Scrum issue/decision

[FlipFlop]

Had this happen a couple of times. Deliberately only going to give a final position - how they got there is for you to imagine (and part of the process I want to understand)

Team A against Team B.
Team A tighthead (#3) against Team B loosehead (#1).
Scrum ends up with #3 still engaged (head still in place). All Front row still engaged and bound.
#3's feet are off the ground, back bent. hips level with shoulders.
Scrum hasn't really moved, if anything Team B driven forward a bit.
Team B generally dominant in the scrum.

So how they go there is for you to work out. What is the decision? And yes - the decision might well be in how they got there. If for example you think that #3 had to be standing up - that could be your PK. I'm after realistic decisions, from realistic scenarios, that end up at this final place.

It's a discussion I've had a few times now, with complaints after my games. So want to throw it over to you lot.


For what it is worth - I pk'ed the #1 for:

20.8 (i) Lifting or forcing an opponent up. A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air, or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards. This is dangerous play.

and the comments were that I wasn't rewarding the dominant scrum, and that I should be penalising the #3 for standing up.

 

[Phil E]

If I see any FR's feet lifted off the floor I'm blowing up for safety straight away.

I think I would put the onus on them "if this happens again we go to uncontested scrums for safety" see if that fixes it. I bet it does.

Otherwise I wouldn't even begin to give an answer without seeing it, too many variables.

 

[FlipFlop]

Phil,

The point is - I want to see what people are looking for. What might cause decision 1,2,3 etc...

I can never explain (without a video) the exact situation. So want to hear peoples views, and why they might go down one route or the other.

FF

 

[Phil E]

fair enough, I would guess that someone is driving up, not flat.

So you need to look at body angles. From your description I would guess it might be the fault of his own second row?

I can't see how the opposition FR driving upwards would cause his feet to come off the ground and his back and hips to stay parallel to the ground???

I have seen it happen when you get a very tall FR who doesn't get in the classic stance, but simply bends over with a rounded back. When his own SR and the opposition FR then drive into him from opposite directions he bends in the middle and his feet come off the floor; but you would see this in his stance as not having a flat straight back, which you said he did have.

 

[Blue Smartie]

For me it is difficult to stand up without your feet on the ground, and not even the front row are stupid leave their head engaged so as to bend their neck and spine like that.

Though it is feasible for his own lock to create the pressure from behind I have yet see a lock who thinks it a good idea.

Ergo quick whistle (dangerous play) and penalise #1 for driving up.

 

[Phil E]

Ergo quick whistle (dangerous play) and penalise #1 for driving up.

How?

I can't see how the opposition FR driving upwards would cause his feet to come off the ground and his back and hips to stay parallel to the ground???

msf

 

[Pegleg]

Ask your self Brian Moore's question. How did "A3" get to "stand up" with his feet off the ground?

Answer

He can't do it to himself! He was clearly driven up. So you have two possible culprits.

1; His own locks got under him and drove up - Highly unlikely though "technically" possible.

Or

2; it was "B1" driving him up.

So ping "B1" he done did it! The law quoted in the above posts is the relevant one.

 

[Pegleg]

fair enough, I would guess that someone is driving up, not flat.

So you need to look at body angles. From your description I would guess it might be the fault of his own second row?

I can't see how the opposition FR driving upwards would cause his feet to come off the ground and his back and hips to stay parallel to the ground???

I have seen it happen when you get a very tall FR who doesn't get in the classic stance, but simply bends over with a rounded back. When his own SR and the opposition FR then drive into him from opposite directions he bends in the middle and his feet come off the floor; but you would see this in his stance as not having a flat straight back, which you said he did have.

He does not say that!

Scrum ends up with #3 still engaged (head still in place). All Front row still engaged and bound.
#3's feet are off the ground, back bent. hips level with shoulders.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Had this happen a couple of times. Deliberately only going to give a final position - how they got there is for you to imagine (and part of the process I want to understand)

Team A against Team B.
Team A tighthead (#3) against Team B loosehead (#1).
Scrum ends up with #3 still engaged (head still in place). All Front row still engaged and bound.
#3's feet are off the ground, back bent. hips level with shoulders.
Scrum hasn't really moved, if anything Team B driven forward a bit.
Team B generally dominant in the scrum.

