No more pause-pause-pause

[Teh Mite]

Now the scrum will be "crouch-touch-set" according to new IRB directives.



Discuss.

 

[Feicarsinn]

It's all about implementation innit? There was nothing fundamentally with the 'pause' system, it's just that refs didn't get it at all.

It should have gone:
crouch---touch---pause---engage!

But what we saw was a load of different variations like:
crouch---touch---pause--------------engage!
crouch---touch-----------pause---engage!
crouch---touch---paaaaaaaaaause---engage!

Meaning that reset scrums were inevitable, as the front rows were left guessing when to bind.

 

[Teh Mite]

The time between "touch" and "engage" should be the pause, there's no reason to announce it.

 

[TRF_Ezequiel]

The problem was more the fact that "engage" is 2 syllables which makes the teams jump the gun. Do you go on the "en" part or on the "gage" part? Now they change it to "set" which is easier to focus on and less likely to cause early engagements

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

 

[Patchey]

I used to play as a Lock before I got tired of having my head stepped on and moved to the backs and the 'paaaaaause' factor was a real pain in the backside to play with. If the new 'set' rule is implemented properly this is a very good thing.

Does anyone know when this (and the other trial rule changes) are coming into effect?

 

[lucky number 7]

How about we take away the hit..and push it into the sea.

 

[Draggs]

It's all about implementation innit? There was nothing fundamentally with the 'pause' system, it's just that refs didn't get it at all.

It should have gone:
crouch---touch---pause---engage!

But what we saw was a load of different variations like:
crouch---touch---pause--------------engage!
crouch---touch-----------pause---engage!
crouch---touch---paaaaaaaaaause---engage!

Meaning that reset scrums were inevitable, as the front rows were left guessing when to bind.

Can't forget the classic crouch---touch--pausengage!

This reminds me a bit of "What's yoour favourite humming noise?" from Father Ted.

 

[Feicarsinn]

Can't forget the classic crouch---touch--pausengage!

This reminds me a bit of "What's yoour favourite humming noise?" from Father Ted.

My favourite is HHHHmmmmmm. That's the sound of a man humming.

 

[big ginger 8]

As a prop I don't actually mind the sequence as most of the refs we get are sensible about it. However when you get refs who pause for 5 minutes between each word it's a pain in the ass especially as the second rows are always trying to go way before.

 

[dasNdanger]

The problem was more the fact that "engage" is 2 syllables which makes the teams jump the gun. Do you go on the "en" part or on the "gage" part? Now they change it to "set" which is easier to focus on and less likely to cause early engagements

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

I'll miss the 'engage' because it always reminded me of Captain Picard... but I do see where it was the bigger problem. True, the variations on the length of the pause seemed to create some confusion, but I've seem more jumping the gun on the 'engage' than on the 'pause'. The only thing I don't like (perhaps to my American ears) is that the word 'set' reminds me more of a stationary command - like stay, or - ya know - pause.

Maybe they should just change it to the old schoolyard chant of 'Ready, set, go!'


das

 

[dasNdanger]

It's all about implementation innit? There was nothing fundamentally with the 'pause' system, it's just that refs didn't get it at all.

It should have gone:
crouch---touch---pause---engage!

But what we saw was a load of different variations like:
crouch---touch---pause--------------engage!
crouch---touch-----------pause---engage!
crouch---touch---paaaaaaaaaause---engage!

Meaning that reset scrums were inevitable, as the front rows were left guessing when to bind.

Just want to comment on this bit after watching super rugby this weekend. I've noticed that many of the refs go the crouch---touch-----------pause---engage! route. They pause (sometimes for quite a bit) before actually saying the word 'pause'. I think that's one thing that causes - ya know - premature scrummaging.


das

 

[Sam91]

As a prop I don't actually mind the sequence as most of the refs we get are sensible about it. However when you get refs who pause for 5 minutes between each word it's a pain in the ass especially as the second rows are always trying to go way before.

Nothing annoys me more than seeing this, it's as if the refs forget that there's over a tonne of weight holding each other whilst bending their knees and back

 

[Tony Manx]

Maybe they should just change it to the old schoolyard chant of 'Ready, set, go!'

Like that but would go with the original Ready Steady Go...................replaced the 6.5 Special did it not with the lovely Josephine Baker?

 

[TNT88]

The scrum call is supposed to be dictated by the front rows. The ref simply moves onto the next call as soon as the previous instruction has been completed. It can be 3 seconds or 12 seconds depending on how fast they react. This new call will probably prevent a lot more dragged out scrum engagements though, which will hopefully clean the area up a bit.

 

[dasNdanger]

Like that but would go with the original Ready Steady Go...................replaced the 6.5 Special did it not with the lovely Josephine Baker?

For some reason, this popped into my head:




das

 

[HenryChinaski]

The first thing to be done is to standardize the length of referees scrum calls, so the front rows don't have to guess when the engagement is going to come. That way you'll have scrums decided on merit. The way referees treatment of the scrum ranges so much is a huge problem. It's like referees feel the aim of the game is to take the players by surprise.

 

[Peat]

The first thing to be done is to standardize the length of referees scrum calls, so the front rows don't have to guess when the engagement is going to come. That way you'll have scrums decided on merit. The way referees treatment of the scrum ranges so much is a huge problem. It's like referees feel the aim of the game is to take the players by surprise.

The non-standardised length is very deliberate, to stop teams being able to anticipate the calls and go that bit early that they get the advantage but the ref has difficulty spotting it. Whether that's favourable, I don't know, but I can't argue with their logic in terms of what front rows will do and what you can do to try and stop it.

 

[HenryChinaski]

The non-standardised length is very deliberate, to stop teams being able to anticipate the calls and go that bit early that they get the advantage but the ref has difficulty spotting it. Whether that's favourable, I don't know, but I can't argue with their logic in terms of what front rows will do and what you can do to try and stop it.

I guess I can see that. But can't they just be stricter about what counts as early and hold teams more tightly to that standard? Either way, theres acceptably different calls and the theres whats clearly ridiculous - 3 second 'pauses' do noone any good.

 

[Peat]

I guess I can see that. But can't they just be stricter about what counts as early and hold teams more tightly to that standard? Either way, theres acceptably different calls and the theres whats clearly ridiculous - 3 second 'pauses' do noone any good.

Likely to be a lottery. Much like now. But at least it will be a quicker lottery, so I'm probably in favour. Just wanted to point out why they did it.

 

[HenryChinaski]

Likely to be a lottery. Much like now. But at least it will be a quicker lottery, so I'm probably in favour. Just wanted to point out why they did it.

No it's interesting to know! I didn't realise there was a theory behind the madness...