Dysfunctional scrums - the agony continues

[smartcooky]

Dunkhookin

Squint feeding is a SYMPTOM of the scrum dysfunctionality, its is NOT the cause of it. If I was a Premiership referee and decided this coming weekend that I was simply going to ping every crooked feed, it would fix nothing. All that will happen is a scrum mess even worse that what we have now, and a crapload of FKs and PKs. Enforcing a straight feed will only work if it is part of a wider plan to change the mindset and behaviour of the front rows.

There are a number of things that front row players do which are directly against the intent, the letter and the spirit of the Laws. What needs to happen is a change in the way the scrum is managed so that it makes these illegalities difficult to accomplish.

The first Law I would change is wheeling. I would outlaw it completely. All pushing in the scrum must be parallel to the touchlines, and the scrum MUST remain parallel to the touch lines, and only be pushed in a direction parallel to the touchlines.

The second Law I would change is what happens after the "set". Currently, the props take a long bind at the "bind", but at the "set", those binds are shortened as the front rows come closer together. I would have all props re-bind with a long bind after the "set". Anyone who has done any kind of weight training will understand that a bent arm is MUCH stronger than a straight arm. With a bent arm, they can pull down on their opposite, but its almost impossible for a prop to "push" his opponent down if he has a bind with palms facing downwards. Its much harder for props to get up to monkey business with their bind arms fully extended.

So, I would replace "C-B-S" with C/B-S-R...

Crouch and Bind
Set!
Rebind

After all that has been accomplished, the referee ruthlessly penalises the following

1. any front row player who makes any attempt to turn inwards.
2. any prop who who has a short bind.
3. scrum player who pushes in any direction other than parallel to the touchline.
4. Any scrum half who feeds the ball squint.

 

[Dunhookin]

Agreed Cooky 100% - enforcing straight feed is indeed a key part of the change of focus and mindset. I'm not advocating a sudden enforcement of straight feed, some would cope ok, but others wouldn't - and we would have a period of more disruptions and dysfunction.

There must be an unequivocal instruction from WR that straight feeding is a law that WILL be enforced from say next season. That gives teams and their players time to get the necessary skill coaching in place so their lineout throwers become hookers. Then, after that reasonable notice period, the law is enforced - this would see a significant improvement in scrum efficiency, fewer penalties and faster ball as the focus and mindset would be on the ball.

Problem is we're had 'the ball will be going in straight' from WR only 18 months ago - and already they've reneged on that. Simple question WR - why?

 

[Zootalaws]

OK - free kick then.
It's not the nature of the punishment for an infringement that is being debated - its "dysfunctional scrums" What is your solution to the issues under debate?

Penalties for failed scrums is part of the problem - it rewards those best able to make the ref think it's the other guys fault.

Its rewarding negativity, instead of positivity. Do it right, get the rewards.

They have the rules, they need to enforce them - put it in straight.

 

[Blindside]

HNY everyone.

Yes, Kevin Phillips was very skilful and very technical - as was Ian Watkins before him, Billy James and Alan Phillips going back further still. Skilful and technical - sad, regrettable casualties of bent feeding.

Ok let's actually sort the question of what will become of the TH were WR to grow a pair (they won't) and deal with bent feeding. Your statement that the TH will be hung out to dry is due to the current malaise of everybody having become used to bent feeding and dysfunction. The mindset and focus is not on the ball, winning the ball is a foregone conclusion - it will be rolled into the second row. With competing for the ball nigh on impossible, players look for other ways to compete. The 2 v 1 situation where LH and hooker attack the TH causing him to pop up, or the scrum to wheel, has evolved as the hooker has no opportunity to go for the ball - as a hooker, he is redundant. Therefore he's free to join with his LH in attacking the TH to disrupt or screw a penalty.


Were straight feeding to be enforced - players would have to focus on the ball - winning it would be their first priority. Therefore the defensive hooker now has a 'ball first priority focus and mindset' and whilst opportunities to go for the ball against the head will be few, he will be watching for it. So hookers will be far less likely to engage with LH and 'gang up' on the opposing TH - there'll be the odd instance of it - but it won't be their priority.

Bent feeding has made the TH's role very defensive - as the 2 v 1 way to compete has become the norm. When straight feeding was properly enforced, on the opposing put in, the TH's role was more offensive - to try and create disruption and pressure so his hooker could strike against the head - all about the ball.

With bent feeding - yes the 30 seconds quoted was an extreme example, but we absolutely do get scrums where the ball takes an age to emerge. Twelve, 15, and 20 seconds for the ball to show up is common - and look at how the slow ball is used. Look at the players' body language - they're not interested in it - when was the last time you saw a back row move from a scrum?