Unless B#1 is an absolute monster, and hugely strong; enough so to dead-lift 100kg+ on the end of his outstretched arms, I cannot see how he could get A#3 into this position on his own. If he drives A#3 upwards and have that player remain , then for him to remain back bent. hips level with shoulders and still engaged, at the very least, A#5 (the lock behind A#3) has to be bound low and driving his back end upwards as well.

As for the (coaches?) comments you got, I don't see how A#3 can be standing up if his feet are off the ground.

 

[Pegleg]

A prop can certainly get him up there. We used to do it all the time, when it was legal. With a dynamic situation he'd not be up there long and I'm guessing that the OP is describing a moment in time. Certainly a poor angle from the THP's second row would not have helped him.

 

[Ian_Cook]

A prop can certainly get him up there. We used to do it all the time, when it was legal. With a dynamic situation he'd not be up there long and I'm guessing that the OP is describing a moment in time. Certainly a poor angle from the THP's second row would not have helped him.

The question I am addressing is

"and the comments were that I wasn't rewarding the dominant scrum, and that I should be penalising the #3 for standing up.

As I understand the OP, A#3 and B#1 are still bound (heads locked).

Sure, B#1 could drive up, but he would be near standing up himself.

How can A#3 be standing up, with his feet off the ground and still bent over with his hips level with his shoulders and to have got himself into that position? Once his feet lose contact with the ground, he has no control over what happens to him.

Either B#1 has got him up there by getting under him and pushing him up with just his left arm (heads still locked remember) or, he has had involuntary help from A#5

I suppose it is possible that B#1 has managed to get his right arm free (by being illegally unbound from his hooker, inside the scrum and under A#3 as well. I have seen that happen before.

 

[talbazar]

I'm with Ian (and others) on this: A#3 didn't put himself there during the scrum... But what about his initial position (see below)...
Team A lock is probably partly responsible for his tight head's feet getting off the ground.

The real question is: is B#1 responsible for A#3's position or is he saving his life by following him up?
Seriously, if Team A loose head stays flat and low, it's only going to get worse for Team B tight head...

IMHO, the most probable reason is A#3 position at the Set. If his hips are too high, he is more likely to end up in this weird position. If he pulls his feet backwards and lower his hips, his lock will be able to keep him lower.

Personally, I'd blow for safety and reset.
Talk to B#1: watch your position, stay flat. Don't drive upwards.
Talk to A#3: keep your ass low before shoving, maybe get your feet backwards a bit
Talk to A lock: keep him low please, don't drive up
Reset, same way and see what happens

My 2 cents,
Pierre.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I'm with Ian (and others) on this: A#3 didn't put himself there during the scrum... But what about his initial position (see below)...
Team A lock is probably partly responsible for his tight head's feet getting off the ground.

The real question is: is B#1 responsible for A#3's position or is he saving his life by following him up?
Seriously, if Team A loose head stays flat and low, it's only going to get worse for Team B tight head...

IMHO, the most probable reason is A#3 position at the Set. If his hips are too high, he is more likely to end up in this weird position. If he pulls his feet backwards and lower his hips, his lock will be able to keep him lower.

Personally, I'd blow for safety and reset.
Talk to B#1: watch your position, stay flat. Don't drive upwards.
Talk to A#3: keep your ass low before shoving, maybe get your feet backwards a bit
Talk to A lock: keep him low please, don't drive up
Reset, same way and see what happens

My 2 cents,
Pierre.

Yep, 100% Pierre IIUC

You are saying he is "bent" over (like a naughty boy in the headmaster's office) instead of "crouched" forward, so he's not braced against the LHP pushing him back, and his lock is pushing his legs forward off the ground, so he has nowhere to go but up?

