Scrummaging - why the dead straight put-in ?

[Bury_Dave]

Hi All,
I'm a new ref'. Just done my first youth and adult games in the last 2 weeks - interesting to put it mildly !:Nerv: I spent the 80 minutes of the senior's game wishing it would all stop and ever since then keen to get back on the field and ref again ! :chin: It would have been easier if the two teams weren't both playing in black sock and shorts and one with red and dark blue and the other red and black. I realised at the first breakdown I was in trouble ! However, feedback was actually very good with a couple of points of constructive criticism. Most importantly, 30+ guys had a good afternoon's flowing rugby and I learned a LOT .

Anyways, I digress.

It occurred to me whilst on the field that if a scrum is required, it is because one team has made a minor infringement. So, why do we insist there is a totally straight put-in which actually means that the team against whom the infringment was committed gain no advantage ? Or is that why so many refs do allow leeway ?

I'm not saying VERY crooked so that competition is killed, but just the turn of the ball maybe ? After all, we do have the Advantage law, no ?

I'll sit back now and wait for the deluge of people telling me I'm a numpty

Dave

 

[Donal1988]

I dont mean this as an insult or a criticism but have you played much rugby or did you take up the whistle after coaching or due to kids etc.

The putting in team has 2 major advantages from what I can see regarding the strike. They know they timing of when the scrumhalf will feed (as he will usually tap his hooker before hand) and the putting in hooker is in a better position to strike than his opponent as there are less players between him and where the ball is fed.

However it like everything is a contest. Thats what rugby is a contest. The breakdown is a contest with a small advantage to the team in possession. The scrum is something similar. It is an advantage to the non offending team but they are made work to get it.

 

[PaulDG]

It occurred to me whilst on the field that if a scrum is required, it is because one team has made a minor infringement. So, why do we insist there is a totally straight put-in which actually means that the team against whom the infringment was committed gain no advantage ?

The team putting in does have built-in advantages.

Assuming the SH is putting the ball in from the correct side, his hooker's feet are closer to the ball as it comes in than the opposition.

Also, there's generally a signaling system worked out between SH and hooker so that the putting in side hooker has a good idea about exactly when the ball is coming in.

Added together, those advantages mean any experienced team should win their own scrum practically all the time. If they don't it's likely to be down to them being pushed off the ball (either legally or illegally - your job to spot which), or the non-putting hooker has his foot up early or the props/flankers/2nd row are getting their hands in.

 

[Bury_Dave]

Told you I'd be called a numpty !!

So why do SO MANY refs let it go ? I am trying to understand why it is so rarely enforced ?

And yes I did used to play rugby. A long, long time ago I had to give it up due to a serious injury. I've taken up refing as some of my mates who still play are not getting games due to too few refs and I thought I'd try to help that as most refs want to get as high a grade as possible and the poor old 3rds and vets struggle attracting attention.

Dave

 

[Donal1988]

In fact last week at our scrum workshop we were told that it is very rare for a clean win against the head. We were told 99% of wins against the head are when it comes off a players foot first in a mis strike or else something illegal.

Its rarely enforced at the top level but in grassroots its fairly standard. A lot of how the TV referees apply things is different to how you and me should do things.

 

[Bury_Dave]

Well, thanks to you both for putting me right.

Seems there is such a thing as a dumb question after all

Dave

 

[Bury_Dave]

:wink:

 

[Donal1988]

It wasnt a dumb question. If your gonna comment on this site you need to lose that attitude. Half of the most interesting discussions here are from trivial issues. Dont be afraid to put something down. Who cares if its stupid - you'll get the answers you need.

(oh an nobody called you a numpty:Zip: ) Take it easy on yourself

 

[OB..]

The only dumb question is the one you don't ask.

 

[Donal1988]

The way I looked at it when I started was that I really didnt care if a load of blokes in England thought I knew squatt about rugby. If I could get the answers I needed and use that to impress my assessors and make the games I refereed more enjoyable to play and ref I would be happy.

 

[DrSTU]

The way I looked at it when I started was that I really didnt care if a load of blokes in England thought I knew squatt about rugby. If I could get the answers I needed and use that to impress my assessors and make the games I refereed more enjoyable to play and ref I would be happy.

Top priorities Donal

1: Assessor
2: Players
3: ref

 

[ddjamo]

1. young hotties
2. milfs
3. munters
4. old boilers
5. assessors
6. players
7. ref

 

[barker14610]

1. young hotties
2. milfs
3. munters
4. old boilers
5. assessors
6. players
7. ref

Munters over old boilers? It's going to be a long off-season.

 

[Dickie E]

where do "mingers" fit in? :chin:

 

[DrSTU]

where do "mingers" fit in? :chin:

Has to be above a munter at least but below milf.

I daren't get jamo down to SoCal, we'd never get the game started:bday:

 

[Dickie E]

munter or minger?

 

[DrSTU]

Definite munter. A minger is ugly or unattractive:

http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry...=word&queryword=minger&first=1&max_to_show=10

She fell down the ugly true, hitting every branch on the way down and then landed face first on the roots of the ugly tree:wow:

 

[FlipFlop]

And cougars? Where do they fit in?

 

[dave_clark]

between munter and old boiler i'd suggest. if they were attractive, they'd fall into the milf category.

 

[dave_clark]

p.s. Bury Dave, don't take it personally if your threads get hijacked