There's another absolute truth about bent feeding - it's against a fundamental law of our game. Ignoring that law is now spawning the breaking of another law - handling the ball in the scrum is becoming more prevalent. There's a grey area between front and second rows where the bent fed ball often stops as it's run out of momentum. Here the second rows can't get their feet far forward enough to channel it back - and where neither pack can get a nudge on, the ball is stranded. So the SH delves his hands into the second row to retrieve the ball - to which referees turn a blind eye because it's better than spectators being bored sh*tless waiting...how long was it?... for the ball to get to the 8.

Begs the question - what other laws do WR intend to ignore because they don't have the backbone to deal with bent feeding? Answers on a postcard...

I fear we must agree to disagree on the likelihood the hooker of the side not in possession, will give up the advantage of scrummaging square and giving his scrum a dominace, for the unlikely chance of a strike against the head. But i agree that the loss of hooking is indeed a real shame.

The facility should exist for a scrum to be driven back and badly disrupted, with no penalty given. At the moment it does not, so every scrum that is driven back substantially, by the side in possession, always commits an offence. Why should this be the case. Regarding the poster who said wheeling the scrum should be made illegal.... it is.

Regarding your question, two laws that are totally ignored for me is lifting in the lineout before the ball is thrown. Im not saying it should be enforced, but it simply is not. The other which i think should be enforced is the immediate one movement after the tackle. I see tackled players holding the ball up for some time, to make it available and even tossing it up some 10 seconds after being tackled, to the scrum half etc. OK these are positive actions that keep the ball alive and the game fluid, but they are clearly breaking the law and if great defense has caused the potential to slow down the recycling of the ball, why should a illegal act, however positive in its intentions facilitate it ?

 

[smartcooky]

The facility should exist for a scrum to be driven back and badly disrupted, with no penalty given. At the moment it does not, so every scrum that is driven back substantially, by the side in possession, always commits an offence. Why should this be the case. Regarding the poster who said wheeling the scrum should be made illegal.... it is.

No, it isn't.

[TEXTAREA]20.11 SCRUM WHEELED
(a) If a scrum is wheeled through more than 90 degrees , so that the middle line has passed beyond a position parallel to the touchline , the referee must stop play and order another scrum.
(b) This new scrum is formed at the place where the previous scrum ended. The ball is thrown in by the team that previously threw it in.[/TEXTAREA]

Note that there is no sanction in this Law

Don't get confused with the Under 19 Variations, where scrum wheeling IS illegal

[TEXTAREA]20.11 SCRUM WHEELED (U19V)
(a) No wheeling. A team must not intentionally wheel a scrum.
Sanction: Penalty kick
If a wheel reaches 45 degrees, the referee must stop play. If the wheel is unintentional, the referee orders another scrum at the place where the scrum is stopped. The same team throws in the ball.[/TEXTAREA]

(NOTE: I am aware that the UK and Ireland, there are some lower levels of adult rugby where the Under 19 Variations are applied).

What I am advocating is a complete ban on wheeling as per the U19 Variations, with any attempt to wheel intentionally, drawing an immediate santion.

 

[Blindside]

The intent to wheel a scrum intentionally though is already a immediate sanction. The intent to shove a scrum back, that results in one side be shoved quicker than the other, is not a deliberate attempt to wheel. Even under such circumstances it is very difficult to tell who has initiated the wheel, which side. So emphasis in this area may just create another mess, where sides under pressure going back wheel to get a penalty. If every wheel scrum is a penalty then does that help the game.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

The intent to wheel a scrum intentionally though is already a immediate sanction. The intent to shove a scrum back, that results in one side be shoved quicker than the other, is not a deliberate attempt to wheel. Even under such circumstances it is very difficult to tell who has initiated the wheel, which side. So emphasis in this area may just create another mess, where sides under pressure going back wheel to get a penalty. If every wheel scrum is a penalty then does that help the game.

Wheeling is now just a reset as well (as in when it wheels and is not a deliberate wheel).

We are in such a mess with scrums I just don't think world rugby has the balls to really sort it out.

What about no sanction for a scrum failing. So if it collapses you just play on? If one side goes down then give the other team the right to walk over them and take the ball? Would soon make people want to stay up?

No idea of that would really work though.

 

[smartcooky]

The intent to wheel a scrum intentionally though is already a immediate sanction

What is the sanction?

 

[die_mole]

What is the sanction?

