6 Nations Referees interpretation of the rules

[schmug1]

The scrum has become too difficult for Referees to apply the rules and it is time for the Governing Body to take the bull by the horns. The original reasons for scrums was a way to restart the game after a breakdown and for many years it worked well. Now, however, because scrums have taken a much more prominent position (too many penalties being awarded for being pushed back etc) the game has become unbalanced with referees making decisions for collapsed scrums on an ad hoc basis. Todays France v Scotland game where France had a dominant scrum the referee allowed the French scrum half to put the ball straight to the second row then awarding a penalty when Scotland were pushed back. There was no way Scotland had a chance to win the ball on put in. It is time to rethink the way the game should be restarted after breakdown.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

I think the simplest way is to offer free kicks for a wider range of infringements at the scrum. But I think it has been less of an issue this year. A Scottish scrum without Nel should be conceding penalties to the huge French pack.

 

[schmug1]

What about the crooked input?

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

I believe crooked feeds are allowed to reduce the likelihood of penalties. It lets the front row focus purely on stability rather than contesting the ball and increases the survival chances for a scrum feed for the inferior scrum. I say all this knowing nothing about scrummaging!

 

[Reiser99]

I feel the ref should have a time limit on when he can award a penalty. If a player infringes clearly at the start or the team going forward starts immediately then a penalty can be awarded. However if the scrum is solid and it's only after an extended period of scrummaging that there is an infringement then you only get a free kick. This will stop the long scrums aiming for a penalty, encourage the attacking side to get it out quicker if the scrum is solid and not punishy the opposition too harshly, who start strong, but can't hold it.

 

[duncanb]

Yawn Yawn the ball was never put in straight even in my playing days in 70s onwards.
If you care about a crooked feed why don't you post every single hooker that tries to hook ( few) has his foot up an offence.
Also no opposite hooker is trying so materiality of applying this Law ( not a rule).
If teams are going to contest a hook, apply law if not leave as is.
Does any player,coach ref complain about this No.
Scrum is not straight driving and in correct binds not feeding.
Saturday you saw a great reffing of scrum by JG. no ******* about by front rows and correct sanctions applied.
JP was fine today as well Scots just poor in the tight.

 

[Dunhookin]

The issue with dysfunctional scrums and bent feeding is a continuing sore and a blight on our game. Apathy and resignation as shown by Dunc above do not help - neither does his statement that bent feeding was prevalent back in the 70s and 80s - when it was not.

WR are badly out of touch with the feeling of many real rugby enthusiasts with their continued inept mis-management of scrum laws. There appears to be a faction within WR (and probably another one outside of WR with a disproportionate and inappropriate amount of influence) who do not want straight feeding and proper 'contest for the ball' scrum functionality.

So exactly who is responsible for WR policy on scrums? Anybody know who they are? What should be happening is that these faceless, nameless people responsible for the debacle should be identified and invited to explain why a fundamental law of the game is being so diligently ignored and we're all being subjected to such an abhorrent mess.

Only 18 months ago WR stated that firm action would be taken to deal with bent feeding. Their strap line was 'the ball will be going in straight'. In the 6N games so far the most unbelievable bent feeding has been there for all to see. France rolling the ball through the LH's legs straight to the Number 8 - utter farce. And the media are complicit - commentators notably do not comment on it...why? They've been gagged. Notably Andrew Cotter used the words 'scrum feeds are absurd' during the France/Scotland match yesterday - an understatement, but at least he said something.

There's a perfidious agenda afoot here - with the inevitable unpleasant whiff of something dodgy. Time something was done - well past time actually

 

[Which Tyler]

I'd love to see a youtube montage of, for example - every 3rd scrum in the 6N from the 70s through to today, so that we can see just how much it actually has changed.
It would need to be unbiased to show what was, rather than show confirmation-bias. It would also need unfettered access to the BBC's archive and a lot more time / expertise than I have to put it together.

My bias would expect to see more scrums the further back we went; but that set-up quicker, straighter feeds (not straight, just a lot closer than now), with greater competition for the ball and were over quicker with the ball being used, rather than ending in penalties. But that's my bias, and I'd love to see what such a video actually looked like.

 

[die_mole]

The issue with dysfunctional scrums and bent feeding is a continuing sore and a blight on our game. Apathy and resignation as shown by Dunc above do not help - neither does his statement that bent feeding was prevalent back in the 70s and 80s - when it was not.

WR are badly out of touch with the feeling of many real rugby enthusiasts with their continued inept mis-management of scrum laws. There appears to be a faction within WR (and probably another one outside of WR with a disproportionate and inappropriate amount of influence) who do not want straight feeding and proper 'contest for the ball' scrum functionality.

So exactly who is responsible for WR policy on scrums? Anybody know who they are? What should be happening is that these faceless, nameless people responsible for the debacle should be identified and invited to explain why a fundamental law of the game is being so diligently ignored and we're all being subjected to such an abhorrent mess.

