Why do you have a scrum if ball goes out on full at kick-off?

[Johnny Storm]

If a ball is kicked directly into touch from kick off, the opposing team can choose the line out on the half way line or a scrum on half way.

Surely it should just be a straightforward line out. Why is there an option of a scrum in this instance?

 

[Johnny Storm]

I've just spent a couple of hours on Google with this. Apparently it has to do with the half not even beginning if the ball goes straight dead into touch and the other team can then choose how they wish to start the half from there.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

That's pretty mad, tbf - I would've just guessed that it was ruled as some sort of twisted freekick, rather than anything like that

 

[Johnny Storm]

If the ball goes direct into touch from kick off the other team can:
1. Accept the line out on halfway
2. Have a scrum on halfway
3. Have the kick off retaken, but that would surely be disadvantageous territorrially and a waste of about 60 seconds.

I think this must have come into the rules because of repeated kicks into touch from kick off which wasted loads of time and prevented the game from really starting.

Interesting

 

[unrated]

If its becomes a standard lineout, then teams who has a strong lineout can just kick the ball out on the full every restart to get that lineout option on the 50, they then have a better chance to recover the ball.

Giving options stops teams from manipulating the system.

 

[Reiser99]

If its becomes a standard lineout, then teams who has a strong lineout can just kick the ball out on the full every restart to get that lineout option on the 50, they then have a better chance to recover the ball.

Giving options stops teams from manipulating the system.

Don't see the point in trying to manipulate it. Often at a restart you kick it long and if you defend well most teams kick it out in their own half and you'd end up with a throw inside their half, rather than challenging the opposition's on the halfway line. However rules are usually there because something has happened, so I imagine some teams must have tried it at some point.

 

[BrokenWing]

If you defend well, you generally aren't looking to manipulate the system.

It's maybe aimed more at teams who are tired of kicking to the opposition forwards and having them steamroller through you. Again.

I can't think of another sport off the top of my head where the team that's just scored gets the ball kicked straight back to them.

 

[Quel Carreleur]

The law's probably 100 years old, when rugby was different.
It's just not a problem, so has never been looked at

 

[BrokenWing]

Doing a bit of reading, I've got a feeling it's probably got something to do with when you could call a mark anywhere on the field and have a shot at goal from it.

 

[Leinster Fan]

I vaguely remember Argentina deliberately kicking the kick off out against Ireland at some point in the 2000s, back when they had a brilliant scrum and Ireland's scrum was bad (to be nice).

 

[TRF_heineken]

It's about resetting. The default call for a reset is a scrum. And that is why the scrum was always the main go-to call for a kick-off made directly into touch. The kick-off is the first play where teams can contest for the ball, and if it's not contestable, a reset is given. The lineout on the halfway line, wasn't always part of the calls IIRC.

 

[Johnny Storm]

It's about resetting. The default call for a reset is a scrum. And that is why the scrum was always the main go-to call for a kick-off made directly into touch. The kick-off is the first play where teams can contest for the ball, and if it's not contestable, a reset is given. The lineout on the halfway line, wasn't always part of the calls IIRC.

In that case, why not start each half with a scrum?

It's weird.

EDIT: Maybe that's how it was done in early rugby, and the kick-off was introduced to add more speed and dynamics to the beginning of the half? However, if you get it wrong, then it's back to the old basics with a scrum.

That would make sense actually. A scrum was the start of a half, the kick-off was later introduced, but the scrum start was never rescinded from rules, so that is why only a kick-off into touch can result in a scrum?.

The options of a lineout or retake the kick were recently introduced, that is why older players can only remember the scrum being given in the past.

 

[TRF_heineken]

In that case, why not start each half with a scrum?

It's weird.

EDIT: Maybe that's how it was done in early rugby, and the kick-off was introduced to add more speed and dynamics to the beginning of the half? However, if you get it wrong, then it's back to the old basics with a scrum.

