- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 12,094
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
...World Rugby that the scrums are a problem?
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
99 minutes to convince...
- Thread starter ratsapprentice
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2011
- Messages
- 7,989
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Not a problem. France should have been give a penalty try after the Welsh collapsed it a 2ND time
Indeed. What a farce.
j'nuh
First XV
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2011
- Messages
- 4,209
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
I think we need to accept that the scrum has to fundamentally change if it is to work again. The trouble is that it's now a way of winning penalties rather than a way of restarting the game. It doesn't make sense to protect it as a traditional and intrinsic part of the game, because there's nothing traditional about the way scrums are today.
I don't want to go as far as saying it should be dropped from the game, but I do think that that would be preferable to the current arrangement.
I don't want to go as far as saying it should be dropped from the game, but I do think that that would be preferable to the current arrangement.
Last edited:
Fair point J'nuh - but the core of the problem is that the traditional function of our scrum is not being respected. WR's inept failure to ensure the key laws of this fundamental aspect of our game are correctly applied, has put us onto the slippery slope of farce and ridicule.
Our scrum is now all too often a dysfunctional embarrassment, a negative nightmare, polluted by abject bent feeding, excess referee interference, meaningless collapses and a means of cynical coaches seeing them solely as a source of dodgy penalties for cheap points. I have very strong views about this and see it as a betrayal of a core aspect of our game's very soul. Influential people within WR have some sort of perfidious agenda resisting corrective action - but these faceless bureaucrats are ring fenced from criticism - and that has to change.
WR should be exposed for their myopic incompetence and called to account to publically explain why our scrums have degenerated into the current debacle. Put under such pressure - WR would be forced into correct application of the laws - well overdue
Our scrum is now all too often a dysfunctional embarrassment, a negative nightmare, polluted by abject bent feeding, excess referee interference, meaningless collapses and a means of cynical coaches seeing them solely as a source of dodgy penalties for cheap points. I have very strong views about this and see it as a betrayal of a core aspect of our game's very soul. Influential people within WR have some sort of perfidious agenda resisting corrective action - but these faceless bureaucrats are ring fenced from criticism - and that has to change.
WR should be exposed for their myopic incompetence and called to account to publically explain why our scrums have degenerated into the current debacle. Put under such pressure - WR would be forced into correct application of the laws - well overdue
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2013
- Messages
- 25,612
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
I've got 99 problems but a scrum ain't one.
Maverick1987
First XV
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,674
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
I don't think scrums are that bad tbh . It's the referees that are the problem imo . If a referee deems a scrum to be fair but it drops to the floor don't reset it make the attacking team play . If someone is getting humped at the scrum it's a penalty ..... simples
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2011
- Messages
- 2,590
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Isn't that the laws (i.e. World Rugby) that's the problem then Maverick?
FNS
Bench Player
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2015
- Messages
- 604
- Country Flag
Same as line out ts function is restarting the game after the OTHER team committed and infraction yet the chance of loosing the ball is to big. So its flawed, always been. A team with a good first row could commit a mistake then force a penalty and win and advantage (We did a lot in WC, Pumas btw).
The thing with the scrum that`s a core play of the game, also binds 18 players to a part of the field open it up to the rest. So hard to take it away for good. Maybe the on team that restarts the game always gets the ball? that way it keeps some of the idea of it while taking away the "push/Collapse" to generate a penalty. After repeated collapsing the other team gets a free kick with the ability to kick to touch and restarting again but no able to kick to posts. if done on 5yd to goal line automatic try after 3rd collapse.
The thing with the scrum that`s a core play of the game, also binds 18 players to a part of the field open it up to the rest. So hard to take it away for good. Maybe the on team that restarts the game always gets the ball? that way it keeps some of the idea of it while taking away the "push/Collapse" to generate a penalty. After repeated collapsing the other team gets a free kick with the ability to kick to touch and restarting again but no able to kick to posts. if done on 5yd to goal line automatic try after 3rd collapse.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2006
- Messages
- 6,048
- Country Flag
It's imperative that scrums are retained in their current form. Something needs to be done to ensure they don't descend into farce like they did at the end of France v Wales, but depowering, or devaluing them shouldn't be an option for the following reasons:
- with power (and technique) key to a strong scrum, it ensures that most sides must pick strong scrummaging props, hookers and second rows, or at least a blend of those. These players tend to be the larger, slower, less nimble players. If a back get's a one-on-one you can bet he'd want it to be against a prop.
