Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
99 minutes to convince...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mrs. Peter Quinn" data-source="post: 845944" data-attributes="member: 12190"><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>Scrums do need change but we should avoid the reaction some want which is to make them basically irrelevant to the game. </p><p></p><p>Maybe all referees should attend intensive scrum training where they each play front row! Then they'd come to understand dynamics better.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mrs. Peter Quinn, post: 845944, member: 12190"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
99 minutes to convince...
Top