PK, referees use the pulling part of 20.8(g) as justification

it doesn't really make sense to me, especially now that wheeling the scrum no longer results in a turnover

 

[smartcooky]

PK, referees use the pulling part of 20.8(g) as justification

it doesn't really make sense to me, especially now that wheeling the scrum no longer results in a turnover

You're right it doesn't. Wheeling the scrum serves only one purpose IMO, to win a PK by disrupting the oppostion

However, I repeat, it is a fact that wheeling the scrum is not illegal per se. Given the fact that a scrum will naturally wheel to the right (clockwise as viewed from above) anyway due to the offset nature of the front row engagement, if your THP and TH side lock are strong enough to "pin" their side of the scrum (i.e. not give any ground) and your LHP and his LH lock are strong enough to push the opposition THP/TH Lock backwards, then the scrum will wheel to the right without any offence being committed under 20.8 (g) or any other Law. Your LHP is always pushing forwards so he's not infringing.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Wheeling up to 90 degrees is fine by me. It can be an attacking or defensive tactic and is a unit skill, as is stopping it.

Far more concerned by bent feeds and non hooking and deliberate collapsing.

 

[Blindside]

You're right it doesn't. Wheeling the scrum serves only one purpose IMO, to win a PK by disrupting the oppostion

However, I repeat, it is a fact that wheeling the scrum is not illegal per se. Given the fact that a scrum will naturally wheel to the right (clockwise as viewed from above) anyway due to the offset nature of the front row engagement, if your THP and TH side lock are strong enough to "pin" their side of the scrum (i.e. not give any ground) and your LHP and his LH lock are strong enough to push the opposition THP/TH Lock backwards, then the scrum will wheel to the right without any offence being committed under 20.8 (g) or any other Law. Your LHP is always pushing forwards so he's not infringing.

Yes i concede.... to deliberately wheel through pulling the scrum is what is illegal, pushing is not. Or to push at an angle to cause the scrum to wheel. But as you point out the wheeling is not illegal but depending on the means used to achieve it.

 

[ALJ]

Removed 'cos I'm too stupid to use a computer.

 

[Blindside]

Wheeling up to 90 degrees is fine by me. It can be an attacking or defensive tactic and is a unit skill, as is stopping it.

Far more concerned by bent feeds and non hooking and deliberate collapsing.

The thread is pretty much in agreement with that, the problem is how you enable the hooker to strike, without that side being at a disadvantage. IMO it is because the TH is so easily targeted and put at a significant disadvantage unless he is superior to the opposing loosehead.

 

[Which Tyler]

Removed 'cos I'm too stupid to use a computer.

If that's a good enough reason to remove posts; then this board is doomed!

 

[Dunhookin]

Ok Blind - let's agree to disagree on the straight feed/hooker striking point. I see it as the root cause of scrum dysfunction - you don't. Sometimes that's just the way it is.

Stand by for a shock though - we do agree that scrums shouldn't be automatically pinged when one pack pushes the other back/disrupts. More flexibility should be exercised as in a number of instances the reward for the dominant pack could be greater than 3 points.

- - - Updated - - -

Cooky - just been reading your earlier post on the use of an indirect penalty kick...? Must say I think the idea has considerable merit to the point that it's worthy of a trial period. Removing the cheap points 'carrot' currently the scrum outcome of preference of some elite level coaches would make a positive difference.

The (immense) difficulty would be getting the bureaucrats in WR to open their eyes and accept that immediate action is required for our scrum. Their last effort to sort out the set piece 'the ball will be going in straight' was the phrase coined by WR - sounded pretty good - but the enforcement was insipidly ineffectual - and we're back to square one. Pathetic.

 

[Dunhookin]

Thought, as we're about to welcome the 6N tournament to revive this thread which has lulled to a halt in recent weeks. Just for interest, I'm going to gauge teams scrum success - or failure. There would be a number of assessment points to this, which would make it difficult to compile and probably to read too.

So the success/failure criteria will be on just one dimension - because that's all I'm capable of and need to keep it simple! I'm going to time how long it takes on average from the scrum half rolling the ball into the second row to it arriving at the 8's feet. Let's see which team is the most efficient and which one least.

Current betting;

1-4 on and outright favourite - Ireland, Rory Best is the real deal a proper technician bless him, predicted speed range 0.5 to 4 seconds
2-1 England, Hartley is capable of striking the ball, though he rarely has to - predicted speed range 2.5 to 11.5 seconds
3-1 Wales, Baldwin can strike, but as above, scarcely needs to bother, predicted speed range 2.5 to 12 seconds
5-1 France, Guirado is a paddler, not a striker, France pioneered bent feeding, predicted speed range 5.0 to 16.5 seconds
8-1 Scotland, Ford is a big strong unit, but no more a hooker than my elderly aunt, predicted range 6.5 to 19.5 seconds
9-1 Italy, never seen an Italian hooker, they pick lineout throwers only. predicted range 7.5 to 22.5 seconds

Anyone care to offer their own odds - or to assess scrum penalty counts team for team - please feel free

With best regards

Andy H