The scrum gets a revamp

[MielieSpoor]

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.

This is actually not right. The line is not part of the playing field so a hooker may stand on the line when throwing the ball into the line out. If the hooker is standing with his foot (feet) in the field of play then the non-offending team (team not throwing the ball in) gets a choice of a line out or a scrum on the line of touch at the 15 metre line. But one thing has to be remembered. All the people on the pavilion wants to see rugby and not how well the refs knows his laws so it is his resposibility to first speak to the player informing him of his mistake. If this happens repeatedly then award the choice. If it still happens then the referee is allowed to award a free kick on the 15m line. If it still continues (which I have never seen), then he may reward a penalty for repeated infringement. If it still continues, a yellow card may be given. I doubt however that this has ever happened and ever will, but that is the laws...

 

[Omac]

I'm not alone!

This too shall pass by Super Wrap

Posted on 06 February 2007 - 09:33

The first week of the second Vodacom Super 14 rugby tournament produced nine yellow cards, no bonus points for tries and six new captains, but most of all it provided the jolt of the first sight of the new four-stage scrum that sent shock waves through the game.

Welcome back to the SuperWrap at the start of yet another SuperRugby tournament and all we can say is that “this too shall pass.”

The scrum has always been the special preserve of a unique brand of men. It held deep secrets that only members of the covert society of frontrow forwards understood, it contained the Da Vinci Code of rugby, only grasped by a cult of broad men and preserved by them as the innermost core of the game.

And then came 2007 and we discovered that the temple had been raided, the scrolls altered and the most sacred area of the game reduced to ridicule.

The law makers had intended to make the scrum safer and introduced an additional step in which the frontrows are required to reach out and “touch” each other to set the distance between them before the real business of establishing physical supremacy gets under way.

It sounded odd when first announced but in practice it has turned out to be ludicrous – in the words of one grizzled denizen of the frontrow who called us “making props look like girls threatening to have a fight.”

Rugby’s heaviest and strongest men look as though they are touching a hot plate rather than getting ready to scrum the x!*t out of an opponent, but it seems we have no choice but to give it a chance. It will pass. Like kidney stones, a malady props tend to suffer from incidentally, it will pass. We hope.

Yup!

A question: Were the like of Os du Randt, Ollie le Roux, Carl Hayman, Tony Woodcock, John Smit, Keven Mealamu, Brendan Cannon and Anton Oliver asked for their input when the new scrum law was decided upon? Somehow we think not.

Bloody sure they weren't. Only refs and administrators methinks.

It's like parents (admins) handcuffing a child to make the teachers (refs) job easier.

Quote of the Week I: “I don’t know about this touch business, frankly.” – Hugh Bladen on the new four-stage scrum.

http://www.superrugby.co.za/default.asp?id=204015&des=article&scat=superrugby/super14

 

[Omac]

Has anyone noticed a difference in the way refs are calling at the scrum lately.

It seems that the refs agree (quietly) that the change to the refs calls at the setting of a scrum are BS. They appear to have shortened the call back to 3 instructions instead of 4 by instead of doing this,

"crouch...................touch...................pause.................engage.

doing it this way,

"crouch....................touch&pause...............engage."

 

[MielieSpoor]

Has anyone noticed a difference in the way refs are calling at the scrum lately.

It seems that the refs agree (quietly) that the change to the refs calls at the setting of a scrum are BS. They appear to have shortened the call back to 3 instructions instead of 4 by instead of doing this,

"crouch...................touch...................pause.................engage.

doing it this way,

"crouch....................touch&pause...............engage."

Sorry but you are wrong. The refs didn't quitely decide that. There is a difference in the calls beacause the referees are told to do so.

André Watson has sent out a letter some time ago saying that that the touch and pause should be one call!!

It is only international games that still has to be called seperately. The IRB is currently in discussion on this. They will make a decision wether the touch and pause should be called as one call or seperately after the world cup.

 

[Omac]

I knew it would be you to reply!

Semantics. Maybe I should of said, it appears that someone at SA Referees has decided..................

Still, he appears to agree with me!

I must says that it is a little disingenuous of André Watson to defend the original change using statistics from matches and then quietly change the call because the long (4) wasn't working.

 

[MielieSpoor]

The only reason the desicion was made is because it doesn't make a diffirence if you call touch, pause or touch-pause. The rugby public spends way too much time in critisising the call but doesn't really understand what it is about.

Whether a referee makes the call with a gap in between the words or without, your duty stays exactly the same!

From experience I can tell you that the it had a positive impact. I called it as one call from the very start as it is a bit more conveniant and you don't waste time on setting the scrum.

Oh, and André Watson didn't make they dicision on his own, the IRB also had a finger in the pie...Allround the world, it is only Test match rugby that the call still is touch, pause. All other games it should be touch-pause as one call.

 

[TheREV]

And here I thought our dof refs were calling "Touch paws, engage!"

Still, why have different interpretations for local and international? Surely that's a recipe for disaster when our bokke are engaging on the pause (paws)?

 

[MielieSpoor]

And here I thought our dof refs were calling "Touch paws, engage!"

Still, why have different interpretations for local and international? Surely that's a recipe for disaster when our bokke are engaging on the pause (paws)?

The change in the call doesn't make a difference in the engage...the scrum aren't allowed to engage before the referee calls engage so this has got little effect.