That would make sense actually. A scrum was the start of a half, the kick-off was later introduced, but the scrum start was never rescinded from rules, so that is why only a kick-off into touch can result in a scrum?.

The options of a lineout or retake the kick were recently introduced, that is why older players can only remember the scrum being given in the past.

Rugby was derived from soccer/football, and adopted the same method of starting a game, which is the kick-off

 

[Umaga's Witness]

It's about resetting. The default call for a reset is a scrum. And that is why the scrum was always the main go-to call for a kick-off made directly into touch. The kick-off is the first play where teams can contest for the ball, and if it's not contestable, a reset is given. The lineout on the halfway line, wasn't always part of the calls IIRC.

It makes sense that they would then add a lineout option given some teams might kick out deliberately if they had the superior scrum.

speaking of, any time a team is awarded a scrum they should be awarded a free kick instead. Then there is no perverse incentives. The team with the superior scrum can still choose to scrum when they are awarded a free kick. I'm just sick of a team stuffing up, eg knocking the ball on, then winning a penalty from the ensuing scrum.

 

[TRF_heineken]

It makes sense that they would then add a lineout option given some teams might kick out deliberately if they had the superior scrum.

speaking of, any time a team is awarded a scrum they should be awarded a free kick instead. Then there is no perverse incentives. The team with the superior scrum can still choose to scrum when they are awarded a free kick. I'm just sick of a team stuffing up, eg knocking the ball on, then winning a penalty from the ensuing scrum.

Actually, in the past, when the ball was kicked out directly from a kick-off, the referee awarded a free kick and the team that were to receive the ball from kick-off, had the choice of taking the free kick, from which their captain usually decided to go for a scrum, or lineout.

Then came the ELV's, and the free kick, in many facets of the game, started to disappear and then WR made the rule that it's either a scrum/lineout or reset kick.

 

[xtempore]

A scrum in centre-field is a pretty good attacking opportunity, with options left and right (as long as you've got a decent scrum). Most top teams have pretty similar stats in terms of their scrum and lineout wins, so that's not a factor. From half-way, you're not going to make much impact with a rolling maul, so you're looking at getting the ball out pretty quick, and it's just easier to defend against. A dominant scrum can also give you a penalty, which can then give you that lineout, much further upfield. And even just a decent scrum, lets you keep the opposition guessing which side you'll attack. I don't see why many if any teams would opt for the lineout.

 

[BrokenWing]

A scrum in centre-field is a pretty good attacking opportunity, with options left and right (as long as you've got a decent scrum). Most top teams have pretty similar stats in terms of their scrum and lineout wins, so that's not a factor. From half-way, you're not going to make much impact with a rolling maul, so you're looking at getting the ball out pretty quick, and it's just easier to defend against. A dominant scrum can also give you a penalty, which can then give you that lineout, much further upfield. And even just a decent scrum, lets you keep the opposition guessing which side you'll attack. I don't see why many if any teams would opt for the lineout.

The question isn't asking why you'd take the scrum if you were given the option, it's asking why the option of the scrum is offered.

 

[Ids1978]

If the ball goes direct into touch from kick off the other team can:
1. Accept the line out on halfway
2. Have a scrum on halfway
3. Have the kick off retaken, but that would surely be disadvantageous territorrially and a waste of about 60 seconds.

I think this must have come into the rules because of repeated kicks into touch from kick off which wasted loads of time and prevented the game from really starting.

Interesting

Is the line out on halfway a recent thing? I played rugby for 25 years and when the ball went out on the full from a kick off we only ever had 2 options scrum or kick off again.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Is the line out on halfway a recent thing? I played rugby for 25 years and when the ball went out on the full from a kick off we only ever had 2 options scrum or kick off again.

It's a recent thing. When WR changed the laws on quick throw-in's a few years ago, they also added this option to the team receiving the kick-off, as when the ball is kicked directly into touch, and the receiving team collects the ball outside of play, without it touching anything, they can run up to the halfway line and do a quick throw in, if they don't they have the option of lineout or scrum or Reset kick-off