oldBastard
Expert Member
http://www.keo.co.za/2006/12/06/the-scrum-gets-a-revamp/
So the time frame of the engament is slowed down a bit, almost like school boy rugby. Will see how it goes in the S14.
Your thoughts
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Do you think Bafana Bafana will win tonight?
The scrum gets a revamp
- Thread starter oldBastard
- Start date
http://www.keo.co.za/2006/12/06/the-scrum-gets-a-revamp/
So the time frame of the engament is slowed down a bit, almost like school boy rugby. Will see how it goes in the S14.
Your thoughts
It will never work! It's basically going to turn the game into rugbyb league... Different refs will blow different interpretations...
When last did you hear of a prop or hooker getting seriously injured at scrum time?
When last did you hear of a prop or hooker getting seriously injured at scrum time?
MielieSpoor
Expert Member
How can you say that it will not work. At 0/19 level the follow is called: "Crouch, touch, engage" - it works fine!
The pause has always been there, it just wasnt called. Basically when blowing the game and your scrums are a mess then your whole game is a mess!!
So the only way to get the engage at a scrum 100% right is to pause a bit between the crouche and engage call or touch and engage call (0/19). The most effective way is to change the length of the pause at every scrum to echieve full effience of the pause.
It is the referees duty to ensure that the whole formation of the scrum is 100% correct before he/she can call the engage, and that is why a pause exists between the crouch and engage calls.
All that is happening now is that the referees must actually say what is happening so they must say "pause", still check to see that everything is right and then engage. So nothing actually changes.
I can't see this lasting. It will be a complete shambles.
Scrummaging relies on the hit to get the right shoulder and begin to overpower the opponent. The IRB will say that they have left this intact.
Practicaly they've taken the 'hit' out of the contest. Hello rugby league.
and uncontested scrums.
When a scrum forms, and gets to the crouch stage, the props are effectively, already holding the rest of the scrum back, similar to a coiled spring, in order to achieve the 'hit' and gain the advantage. How the hell are they going to withdraw from the 'touch'.
Argh, stop all contact and call it tiddlywinks. Idiots.
For the kids yes!
Have you not noticed the lack of effective front row forwards comming through the ranks. It's because they don't know how to scrummage effectively when they get to play with the big boys.
Scrummaging relies on the hit to get the right shoulder and begin to overpower the opponent. The IRB will say that they have left this intact.
Practicaly they've taken the 'hit' out of the contest. Hello rugby league.
and uncontested scrums. When a scrum forms, and gets to the crouch stage, the props are effectively, already holding the rest of the scrum back, similar to a coiled spring, in order to achieve the 'hit' and gain the advantage. How the hell are they going to withdraw from the 'touch'.
Argh, stop all contact and call it tiddlywinks. Idiots.
For the kids yes!
Have you not noticed the lack of effective front row forwards comming through the ranks. It's because they don't know how to scrummage effectively when they get to play with the big boys.
Last edited:
oldBastard
Expert Member
As far as I can read from this the hit is still there, just will take a second longer.
But yea opposing props to touch each other, mmmmmmm????
But yea opposing props to touch each other, mmmmmmm????
Then why start calling it??
Anyway I think the touch command is the problem. In any scrum where a prop tries to touch his opponent and then withdraw, the binding becomes a problem too, and inveriably a prop get penalised for touching the ground because he was unable to get the bind or the scrum collapses.
Edit: Welome Mielie. The more contributers to the Sport Forum the better!
lilDeath
Executive Member
This is a bit of a oddball rule.
Kinda silly IMO.
Professional games are frantic, can you just imagine the guys now having to wait foir "pause" when they are rearing to hit.
And the "withdraw their arms"-business may just cause collapses...
Now the hookers must hold the 10ton truck back a bit longer while he is waiting for "pause" and then "engage".
Kinda silly IMO.
Professional games are frantic, can you just imagine the guys now having to wait foir "pause" when they are rearing to hit.
And the "withdraw their arms"-business may just cause collapses...
Now the hookers must hold the 10ton truck back a bit longer while he is waiting for "pause" and then "engage".
The front rows will always make a meal of it in order to get the hit in.
Honestly I dont think the problem lies in the engagement, but in the time it takes for the scrummy to put the ball in. That needs to be looked at more closely.
Gregan standing on the side of the scrum with hand and ball in the air gives mee the ****zz.
A wee bit off topic,, did anyone else notice a little argy bargy between Sephaka and the back row (think van den Berg), last scrum of the match last week?