- if the scrums' were de-powered in any way, everyone would simply swap their big lumbering props, hookers, and second rows for extra flankers etc. If anyone thinks that would improve the attacking rugby on show they're deluded Imo.
- it would also fundamentally change one of rugby's best attributes, that it's a game for everyone. You don't have to be super fit or super athletic to play the game.
I don't really care that the scrum is a traditional part if the game, if that were all I'd probably happily see it go. But I wouldn't want to see the game changed out of sight because of a combination of poor reffing, and negative coaching.
- with power (and technique) key to a strong scrum, it ensures that most sides must pick strong scrummaging props, hookers and second rows, or at least a blend of those. These players tend to be the larger, slower, less nimble players. If a back get's a one-on-one you can bet he'd want it to be against a prop.
- if the scrums' were de-powered in any way, everyone would simply swap their big lumbering props, hookers, and second rows for extra flankers etc. If anyone thinks that would improve the attacking rugby on show they're deluded Imo.
- it would also fundamentally change one of rugby's best attributes, that it's a game for everyone. You don't have to be super fit or super athletic to play the game.
I don't really care that the scrum is a traditional part if the game, if that were all I'd probably happily see it go. But I wouldn't want to see the game changed out of sight because of a combination of poor reffing, and negative coaching.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2010
- Messages
- 5,744
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Spot on IMO Dull. I think there's a tendency creeping in, especially amongst newer fans to the game to thinking that scrums are just a nuisance part of the game which give no-one any real satisfaction. These people presumably just want rugby to be an equivalent of crickets 20/20 (guessing that still exists?) Whereby you get all the fast paced fun without much of the technical side of the game.
Whilst respecting this point of view as much as possible I think it's important to treat scrums, lineouts, the breakdown as an essential part of the game making union what it is.
People who don't get the game might only ever celebrate or cheer at tries. A real fan sees the contest and excitement in every turnover, dominant scrum, breakdown pilfering, and stolen lineout. These are all key flashpoints.
You're right that rugby would be far less interesting if all players were skinny wingers. Similarly so if they were all props. Accessibility is key as you say and also teamwork, complementary strengths, and allowing for players with different expertises to look out for each other. That's the 15 man game - with the props as key to the defensive line as the backrow and th centres.
This doesn't mean scrums don't need to change of course. One particular change should be that any usable ball with a scrum not going forwards after a few seconds, should have to be used. Similarly to the lineout - you don't give teams 30 minutes to get going forward, you eventually have to use it. Scrums should be a little like this. The absolute worst thing is when a stable platform for playing is ruined because the referee gave the team with the put in too long to try and get a shove on.
To be fair, France versus Wales was a particular confluence of factors including player tiredness, Wales wanting to kill a little time to get back to 15 men and hoping France would make a mistake, and Barnes rightly not wanting to make a hasty decisions with so much at stake. It was a farce but at the extreme end of the spectrum of what's possible in the game.
Scrums do need change but we should avoid the reaction some want which is to make them basically irrelevant to the game.
Maybe all referees should attend intensive scrum training where they each play front row! Then they'd come to understand dynamics better.
Whilst respecting this point of view as much as possible I think it's important to treat scrums, lineouts, the breakdown as an essential part of the game making union what it is.
People who don't get the game might only ever celebrate or cheer at tries. A real fan sees the contest and excitement in every turnover, dominant scrum, breakdown pilfering, and stolen lineout. These are all key flashpoints.
You're right that rugby would be far less interesting if all players were skinny wingers. Similarly so if they were all props. Accessibility is key as you say and also teamwork, complementary strengths, and allowing for players with different expertises to look out for each other. That's the 15 man game - with the props as key to the defensive line as the backrow and th centres.
This doesn't mean scrums don't need to change of course. One particular change should be that any usable ball with a scrum not going forwards after a few seconds, should have to be used. Similarly to the lineout - you don't give teams 30 minutes to get going forward, you eventually have to use it. Scrums should be a little like this. The absolute worst thing is when a stable platform for playing is ruined because the referee gave the team with the put in too long to try and get a shove on.
To be fair, France versus Wales was a particular confluence of factors including player tiredness, Wales wanting to kill a little time to get back to 15 men and hoping France would make a mistake, and Barnes rightly not wanting to make a hasty decisions with so much at stake. It was a farce but at the extreme end of the spectrum of what's possible in the game.
Scrums do need change but we should avoid the reaction some want which is to make them basically irrelevant to the game.
Maybe all referees should attend intensive scrum training where they each play front row! Then they'd come to understand dynamics better.
Last edited:
Similar threads