 

[Mr.Christopher]

If team B is dominant in the scrum, it stands to reason that B would have been moving forward, or at least have got the initial push on. In this situation, the team-A 2nd row behind needs to take a step backwards... so that A1,2,3 can still keep a strong pushing position, without putting necks in danger.

What most likely happened is that B loosehead was getting the better of A tighthead... and wanted to drive A backwards. The A 2nd row locked out... meaning the the A3 was getting folded and had nowhere to go.

In this situation, one of 3 things results. A3 goes up, A3 goes down... or A3 tries to offset the pressure and pushes his ass out... almost looking like he is boring in.

If B1 is driving straight, and was even slightly lower than A3, then it makes sense that A3 would start folding into a very painful pike position. If A3 ends up in the air, and B is still in good driving position and doesn't appear to be going up.... I might not give the penalty. If B is going low to high... then yeah, penalty.

It is very had to tell from the description...you really need video to see how this played out... as there are so many forces at play... even a little misalignment can have serious consequences.

 

[talbazar]

Yep, 100% Pierre IIUC

You are saying he is "bent" over (like a naughty boy in the headmaster's office) instead of "crouched" forward, so he's not braced against the LHP pushing him back, and his lock is pushing his legs forward off the ground, so he has nowhere to go but up?

Yup, exactly.

And even if his pre-set position looks almost ok, maybe he just need to get lower:
From the OP's description, I can imagine a strong and short B#1 against a taller (possibly less experienced) A#3...

 

[Pegleg]

...Lifting - one of the reasons I have a poor opinion of BL is that he was unable to understand that it is not possible for a prop to stand up and by doing so suspend hi9himself in mid-air, three feet off the ground. **** me, you don't have to be a prop to get this, trying standing up and getting to where Phil Vickery found himself against the so-called Beast. you might do it if you're David Blaine but not otherwise..

and
Very dangerous - hyper extension if still bound in dangerous coming down if not. in the air - NEVER the liftee's fault. It is technically possible for a retreating second row to stop the drive by diving under his front row and shooting them up, but this is so cynical and difficult it might occur once in whatever.

The blame almost certainly lies with the other prop. His own 2nd row may not have helped. But ping the LHP (B1) for me

 

[TheBFG]

for me, it's a reset and a bollocking for the 2nd row for putting him up there!!

 

[FlipFlop]

Thanks guys. Useful.

Deliberately left out details - as next time it will all be different, so want to see what you were all wanting to look for etc.

 

[Shelflife]

As a prop ive been in this position, in my situation i was inexperienced and up against a good prop, our front row were too weak and our second row were slightly stronger then us and managed to slow down the shove somewhat, they got the shove on and we went up.

The fault lay with our front row, physics took care of the rest, if you are caught between a rock and a hard place .........., we werent scrummaging illegally we just were shite. prob unfair to ping the other prop but the scrum needs to be stopped straight away, it very scary and very dangerous.

Even if the a team are dominant they still must scrummage legally and with a duty of care (safely).

If there was no clear upward push from the dominant prop id be looking to ping the weaker prop or rplace him or uncontested scrums.

 

[Dixie]

Had this happen a couple of times. Deliberately only going to give a final position - how they got there is for you to imagine (and part of the process I want to understand)

Team A against Team B.
Team A tighthead (#3) against Team B loosehead (#1).
Scrum ends up with #3 still engaged (head still in place). All Front row still engaged and bound.
#3's feet are off the ground, back bent. hips level with shoulders.
Scrum hasn't really moved, if anything Team B driven forward a bit.
Team B generally dominant in the scrum.

Exactly this occurred in the Wasps v Saints game last weekend. Ref pinged Ma'afu for driving up, IIRC, but in my view the fault lay with the bind on the Wasps prop by his 2nd row. As far as I could tell, everyone was drivng straight and level. There was a huge amount of pressure coming through the front rows, and while the Wasps 2nd row was locked solid, it seemed to me that the shoulder was too low below the prop's buttock, causing the pressure to push the prop over his lock's shoulder and up in the air.