Honestly I dont think the problem lies in the engagement, but in the time it takes for the scrummy to put the ball in. That needs to be looked at more closely.
Gregan standing on the side of the scrum with hand and ball in the air gives mee the ****zz.
A wee bit off topic,, did anyone else notice a little argy bargy between Sephaka and the back row (think van den Berg), last scrum of the match last week?
MielieSpoor
Expert Member
Then why start calling it??
Anyway I think the touch command is the problem. In any scrum where a prop tries to touch his opponent and then withdraw, the binding becomes a problem too, and inveriably a prop get penalised for touching the ground because he was unable to get the bind or the scrum collapses.
Edit: Welome Mielie. The more contributers to the Sport Forum the better!
Ok a few things.
Law 20 - Scrum:
20.1(h) The front rows crouch and pause, and then come together only when the referee calss "engage". This call is not a commend by un indication that the front rows may come together when ready.
Penalty: Free Kick
20.1(j) A front row must not form at a distance from its opponents and rush against them. This is dangerous play.
Penalty: Penalty Kick
That is taken from the 2006 version of Laws of the Game - Rugby Union (The official law book).
As you can see, the pause is already there. The touch part has got to do with 20.1(j).
From a referee's perspective...Why would you say there is so many srums that fall upon the engage? The only reason is that the two front rows are to far from each other - a change of injury!
Why would you say that this prop can't get grip on his opponent? Again, they are to far apart!
If the four props would thouch, it would happen that the two front rows are at an acceptable distance from each other. They would not be able to charge anymore so rule 20.1(j) would become obsolite in a few years time.
The touching would not take the charge effect out of the scrum. Remember that they can withdraw the touch as soon as they are possitioned correctly and the engage as they always did. Nowhere it was stated that they have to touch and not release the touch before engage. On 0/19 level a prop are not allowed to realese his opponent before engage. They are to stay in that touching position at all time.
The fact that the props are allowed to touch and when positioned correctly release the touch and return to only a crouching position would enable that prop to hit his opponent as he always did.
The only difference is that the 2 front rows will at all times be at an acceptable distance from each other throughout the entire game.
This is a very minor rule that will ease the management of the game!
I think it is a great amendment and will help us referees in the management perspective of the game.
All the "very minor rules" have led us to the point where Union is almost League. I believe that the rule is going to hinder the hit and cause more stoppages for "infringments". Think of the coiled spring behind those props. It's easy to say that the locks and others must not apply some "squeeze" before the engage. (That's the next logical rule change here) If you do, there's no hit and no advantage gained.
I just think that they are once again messing (changing) with an integral part of the game that is going to once again mess with my enjoyment of the spectacle, and getting ever closer to uncontested scrums and league, whilst striveing for the questionable conclusion of reducing injuries.
These types of rules have been in play in age group rugby for a while and we still see catastrophic injuries there.
And you didn't answer this!
Soon we will have no big rampaging bulls on the field. No Ballie Swart, Ollie Le Roux or Os Du Randt.
Time will tell.
Are you a ref, 'cos you sound like one!
MielieSpoor
Expert Member
Yes I am...Are you a ref, 'cos you sound like one!
Before I continue...here is another quote out off the law book(this has been in the laws for many years!)
Laws of the Game said:
As you can see, this ammendment is mere a restatement of something that has been in the laws for many years. In the past we would be estimating the distance between the front rows. From now we don't have to estimate, it will be a matter of fact.
I don't see how this law amendment would have an effect on this. What in fact happens down there is this: The scrum will form as usual. The ref will "crouch and touch". The 4 props crouch (as normal), touch on opponents shoulder. While the prop does this, the
effect behind the prop happens. During the pause, the prop releases his grip on his opponent. When the prop looses this grip on his opponent all he does is just drop his arm. He doesn't move an inch! So in other words he stays in the crouching posistion not affecting the rest of the formation at all. When the referee is happy with the formation, he calls the engage call and the scrum starts.
I have given many penalties for front rows that engage to early - as with all refs. The same will apply.
As you can see, this will have no real impact on the engage part of the scrum and the front rows are free to engage with the same force as they always did. One thing that needs to be remembered is the following rule.
A scrum may move 0.5m after the 'hit' at an angle of no more than 15degrees. This is not much but this rule is still effective with this new law amendment. This also encourage the hit. The goal of this is actually not to engourage the hit but is there because of the immense impact of the hit. It is obvious that the scrum cannot be static upon the engage thus this rule was brought into action as from the 2006 season.
