What is the scrum worth?

[shebeen]

I'm going to park my bias as a Bok here, and add no direct comment further.
The RGR series with NZ Vs Boks has scrum calls/dominance/penalties in all the drama leading up to the opening game, and continuing through the first and second games.

It's the battle ground between the coaches in the press conference and the media, but I'm very keen to see some informed and neutral opinions here.

I'd add some links but there are highlights and opinion pieces everywhere and I don't want to steer the argument in a direction.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I think it is time that referees stopped "rewarding dominance" and actuall started to penalize offences. There is no offence of "going backwards" there is no offence of "being drive up and down" Dominance can be by illegal means as well as legal. Let us all reward the honest and punish the sinner.

 

[dfobrien]

And if you going to reset the scrum, particularly if you're going to give a lecture, stop the f-in clock. Angus Gardner wasted more than five minutes of playing time on Saturday calling the front rows over to remind them of what they had agreed in the dressing room.

 

[SimonSmith]

And if you going to reset the scrum, particularly if you're going to give a lecture, stop the f-in clock. Angus Gardner wasted more than five minutes of playing time on Saturday calling the front rows over to remind them of what they had agreed in the dressing room.

It's a no-win for the referees.

Avoid PKs unless absolutely necessary. Two sides dicking about at the same time making it difficult to PK one of them.

Gardner didn't kill the clock - the players did.

 

[didds]

Gardner didn't kill the clock - the players did.

I wold agree - other than the caveat that allowing the clock to run while the chats occur could benefit one side who ciold then use a scrum reset as a way to kill time.

Id be happy that all such chats be time off so that doesnt become a potatential tactic.

 

[didds]

I think it is time that referees stopped "rewarding dominance" and actuall started to penalize offences. There is no offence of "going backwards" there is no offence of "being drive up and down" Dominance can be by illegal means as well as legal. Let us all reward the honest and punish the sinner.

Ive a lot of sympathy with this.

Go back not that long ago really and a side humbled at the scrum just lost the ball and metres and defensive orgainsatiuon... "somebody somewhere" then decreed that strict application of "pushing straight" and "remaining bound" was required turning devastated scrums into a PK when one or other or both of these laws get breached as backrows get spat out and front rows are unable to actually push as they are busy trying not to fall over with attendant safety fears.

 

[dfobrien]

It's a no-win for the referees.

Avoid PKs unless absolutely necessary. Two sides dicking about at the same time making it difficult to PK one of them.

Gardner didn't kill the clock - the players did.

I agree both sides were dicking about, but how is it a no-win for the referees? At the moment, it's a no-win for the fans that paid good money, and, as Didds said, allows the side leading to milk it. Just stop the clock and then you can lecture away to your heart's content ... and we all win.

 

[jeremy]

Ive a lot of sympathy with this.

Go back not that long ago really and a side humbled at the scrum just lost the ball and metres and defensive orgainsatiuon... "somebody somewhere" then decreed that strict application of "pushing straight" and "remaining bound" was required turning devastated scrums into a PK when one or other or both of these laws get breached as backrows get spat out and front rows are unable to actually push as they are busy trying not to fall over with attendant safety fears.

Presumably pushing straight and remaining bound are considered safety issues.

But what about demoting these to a free kick? FK offences the ref considers dangerous can always be blown as PK on their merits, no?

 

[didds]

Presumably pushing straight and remaining bound are considered safety issues.

But what about demoting these to a free kick? FK offences the ref considers dangerous can always be blown as PK on their merits, no?

presumably because safety issues tend towards the "foul play" bucket, not technical bucket ?

 

[SimonSmith]

I agree both sides were dicking about, but how is it a no-win for the referees? At the moment, it's a no-win for the fans that paid good money, and, as Didds said, allows the side leading to milk it. Just stop the clock and then you can lecture away to your heart's content ... and we all win.

If both sides are dicking about, what should he do then? Penalize at random?

 

[tim White]

Do a Wayne Barnes - Threaten to replace the front row players of both teams, "of course I can"

 

[shep]

Ive a lot of sympathy with this.

Go back not that long ago really and a side humbled at the scrum just lost the ball and metres and defensive orgainsatiuon... "somebody somewhere" then decreed that strict application of "pushing straight" and "remaining bound" was required turning devastated scrums into a PK when one or other or both of these laws get breached as backrows get spat out and front rows are unable to actually push as they are busy trying not to fall over with attendant safety fears.

Think we need to remember the existential threat to rugby through the 90s was spinal injuries, not head injuries.

The stats were starting to get truly horrifying for a little while there, and they are much better now

 

[dfobrien]

If both sides are dicking about, what should he do then? Penalize at random?