Only 18 months ago WR stated that firm action would be taken to deal with bent feeding. Their strap line was 'the ball will be going in straight'. In the 6N games so far the most unbelievable bent feeding has been there for all to see. France rolling the ball through the LH's legs straight to the Number 8 - utter farce. And the media are complicit - commentators notably do not comment on it...why? They've been gagged. Notably Andrew Cotter used the words 'scrum feeds are absurd' during the France/Scotland match yesterday - an understatement, but at least he said something.

There's a perfidious agenda afoot here - with the inevitable unpleasant whiff of something dodgy. Time something was done - well past time actually

I'd say 10% of rugby fans actually care about this

 

[Bada-Bing!]

I'd say 10% of rugby fans actually care about this

Based on.....?

 

[FrenchFan]

I'd say 10% of rugby fans actually care about this

in France 90% of fans care about it. Scrums are better reffed in Top 14.

 

[die_mole]

Based on.....?

That every once in awhile someone comes on here with a very long post complaining about how this has ruined the game and the same 3 people respond to it. Just that they often start accounts on here just to post about threads makes me feel that they can't find other people in their rugby circle who feel the same way about it as they do.

- - - Updated - - -

in France 90% of fans care about it. Scrums are better reffed in Top 14.

They actually called not straight in the beginning of the year.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

That every once in awhile someone comes on here with a very long post complaining about how this has ruined the game and the same 3 people respond to it. Just that they often start accounts on here just to post about threads makes me feel that they can't find other people in their rugby circle who feel the same way about it as they do.

- - - Updated - - -



They actually called not straight in the beginning of the year.

Yeah, well I think it is a bug bear, certainly for me, although I get the argument of materiality etc i.e. if the other side is not going to compete/hook for it, then to let it go. But still, I think older members it's more of a problem, than those who started following the game in the last 10-15 years, apart from Duncanb.

 

[die_mole]

Yeah, well I think it is a bug bear, certainly for me, although I get the argument of materiality etc i.e. if the other side is not going to compete/hook for it, then to let it go. But still, I think older members it's more of a problem, than those who started following the game in the last 10-15 years, apart from Duncanb.

i've never seen a straight feed in professional rugby, which is younger than I am. I know that refs at the amateur level were sticklers for it when i played and now as a ref my coaches are pretty strong about it.

I don't buy the materiality argument since yesterday scotland would feed and then collapse, they would have lost the ball if it was a straight pushing contest. I think the more honest explanation is that both teams are okay with a crooked feed so that is what we are going to allow.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

i've never seen a straight feed in professional rugby, which is younger than I am. I know that refs at the amateur level were sticklers for it when i played and now as a ref my coaches are pretty strong about it.

I don't buy the materiality argument since yesterday scotland would feed and then collapse, they would have lost the ball if it was a straight pushing contest. I think the more honest explanation is that both teams are okay with a crooked feed so that is what we are going to allow.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/zwdxp39

For what it's worth: the Video at 4 with Brian Moore (the grumpy old man of rugby) shows how it's done and also a straight feed down the middle of the tunnel (personally I'd forgotten what one looked like ).

If you can access above link from the US and the video plays. So it can clearly be done.

Problem is early pushing before the put in, which Refs do not penalise sufficiently IMO, which contributes to scrum halves not putting in straight. If you think Scotland were going to lose on a straight pushing contest, that is because France were pushing on or just after engagement and before the Laidlaw or his replacement fed the ball in.

 

[Dunhookin]

I suspect many like you Mole with a blend of cynicism and no experience of how much better the game flows with proper functioning scrums, will be indifferent to the current scrum debacle. Your 10% interest assessment may reflect the concern level with your generation - but it will be much higher with those who been rugbymen for decades.

A recent view of how well scrums can function can be seen in RWC 2015. Watch the Japanese scrummage, their hooker is a class act, an effective combination of technique and speed. He strikes the ball in channel 1 and it's gone out the back in half a second. Supremely efficient and it's fast ball - eminently usable - watch how the Japanese use it.

Contrast that with the slow useless dross produced by bent feeding - the players' body language says everything, they're not interested in it - they're coached to screw penalties from scrums - the ball is an irrelevance.

The key point about insisting on straight feeding is not to foster a grunt and sweat pushing contest - that simply wouldn't work with equally matched packs. The point is to re-skill the hooker - which will make scrums what they should be - a contest for possession. The Japanese showed in RWC15 the merits, fast ball, scrums over and done with in a fraction of the time and much lower penalty count.

Also - allowing bent feeding is blatantly ignoring a fundamental law of our game. Such a laissez faire attitude has caused disastrous consequences for our scrum - so were that attitude to continue, what else shall we allow to be ignored? Are bent lineouts the next mess in waiting? Ignore forward passes...?