It is unfair to blame incompetence of a player on the rules!! If a player do not know how to scrum, why need to blame the rules for that? During the year there were a number of insidents where a player got hurt (in some cases died) and the referee was blamed. During the year the rapport blamed the referee for the death of a prop from a school in Pretoria. After I have spoken to the ref, he told me that the boy was tackling wrongly, bumped his head in the prosess and died a day or two later. A couple of months later in one of my games, almost the same thing happened. A player tackled his opposing player wrongly and was hurt. I was blamed but in fact it is his coach who needs to take the blame cause one could see from that tackle that this player do not know how to tackle correctly.
So this law change would not have the effect of props that cant scrum. If that prop does have a propper coach that knows how to coach a prop to scrum effectively and correct, we will see this rule make the game safer for those props!
Mielie - We are talking differant languages here, you as a ref defending the rules as you must and me as a fan saying the rule changes are spoiling the game.
But, I say again, my issue is not the gap between the opposing scrum. I say that the IRB are taking the hit out of the scrum, an integral part of the scrum, by making the props touch. The props will not touch without applying some pressure and therein lays the problem. Release the touch, a slight release of pressure from the prop and the pressure from the pack causes a collapsed scrum.
Now, a ref must say "well they mustn't do that as it's against the rules". I say I don't want it to be against the rules.
Regarding the incompetance of players. I do not blame it on anyone but the rules. Age group rugby has 'extra' rules if you will, as you have already hinted at (u19). The age group rugby player is taught the fundamentals of the game according to those rules. Now he gets to open rugby and the rules are different to what he's used to and he does not have the basics to perform as he should. IOW, if you did not learn that 1+1 =2 you couldn't do multiplication, or if you did not learn to read, you could not ref. Mind you with some of the refs I've seen........ 
What level do you ref at?
No club level in the Cape I hope. There you should get danger pay if press reports are to be believed!
But, I say again, my issue is not the gap between the opposing scrum. I say that the IRB are taking the hit out of the scrum, an integral part of the scrum, by making the props touch. The props will not touch without applying some pressure and therein lays the problem. Release the touch, a slight release of pressure from the prop and the pressure from the pack causes a collapsed scrum.
Now, a ref must say "well they mustn't do that as it's against the rules". I say I don't want it to be against the rules.
Regarding the incompetance of players. I do not blame it on anyone but the rules. Age group rugby has 'extra' rules if you will, as you have already hinted at (u19). The age group rugby player is taught the fundamentals of the game according to those rules. Now he gets to open rugby and the rules are different to what he's used to and he does not have the basics to perform as he should. IOW, if you did not learn that 1+1 =2 you couldn't do multiplication, or if you did not learn to read, you could not ref. Mind you with some of the refs I've seen........
What level do you ref at?
No club level in the Cape I hope.
There you should get danger pay if press reports are to be believed!Source: http://www.superrugby.co.za/default.asp?id=198815&des=article&scat=superrugby/springboks
Still not sure I like what the rule, IMO, is going to to the game. I would sure like to get Ian Macs' opinion.
(DmZ)Wrecky
Expert Member
I have not seen many refs interpreting the rules around scrums consistent and correct. Most refs, who played rugby before the started blowing the game, were involved in the backline. They do not understand the mechanics of the scrum. This goes for the law makers as well. I have no quarrel with making the game safer for Forwards, but do not stop them from using their weight and power to beat the other team. Once a team has established supremacy in the scrum, half the game is won. That is one of the big differences between league and union. If the IRB takes this away, we might as well play touchies.
MielieSpoor
Expert Member
I'm a ref @ the Blue Bulls...
Ok so you've seen the news paper reports on the new ruling.
I can see we are speaking to different languages here, but all I am trying to say is that the new ruling will have no impact on the 'hit' at the scrum. The only impact that I can think of is that it will the front rows get a better hit because they are better aligned to hit at a better angle. The space would be perfectly right so they can hit with full force and the scrum won't collapse because the opposing team cannot take the hit - something that we saw happening more and more in every match!
In the report it was said as well. There would be a touch and
From what I understood of all of you guy's reasoning you were scared that they have to hold on to each other [in a binding position] untill the scrum ended like the 0/19 law variations state. That is not the case. The have to release and then 'hit in' and after the hit they would need to bind like required in section 20.3 of the laws.
Beside looking from a referees perspective...some of the biggest coaches in Southern Hemisphere rugby feel that this would have a positive impact on the game and in particular for South Arfican rugby -
What we are tols every day is the following: Just read what the law says. Don't fiddle around with other stuff or try and interpret it. Read what it says and impliment it. The law are pretty much straight forward for most of them so its easy to impliment them.
