Is scrum really necessary?

[RoosTah]

Union has far more variety for one. In that, it actually has a meaningful set piece.

That's not actually an answer... you didn't elaborate at all on the question.

Scrums are contested in Union and the variation that creates is that you can either win a penalty off it or steal the oppositions ball. In reality though, you can actually still push in League scrums if you time it right (there was a push over try in the back end of the NRL this year - so it does happen) so the only real tactical difference is that you can get kickable penalties from them in union.

Just to clarify, I don't actually want to see the scrum go, but I don't think anyone here has provided anything close to a reasoned case for it offering any extra "tactical depth" to Union.

 

[SixteenSixtySix]

Please explain how scrummaging is what gives Union more tactical depth than League. I don't think there's a case for that at all...

That said, I do agree that there is greater tactical variation in Union, but I think the scrum has precisely zero to do with that. Rather, what gives union its greater tactical depth is rucking, as the fact that the ball is being contested at every tackle means teams have to think more about the challenge of balancing possession with field position. The only thing the scrum offers is the opportunity to overpower your opponents, other than that what it offers is the same as it is in league; more space to attack with all the forwards tied up.

As for the author of this thread - you really ought to watch the NRL. It's a brilliant competition and the skills on display are absolutely fantastic. For a real clinic on ball in hand free-flowing footy though, watch the Kangaroos v Kiwis in last year's world cup final.

Well, *some* tactical advantage; combining physical strength and technique. One main tactic used by strong packs is to drive the scrum in hopes of gaining as much ground as possible. Argentina is a regular at this tactic

Although there's little a team can do tactic-wise through the scrum, it can be very effective and crucial in a tight game.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

That's not actually an answer... you didn't elaborate at all on the question.

Scrums are contested in Union and the variation that creates is that you can either win a penalty off it or steal the oppositions ball. In reality though, you can actually still push in League scrums if you time it right (there was a push over try in the back end of the NRL this year - so it does happen) so the only real tactical difference is that you can get kickable penalties from them in union.

Just to clarify, I don't actually want to see the scrum go, but I don't think anyone here has provided anything close to a reasoned case for it offering any extra "tactical depth" to Union.

I would say the ability to choose to take a scum from a penalty can really mix things up, you've got a dodgy lineout...a rubbish kicker.....but a 400kg front row and a midfield penalty...pick the scrum, lock in half their defense for at least a phase and roll the dice

 

[gaston le gaff]

That's not actually an answer... you didn't elaborate at all on the question.

Scrums are contested in Union and the variation that creates is that you can either win a penalty off it or steal the oppositions ball. In reality though, you can actually still push in League scrums if you time it right (there was a push over try in the back end of the NRL this year - so it does happen) so the only real tactical difference is that you can get kickable penalties from them in union.

There is one massive example every scrum....... the backs are both 10mts behind the back feet of both 8's, therefore there is 20+mts between the two 10's and probably 30 mts between the wingers in what situation does this occur in a game and the defence are standong still!!!!! its an ideal situation for the attacking team to have a go, how mùany tries are scored by backs from scrums, hundreds this is just one example there are many more, scrums are the ultimate battle of strength and tactics and also must always be a part of union. .

 

[smartcooky]

Scrum is something I do not like in Rugby.
I doubt the necessity of scrum.

The shortcomings of scrum are:

Time-consuming
Too many resets
Physically too demanding
Too many injuries (dangerous)
Impossible when the difference of strength between 2 sides is large
Too many fouls
etc etc...

Dear God, whatever next? Goalposts with two crossbars?

...oh, hang on!

 

[William18]

That's not actually an answer... you didn't elaborate at all on the question.

Scrums are contested in Union and the variation that creates is that you can either win a penalty off it or steal the oppositions ball. In reality though, you can actually still push in League scrums if you time it right (there was a push over try in the back end of the NRL this year - so it does happen) so the only real tactical difference is that you can get kickable penalties from them in union.

Just to clarify, I don't actually want to see the scrum go, but I don't think anyone here has provided anything close to a reasoned case for it offering any extra "tactical depth" to Union.