I'm not suggesting he do anything different, other than stop the clock. If he can't be sure who's at fault, or both teams are, then he should certainly NOT penalise at random. If I recall correctly he did call out both hookers several times for the brake foot, so a Barnes-esque sending both to the bin might have been called for - but at least stop the clock for the lectures and don't penalise the fans for the "dicking about". It doesn't seem difficult.

 

[SimonSmith]

I'm not suggesting he do anything different, other than stop the clock. If he can't be sure who's at fault, or both teams are, then he should certainly NOT penalise at random. If I recall correctly he did call out both hookers several times for the brake foot, so a Barnes-esque sending both to the bin might have been called for - but at least stop the clock for the lectures and don't penalise the fans for the "dicking about". It doesn't seem difficult.

So you want referees to contract outside the law even more than they already do?

5.5The referee may stop play and allow time for:

a. Player injury for up to one minute. If a player is seriously injured, the referee has the discretion to allow more than one minute for that player to be removed from the playing area.

b. Consultation with other officials.

5.6Once the ball is already dead, the referee may allow time for:

a. Replacement of players.

b. Replacing or repairing players’ clothing.

c. Re-tying a boot-lace.

d. Retrieving the ball.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Ive a lot of sympathy with this.

Go back not that long ago really and a side humbled at the scrum just lost the ball and metres and defensive orgainsatiuon... "somebody somewhere" then decreed that strict application of "pushing straight" and "remaining bound" was required turning devastated scrums into a PK when one or other or both of these laws get breached as backrows get spat out and front rows are unable to actually push as they are busy trying not to fall over with attendant safety fears.

"somebody somewhere" then decreed that strict application of "pushing straight" and "remaining bound"

Perhaps the best post ever, Second only to O.B. post about abbrev MSP

 

[dfobrien]

So you want referees to contract outside the law even more than they already do?

Fair enough - I'm not a referee. But it seems daft to regard the constant resetting of scrums as part of "play". And it gives a licence to the team in the lead to engage in time-wasting. So I'd simply change the laws or the guidance to referees. Stop the clock for any scrum reset. Who pays good money to watch sixteen people heaving and then falling over, being lectured by the ref, and moving three yards sideways to do it all again?

 

[didds]

Those are reasonable points, reasonably made.

But - playing devils advocate to some degree - lots of people clearly pay good money to watch sixteen people heaving and then falling over, being lectured by the ref, and moving three yards sideways to do it all again, week on week all around the world.

Meanwhile those of us who dont want to pay upwards of a ton for a club game where this happens, just dont. And maybe instead go along to their local club and watch a game for free that doesn't have this scenario played out.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

So you want referees to contract outside the law even more than they already do?

I think there is a massive difference between putting the watch on hold whilst you sort a problem and the constant ignoring scrum feeds. The first ensures that cheats are controlled without , effective, foreshortening the gametime, so the problem is hopefully stopped in the it tracks, whereas the second allows cheats to abuse the laws without sanction. Again it is an issue of context.

 

[Shelflife]

Firstly I'm not picking on Angus this happens across the elite refs.

Secondly I love a good scrum and if a team has a dominant scrum they should be allowed to use it.

Before the game the ref will talk to the front rows and tell them what he wants, they already know what it required of them as they are full time professionals playing at an elite level.

That's the only time the ref should talk to the front rows after that, no coaching during the game, no stopping a scrum and having the big chat about what is required of them - they know what is required they are full time elite professionals.

If two front row players are "dicking around" and not allowing scrums to be formed properly then YC them, if they refuse to play within the laws - simply remove them from the game, they will soon get the message.

There are way too many resets in the pro game, if we had that many resets in the amateur game we would be dropped down a level.

Make a decision for crying out loud, too many elite refs with two ARs and a TMO abdicate making a decision and opt for a reset.

Too many scrum infringements ? YC We need to get back to a position where forwards scrum legally and properly, if they cant then get rid of them.

How many times have we seen a team with a dominant scrum in the red zone opt for a scrum and when the defending team bring it down the attacking team are forced to play it away, thus reducing their attacking options ?

How many times have we seen a scrum on the 15m line and the ref will be on the far side and the scrum goes down and he will come around to the near side to see whats happening ? You have an International ref less than 15m away - trust them and stay the far side !

How many times have we seen refs stop the game and talk to the two front rows in the 75min ? If you havent it sorted by then you're definitely not going to sort it now .

How many times are the team in the lead allowed to slow down the whole scrum process and run down the clock with the ref happily resetting the scrum without stopping the clock, do they not realise they are being played ?

The scrum is a very simple process that has been complicated over the years by elite rugby simply not enforcing the laws that are already there.

Team talk before the game.

Enforce the laws that are in the law book

Remove players that refuse to obey the laws.

Simple really.

 

[didds]

I cant say I disagree.

But WR have created the problem - refs are merely doing what they are told to do - and we are where we are.