Ok so you've seen the news paper reports on the new ruling.
I can see we are speaking to different languages here, but all I am trying to say is that the new ruling will have no impact on the 'hit' at the scrum. The only impact that I can think of is that it will the front rows get a better hit because they are better aligned to hit at a better angle. The space would be perfectly right so they can hit with full force and the scrum won't collapse because the opposing team cannot take the hit - something that we saw happening more and more in every match!
In the report it was said as well. There would be a touch and
From what I understood of all of you guy's reasoning you were scared that they have to hold on to each other [in a binding position] untill the scrum ended like the 0/19 law variations state. That is not the case. The have to release and then 'hit in' and after the hit they would need to bind like required in section 20.3 of the laws.
Beside looking from a referees perspective...some of the biggest coaches in Southern Hemisphere rugby feel that this would have a positive impact on the game and in particular for South Arfican rugby -
Beeld 7/12/2006 said:
This is a bold statement to make...The are not a lot of people that can honestly say that a ref is amking wrong decisions and interpret the law incorrectly. Obviously there are mistake that you can spot a mile off but when coming to the scrum referees are pretty much spot on with regards to what is standing in the laws.(DmZ)Wrecky said:
Again this ruling will not take away the hit, it will merely help the front rows to get a better hit, so this law actually helps and encourage the hit...(DmZ)Wrecky said:
What we are tols every day is the following: Just read what the law says. Don't fiddle around with other stuff or try and interpret it. Read what it says and impliment it. The law are pretty much straight forward for most of them so its easy to impliment them.
(DmZ)Wrecky
Expert Member
I have blown a few club and school games, 13 years ago. It changed my opinion on refs.
There are too many rules around scrums and lineouts, this allows for different interpretations for the same set of circumstances. At every lineout there are rules broken, I often see that the hooker is standing on the line when throwing the ball into the lineout. This should be blown and a lineout awarded to the other team. At the scrum it often happens that the scrum collapses once, twice and sometimes more, resulting in a penalty for one side. A couple of minutes later the same happens and the other side get the penalty. All the time is clear to see that the same prop is not binding properly or scrumming in. I realize that I am generalizing and I hate that. I hope to see that the new rules will stop the scrumhalf “passing” the ball to the locks at scrum time (foot up). This will allow for proper scrumming and maybe we will see more heels against the head. I would like to see fewer less complicated rules blown consequently. There should not be a situation where 7 rules are broken within a second.
There are too many rules around scrums and lineouts, this allows for different interpretations for the same set of circumstances. At every lineout there are rules broken, I often see that the hooker is standing on the line when throwing the ball into the lineout. This should be blown and a lineout awarded to the other team. At the scrum it often happens that the scrum collapses once, twice and sometimes more, resulting in a penalty for one side. A couple of minutes later the same happens and the other side get the penalty. All the time is clear to see that the same prop is not binding properly or scrumming in. I realize that I am generalizing and I hate that. I hope to see that the new rules will stop the scrumhalf “passing” the ball to the locks at scrum time (foot up). This will allow for proper scrumming and maybe we will see more heels against the head. I would like to see fewer less complicated rules blown consequently. There should not be a situation where 7 rules are broken within a second.
MielieSpoor
Expert Member
True. I can't agree more!
Yup. Less rules, better game. IMO
@ Mielie - I truly hope you stick around mate. (Even tho you're from the B... B.... See I can't even say the name) When S14 & CC start we can have some interesting 'chats'. Especially after 3/2/2007 when the Sharks thrash your mob.
and then I'll tell you 'I told you so'.
@ Mielie - I truly hope you stick around mate. (Even tho you're from the B... B.... See I can't even say the name) When S14 & CC start we can have some interesting 'chats'. Especially after 3/2/2007 when the Sharks thrash your mob.
and then I'll tell you 'I told you so'.
Last edited:
MielieSpoor
Expert Member
...I truly hope you stick around mate. (Even tho you're from the B... B.... See I can't even say the name) When S14 & CC start we can have some interesting 'chats'. Especially after 3/2/2007 when the Sharks thrash your mob.
I have actually been reading myAdsl for more than a year now, I just decided to participate in the forums yesturday when I saw this thread.
I always say one has to dream - it's good for you, but then you have to dream realistically as well...
Oh I see refs can give a bit of cheek too. Roll on 3 Feb 2007. Ons sal sien wie is Baas!