Scrum engagement

[Mipper]

During my game at the weekend I had an interesting scrum dynamic between a young Tight Head and an 'experienced' Loose Head. I would welcome your thoughts.

So the situation was thus;
The TH got into a low, dynamic position at crouch. The LH not so low, not so dynamic.
At bind, the LH (in my view) did not get low enough, and effectively put his head against the TH shoulder, which meant that the TH long bind was difficult.

There were other issue going on in the game and front row, but effectively talking to the LH after the game he is of the position that the TH should be higher. I disagreed with him and suggested that he should go lower.

The older front row of the LH team was dominant throughout, and he made the point that he had no need to be illegal. Which was true, but as I pointed out it doesn't mean that he wasnt illegal.

For what its worth, the rest of the game was very much in the younger team's favour.

I understand that without actually seeing this, it may be a difficult situation to comment on, but I would be interested in other's thoughts.

 

[didds]

TH needs to learn his craft. He'll learn more playing that LH than any amount of scrum machine stuff.

WRT TH being lower - why ? law reference etc ?

 

[Mipper]

TH needs to learn his craft. He'll learn more playing that LH than any amount of scrum machine stuff.

WRT TH being lower - why ? law reference etc ?

Yes he will indeed, and thats why I managed it with a relatively light touch. I'm afarid I don't understand your question - the TH was not too low, he was perfectly legal.

 

[Mipper]

Yes he will indeed, and thats why I managed it with a relatively light touch. I'm afarid I don't understand your question - the TH was not too low, he was perfectly legal.

I have edited my original post. It seemed I had complicated the explanation. This may be why I did not follow Didds' question - as I had not explained the situation well.

 

[Phil E]

The six front row need to be the same height.
Was the TH lower than the rest or was the LH higher than the rest?
One of them had to be out of sync with the other 5, that's the person who needs to change.

 

[Mipper]

Yes in my view, quite obviously, the Loose Head was too high.

 

[didds]

so in what way was he too high, and under what law ?

 

[Mipper]

so in what way was he too high, and under what law ?

He wasn't allowing the TH to get a bind as the LH forehead was against the upper arm/shoulder area of the TH. I'm afraid that I do not memorise the law numbers, i'm too old, can't be bothered to look it up but i'm sure that preventing a bind is illegal. In fact I know it is when i'm the ref

 

[didds]

so its not that he was too high but that he was forming with his head on his opponent's shoulder Gotcha. That could happen at any height obviously.

and it is specifically in the laws

19.10
GLOBAL LAW TRIAL

Engagement

• When both sides are square, stable and stationary, the referee calls “crouch”.

1. The front-rows then adopt a crouched position if they have not already done so. Their heads and shoulders are no lower than their hips, a position that is maintained for the duration of the scrum.
2. The front-rows crouch with their heads to the left of their immediate opponents’, so that no player’s head is touching the neck or shoulders of an opponent.
3. Hookers must have a 'brake' foot positioned to help stability and to avoid axial loading.
   
   Sanction: Free-kick.

 

[BikingBud]

During my game at the weekend I had an interesting scrum dynamic between a young Tight Head and an 'experienced' Loose Head. I would welcome your thoughts.

So the situation was thus;
The TH got into a low, dynamic position at crouch. The LH not so low, not so dynamic.
At bind, the LH (in my view) did not get low enough, and effectively put his head against the TH shoulder, which meant that the TH long bind was difficult.

There were other issue going on in the game and front row, but effectively talking to the LH after the game he is of the position that the TH should be higher. I disagreed with him and suggested that he should go lower.

The older front row of the LH team was dominant throughout, and he made the point that he had no need to be illegal. Which was true, but as I pointed out it doesn't mean that he wasnt illegal.

For what its worth, the rest of the game was very much in the younger team's favour.

I understand that without actually seeing this, it may be a difficult situation to comment on, but I would be interested in other's thoughts.

I thought Tom Foley reffed Bristol v Glaws?

Or were you not reflecting upon Genge v Fasogbon:

 

[Marc Wakeham]

If there is a hight missmatch manage it . "TH up bit and LH down a bit" so we have balance. Just because the LH wants to go low it does not mean he can destabalize the scrum (similarly for the TH) .

If the LH is in line with his H and TH and the oppo LH and H who is the one out of synch? (see Phil's Point in post 5 for the answer!). The hight itself is not an issue. BUT if a player is desabalizing the scrum then "Houston we have a problem".

 

[Mipper]

I thought Tom Foley reffed Bristol v Glaws?

Or were you not reflecting upon Genge v Fasogbon:

Rumbled

 

[SimonSmith]

If there is a hight missmatch manage it . "TH up bit and LH down a bit" so we have balance. Just because the LH wants to go low it does not mean he can destabalize the scrum (similarly for the TH) .

If the LH is in line with his H and TH and the oppo LH and H who is the one out of synch? (see Phil's Point in post 5 for the answer!). The hight itself is not an issue. BUT if a player is desabalizing the scrum then "Houston we have a problem".

There was a time that USA Rugby mandated the lower player had to come up.

I explicitly asked if they were sure that they meant that we were to nix any advantage the lower player could get for being in better condition/a better scrummager. "Yes" was the answer. I had to mute my mic.

 

[didds]

I'll say it again. From the OP'sd descriptions this has NOTHING to do with height and is an issue covered by 19.10. See #9

 

[Phil E]

I'll say it again. From the OP'sd descriptions this has NOTHING to do with height and is an issue covered by 19.10. See #9

The OP stated quite clearly in post 1 (and clarified in post 6) that the LH was higher than the other 5 FR, this will destabilise the scrum.
I am not going to ask the other 5 to get higher, I am going to ask the LH to get lower.
If he can't get lower then we could be looking at uncontested scrums on the grounds of safety....or they can swap him for someone who knows how to scrummage.

 

[didds]

The OP stated quite clearly in post 1 (and clarified in post 6) that the LH was higher than the other 5 FR, this will destabilise the scrum.

he (Mipper) then clarified his OP.


>> I have edited my original post. It seemed I had complicated the explanation.
>> This may be why I did not follow Didds' question - as I had not explained the situation well.

>> He wasn't allowing the TH to get a bind as the LH forehead was against the upper arm/shoulder area of the TH

i.e. Law 19.10.

 

[Phil E]

Not how I understood it, but if that's the issue then I would stand them up and say, stop being a dick, let him get a bind or I will FK you

Incidentally, it amazes me the number of times I come across TH/LH who don't know whose arm is meant to go inside and whose outside?

 

[Shelflife]

Incidentally, it amazes me the number of times I come across TH/LH who don't know whose arm is meant to go inside and whose outside?

This !!

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Usually have a few interesting ones a season when you get a "big" guy who simply can't bend too low and his much smaller oppo struggles to get his short arms for a long bind. I usually tell them if you dick about we're going uncontested on safety grounds and they usually sort themselves out

 

[Mipper]

The OP stated quite clearly in post 1 (and clarified in post 6) that the LH was higher than the other 5 FR, this will destabilise the scrum.
I am not going to ask the other 5 to get higher, I am going to ask the LH to get lower.
If he can't get lower then we could be looking at uncontested scrums on the grounds of safety....or they can swap him for someone who knows how to scrummage.

Yes Phil, exactly this.