still get to have their game before the "Hairspray" boys get to knock the ball on and we all start again.

 

[beckett50]

Give a time limit for the ball to be in a scrum / ruck / maul. Make as much ground as you can in X seconds. You have "go forward " ball etc.

Pushovers allowed within Y distance of the goal line.

The fatties still get to have their game before the "Hairspray" boys get to knock the ball on and we all start again.

Just like a scrum has to formed within 30 seconds of the referee making the mark?

Can really see that working at showbiz level, not! :biggrin:

 

[crossref]

I would go for a maximum distance
If the scrum moves 5m then the referee will call use it, and the ball must be used immediately.

If the scrum is a 5m scrum then law does not apply and pushover tries allowed

 

[didds]

I would go for a maximum distance
If the scrum moves 5m then the referee will call use it, and the ball must be used immediately.

If the scrum is a 5m scrum then law does not apply and pushover tries allowed

I actually reckon that's a decent idea - but it unfortunately (?) creates a line call for the ref. "Sorry guys - this scrum is for a knock on 5.1m out from the line so no push over from here"

didds

 

[ianh5979]

Back in my playing days we had a pushover from more than 15 metres, back then no thought from opposition of collapse, whether winning or losing scrum contest you fought to the end, no wheeling, collapsing or standing up

 

[OB..]

I remember being at Twickenham many years ago in the old South Stand on a freezing cold day. The pitch was frozen and England pushed Ireland back from 5 meters out (or was it yards?). The Irish forwards could not get a grip, but they remained bound as they slid backwards.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Just like a scrum has to formed within 30 seconds of the referee making the mark?

Can really see that working at showbiz level, not! :biggrin:

Well we know none of it will work if thelaws are not used. All our discussions are pointless when you accept that WR has the "unwritten" law book hidden away.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I actually reckon that's a decent idea - but it unfortunately (?) creates a line call for the ref. "Sorry guys - this scrum is for a knock on 5.1m out from the line so no push over from here"

didds

That is why I go for time. If yo ucan pus hthe length of the field in 10 seconds good luck to you.

If yo usay 5 meters you get your scenario. Alternatively a side might take a minute to move half a yard (remember that French(?) video) % / 10 15 seconds and that is all the game time that gets eaten up and the scrong scrum get rewarded by territory.

 

[crossref]

This discussion I think has been mostly about show biz rugby

What about grassroots rugby. How do people manage the situation where one team is driving the other back , until eventually things fall apart

Lots of PK in the same way ? Something else ?

 

[TigerCraig]

This discussion I think has been mostly about show biz rugby

What about grassroots rugby. How do people manage the situation where one team is driving the other back , until eventually things fall apart

Lots of PK in the same way ? Something else ?

"Captain, you know you're better than them, they know you're better than them and I know you're better than them. Everyone works on Monday. Win the ball, don't destroy them and I wont go uncontested"

 

[didds]

This discussion I think has been mostly about show biz rugby

What about grassroots rugby. How do people manage the situation where one team is driving the other back , until eventually things fall apart

Lots of PK in the same way ? Something else ?

Id agree - largely. But I do see level scrums winning PKs in this way. Whether that is a deliberate tactic by the PK winners, or a happy (for them!) by product is open to conjecture...

didds

 

[didds]

"Captain, you know you're better than them, they know you're better than them and I know you're better than them. Everyone works on Monday. Win the ball, don't destroy them and I wont go uncontested"

But surely only if the destruction is becoming unsafe? If its just a case as per what we saw last saturday of the beaten side losing players off the edges, and spinning around loosely with nobody standing up or ending up on the ground, that's not unsafe (certainly compared to a huge smash tackle! LOL ) so why make such a "threat" ?

didds