Bent feeding is a disaster for our game, completely disrespecting the core values of our scrum and de-skilling the game at the same time. WR have an agenda about it - which should be publicised so those behind it can be called to account.

 

[smartcooky]

I feel the ref should have a time limit on when he can award a penalty. If a player infringes clearly at the start or the team going forward starts immediately then a penalty can be awarded. However if the scrum is solid and it's only after an extended period of scrummaging that there is an infringement then you only get a free kick. This will stop the long scrums aiming for a penalty, encourage the attacking side to get it out quicker if the scrum is solid and not punishy the opposition too harshly, who start strong, but can't hold it.

Currently, there is a "five second" Law being trialed with Scrums, similar to the Law for Rucks and Mauls. From the moment that ball is clearly won (in the case of the Scrum, available/under the No. 8's feet) the winning Scrum has five seconds to move forward. If they don't, the must use it, which means take the ball out of the Scrum into open play. One answer might be to change that.

If either Scrum is going to move forward, then they must do so immediately either Scrum wins possession (in the General Definitions, "possession" is defined as "when a player is carrying the ball or a team has the ball in its control; for example, the ball in one half of a scrum or ruck is in that team's possession". If they don't move their scrum forward immediately (and keep it moving forwards) then the five seconds starts. If the winning scrum don't get the ball out in that time, they turnover possession.

This would severely limit the amount of time that front row players have to get up to the illegal stuff trying to win a penalty.

 

[Car]

I suspect many like you Mole with a blend of cynicism and no experience of how much better the game flows with proper functioning scrums, will be indifferent to the current scrum debacle. Your 10% interest assessment may reflect the concern level with your generation - but it will be much higher with those who been rugbymen for decades.

I've only been watching rugby for roughly ten years now and it has always annoyed me. It's simply not what the scrum was supposed to be about - restarting the game quickly.

 

[smartcooky]

Also - allowing bent feeding is blatantly ignoring a fundamental law of our game. Such a laissez faire attitude has caused disastrous consequences for our scrum - so were that attitude to continue, what else shall we allow to be ignored? Are bent lineouts the next mess in waiting? Ignore forward passes...?

Bent feeding is a disaster for our game, completely disrespecting the core values of our scrum and de-skilling the game at the same time. WR have an agenda about it - which should be publicised so those behind it can be called to account.

Dunhookin', you're still repeating this idea that crooked feeding is the cause of all our scrum problems. It is not, and no matter how many times you keep repeating it, it is still wrong.

Crooked feeds are a symptom of the scrum problems we have now. Simply enforcing a straight feed is not a magic bullet that will miraculously fix the scrum., because the primary cause of the scrum problems we have now is front row players cheating and using illegal, and dangerous scrummaging techniques to gain an unfair advantage over their opponents, coupled with a lack of skill among hookers who have never learned to strike properly. This has been a result of two things...

1. The adoption of the eight-man shove by most teams world-wide (see my previous post about "Bajada" in the "Dysfunctional Scrums" thread - http://www.therugbyforum.com/thread...gony-continues?p=826866&viewfull=1#post826866 )

2. Continual efforts by WR to micromanage the scrum engagement resulting in encouraging of the "hit".

Both of these have led directly to unstable scrums.

You sound like someone who has been around the game a long time so I am pretty sure you will know that in the past, the forwards simply put down the scrum without any instructions from the referee beyond pointing to the mark. The ball was fed (straight) when the hooker was ready (not when the referee tells the scrum half). The ball was hooked down either channel 1 or 2; the second row players knew which channel the hooker was going to hook down, so they stood with their feet in a position to allow the ball to travel unimpeded to the back where the SH would play the ball away. From feed to clearance was a matter of a couple of seconds.

Here is a very young Brian Moore (when he still had hair) who demonstrates a proper hooking techniques...



(Those outside of UK might find this blocked, so try this one)

[video]https://uk.proxfree.com/permalink.php?url=s54aaHA%2FaGsaD5vHs0QZLcUclS%2Fc UxrnNZwEMCiA0I%2BKl%2BPUjrbSWvA6pl5WU3W6x5f%2FH6ry bitHrdlRXlQglA%3D%3D&bit=1[/video]

At about 2min, Moore shows a great practice technique. All you need is a padded post, two marker cones and someone to feed the ball. You can practice hooking down channel 1 or channel 2.

Until we return to having scrums where both hookers attempt to hook (and I cannot see that happening unless WR make hooking for the ball a compulsory part of the game.) these problems are not gong to be fixed. Simply feeding the ball straight into a scrum where neither hooker wants to hook the ball will not fix anything... its not even a good start!!

 

[duncanb]

Smartcooky sums up totally,
If you agree or disagree with a not straight feed hard to argue against above.
Hence my ambivalence to crooked feeds.
I know there will never be agreement on this however how a ball is put into a scrum is and never has been the issue.