why the difference

[glawsterexpat]

One of the most frustrating things as a supporter either at live games or in front of the television is that referees are still ignoring a crooked feed at the scrum but are very quick to penalise a crooked throw at the line out.

As a supporter who pays good money either way a crooked feed is cheating the supporter of a fair game.

Why is this allowed to continue?

Rod Francis

 

[4eyesbetter]

The thought occurs that the coaches are perhaps not as interested in a fair game...

 

[OB..]

Consider the differences.
1. A scrum is a sanction for an infringement, and gives a significant advantage to the team throwing in the ball; a lineout is just a restart and the advantage to the throwing team is much smaller.
2. At a lineout the ball travels at least 5 metres in the air, clearly visible all the way; in a scrum it travels about a metre in a forest of legs.
3. At a lineout there is no physical contact between the teams until after the ball has been played; at a scrum both teams are tryng to gain an advantage and the referee has to monitor that.
4. For the players, a lineout is a genuine contest for the ball and turnoves are not uncommon; at a scrum a heel against the head is very rare even if the throw is dead striaght. At a scrum the contest is more to spoil the popponents' possession, rather than to win the ball.
5. At a lineout the target is 1m wide; at a scrum thre requirement is that some part of the ball should be over the mid-line or the scrum - and that may well have changed after the ball is thrown ie when the shove comes on.

As an assessor I do indeed expect the referees at my levels to enforce a credible feed - and that is what I usually see.

I agree there are too many crooked feeds at professional level, and I would prefer to see it tidied up, but a sccrum is very different from a lineout. I think it offends spectators more than players. I once had the opportunity to ask Phil Vickery and Alan Townsend their views (Q&A session at Kingsholm). Phil said he didn't mind as long as it was not ridiculous, because winning against the head was not the top priority.. Alan said that in his day it was always straight.

 

[Rushforth]

One of the most frustrating things as a supporter either at live games or in front of the television is that referees are still ignoring a crooked feed at the scrum but are very quick to penalise a crooked throw at the line out.

As a supporter who pays good money either way a crooked feed is cheating the supporter of a fair game.

Why is this allowed to continue?

Rod Francis

First of all, welcome! As both an (armchair) spectator and a former hooker, I fully understand your point of view.

As a former prop removed from the game by "the hit", and a referee with relatively few years of experience, I can also understand why crooked feeds do get ignored.

Professional rugby is first and foremost a commercial venture. Rugby Union become professional at about the same time as the scrum-wheeling law was changed. Over the course of my playing career, scrummaging changed from being a contest of both skill and strength to being a contest of brute force. Previously, the defending team would use all 8 men to drive or at least retreat straight, because if the scrum wheeled more than 90 degrees this would leave the attacking team back row in a potentially very dangerous position - as close to the opponent's try-line as their own pack! There was still a reset after greater than 90 degrees, but the attacking ideal was to drive straight at first and then rotate somewhat.

In an attempt to "fix" this, the law was changed that if 90 degrees was passed, it would be the side NOT in possession throwing in next. The consequences of this included the hit and thereby almost a generation of referees more concerned with safety than the letter of the law.

I was never a particularly good rugby player as such, but a decent enough hooker fortunate enough to have a very experienced tight five for most of my time in that position. We probably won an average of about five against the head every second XV match. It would have been unthinkable for my SH to feed the ball crookedly, and we probably lost one against the head every other match too.

Let me rephrase what I said in the previous paragraph from the perspective of a referee. If both sides are struggling with the same issue, for whatever reason at all: be lenient. Preferably as lenient as the other people refereeing the same teams at the same level as you and no more (and no less).

That said, I agree that it is a bit embarrassing that they are SO lenient on the crooked feed at the highest level.

 

[Ian_Cook]

One of the most frustrating things as a supporter either at live games or in front of the television is that referees are still ignoring a crooked feed at the scrum but are very quick to penalise a crooked throw at the line out.

As a supporter who pays good money either way a crooked feed is cheating the supporter of a fair game.

Why is this allowed to continue?

Rod Francis

This graphic illustrates OB's point No. 2

The corresponding thrown-in line (green) for line-out (top)
and scrum (bottom) are at the same angle A=0°, B=1°,
C=2°, d=3°. See how much easier it is to see that the
line-out throw is not straight?



This Graphic illustrates part of OB's point No. 5

That a throw-in to the scrum is straight if some part of the
ball is over the mid-line of the scrum....



And this graphic illustrates the last part of OB's point 5

Even though this graphic was made to illustrate how
an early shove severely disadvantages the team who
is throwing the ball in (and why the referee must not
allow this to happen) it does show that the mid-line
of the scrum may change after the ball is thrown in,
making the throw in look more squint than it really was.
​

 

[Dickie E]

You may be interested to know that in an elite competition in my part of the world, we are trialling being less stringent on the crooked lineout throw in the situation where the opposition does not compete.

The philosophy is about encouraging running rugby by getting the ball into play and minimise stoppages. I understand that this philosphy is not embraced by everyone.

 

[Daftmedic]

Are you trailing Richie to stop cheating also?

 

[Ian_Cook]

Are you trailing Richie to stop cheating also?

He doesn't play in the NRC, so, yes!

 

[RobLev]

You may be interested to know that in an elite competition in my part of the world, we are trialling being less stringent on the crooked lineout throw in the situation where the opposition does not compete.

The philosophy is about encouraging running rugby by getting the ball into play and minimise stoppages. I understand that this philosphy is not embraced by everyone.

ISTM that you can buy into the philosophy without buying into the idea of ignoring clear and obvious rule-breaches. It's surely all in the hands of the players...

 

[crossref]

You may be interested to know that in an elite competition in my part of the world, we are trialling being less stringent on the crooked lineout throw in the situation where the opposition does not compete.

The philosophy is about encouraging running rugby by getting the ball into play and minimise stoppages. I understand that this philosphy is not embraced by everyone.

this is a bit circular - maybe the reason a team isn't competing is because the referee isn't enforcing the straight throw...

 

[OB..]

Ian - thanks for you #5. Very useful.

 

[Dickie E]

this is a bit circular - maybe the reason a team isn't competing is because the referee isn't enforcing the straight throw...

The referee will enforce the straight throw until such time that the opposition decide to do something other than compete

 

[Browner]

we are trialling being less stringent on the crooked lineout throw in the situation where the opposition does not compete.

I've been trialling that exact 'materiality' for some considerable time now. Provided both captains know then they're fine, supporters however ..... But then, hey, when have they ever been in on 'game management' subtleties ...