Scrums are rarely contested in league and it only worked because the other team was not expecting it.

The scrum provides huge tactical depth in rugby. It requires specialist front row forwards whose main ability is to scrum. If we did not have a scrum then teams would simply replace their front rowers with two more loose forwards. This would lead to less specialisation, most players having the same skills. Teams would maybe convert a front rower into someone who was good at the jackal. Therefore having no scrums would completely change the breakdown area.

The big difference in rugby is that scrums can provide a platform for your backs to score free from the influence of forwards. New Zealand and Argentina have massively different tactical ideas about what a scrum represents and how they should be used.

 

[SixteenSixtySix]

Dear God, whatever next? Goalposts with two crossbars?

...oh, hang on!

Hahahha I remember that one

 

[gaston le gaff]

Scrums in League are 12 guys leaning on each other which enables them to have a break from endless tackling and giving the chance for the scrum half to roll a ball into the scrum slightly off straight...!!!!!!

 

[smartcooky]

Scrums in League are 12 guys leaning on each other which enables them to have a break from endless tackling and giving the chance for the scrum half to roll a ball into the scrum slightly off straight...!!!!!!

It also temporarily ties up nearly half the players on the field in one area, creating space of the other half.

 

[gaston le gaff]

It also temporarily ties up nearly half the players on the field in one area, creating space of the other half.

i personnly would use the word loosely tied if referring to leaugue temporarily actually could state they are doing something other than resting

 

[TheSaffycen]

That's not actually an answer... you didn't elaborate at all on the question.

Scrums are contested in Union and the variation that creates is that you can either win a penalty off it or steal the oppositions ball. In reality though, you can actually still push in League scrums if you time it right (there was a push over try in the back end of the NRL this year - so it does happen) so the only real tactical difference is that you can get kickable penalties from them in union.

Just to clarify, I don't actually want to see the scrum go, but I don't think anyone here has provided anything close to a reasoned case for it offering any extra "tactical depth" to Union.

At 1.16 Ashton scores a try off a set move. The tactical depth is that with an 8 v 7 scrum Saracens are smart and get the loosehead wheeling slightly keeping the ulster 7 from breaking off and covering the backline, this means Ashton can run off the 10 and go in for the try. The tactical depth to me comes from the backs having the perfect platform to try any and every move they can think of.

 

[sigesige00]

Dear God, whatever next? Goalposts with two crossbars?

...oh, hang on!

Hahahha I remember that one

As for crossbars, there was really a problem in American Football.
The kicked ball, the game-deciding field-goal, went higher than the posts and it was very difficult to judge even by video. So I think that goal should have higher crossbar.

 

[SixteenSixtySix]

As for crossbars, there was really a problem in American Football.
The kicked ball, the game-deciding field-goal, went higher than the posts and it was very difficult to judge even by video. So I think that goal should have higher crossbar.

I think you meant longer side pole. Crossbar is the horizontal pole

 

[gaston le gaff]

i think it's time you had a rest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!if possible a long one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[McTallshort]

The scrums are still a mess and need sorting at the elite level but to lose them would be a disaster for all our clubs overweight 40something props than can still enjoy their moment in the limelight for 40-60 minutes (depending on previous nights drinking) every saturday on some wind swepped pitch in North Nottinghamshire.

 

[goodNumber10]

i think it's time you had a rest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!if possible a long one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

yeah, agreed..

 

[sigesige00]

Dear God, whatever next? Goalposts with two crossbars?

...oh, hang on!

Hahahha I remember that one

I think you meant longer side pole. Crossbar is the horizontal pole

Of course I understand. What I am arguing is that there should be higher crossbar (maybe at 16m) since judgement of balls higher than posts. So balls higher than higher crossbar are no goal. This is what I am srguing.

 

[gaston le gaff]

Time for bed said Zeberdi

 

[MauriSca7]

Physically too demanding

And they said rugby was real men's sport...

 

[SixteenSixtySix]

Physically too demanding

And they said rugby was real men's sport...

It's a full-contact sport, of course it's physically demanding.