Competitive Scrum?

[botica]

The rule book for modified games say a scrum is a way to restart the game after a break down of skills. I think the current way is good, although the same team who feeds gets the ball, its not as gifted as a penelty which a tap is used for. Your team is not waiting lined up and there is a greater chance of error at the pick up from the scrum. Might as well give a penelty for a knock on. A non passive scrum will result in more injurys whick will go against us, they always do!!!!!

[cpwigan]

Competitive scrums is nostalgic romantic bullshirt. People pretend or want to believe that in the past we had these wonderful scrums where the ball was fed down the middle of a tunnel and went perfectly from hooker to loose forward. The reality was that more often than not, approcx 75% of scrums had to be reformed because the scrum half could not even get the ball in because the two hookers were sprawled on the scrum floor trying to block or deflect the feed, the non feed pack would be trying to screw the scrum. Invariably, the ball simply hit one of the hookers legs and rebounded wildly straight back out. The referee either said reform or he would ad hoc award a penalty. Umpteen penalties were awarded from scrum infringements and it was often a lottery who got the penalty. If the scrum reset the ball would be flung hard at the tunnel and rebound again and maybe the referee would simply waive play on in an effort to get the game restarted again.

Those old enough will recall that scrum halves like Andy Gregory still had the habit of actually throwing the ball as hard as possible downwards into a scrum. Very often the scrum half was more important at a scrum than the pack.

Why have scrums. Simple. Variety and an opportunity for backs to attack backs. More important than competition is the need to keep packs in the scrum until the ball is removed from the scrum. referees are weak on this point.

Safety is a real issue

[thegimble]

lucky 13 posted:
Not bothered about the RU part of the topic they just copy us anyway just 100 years behind ,scrum part of our game just think its another thing we don't need in RL

One part of the game league is a 100 years behind is scrummaging. Its now obselite and people should not use the exscuse its a way of starting the game.

The ball goes no where near the hooker. Either do away with it or make it so that the ball has to go square in the scrum not thrown at the second rows ankle.

[DaveO]

the_cow posted:
collapsing of scrums very rarely occurs after the engage- its the impact of the engage and a lack suitable binding that results in a collapse. once the scrum is engaged and set its very rare anything goes wrong.

if two packs are of a similar level in terms of age, then there is no issue- it simply comes down to technique and practice. Its only when you have inexperience or an imbalance, eg. under18's playing a first team, when problems are likely to occur.

I don't think it needs to be as extreme an imbalance as that to cause problems.

It is somewhat rare at the top of the ru game that a scrum is won against the feed, but it is more common that a penalty occurs due to the opposing team turning the scrum or forcing errors due to pressure being exerted on the scrum half.

Exactly! Penalties occur in RU over infringements that don't occur in RL. Who needs the game slowed down to RU pace with more penalties?

i can see the point regarding refs having trouble managing the scrum but then isnt this a reflection upon the skill, or lack of skill, that the referee exhibit. i think its part and parcel of nearly any sport that referees make mistakes and call decisions wrong, whether this be rl, ru or footy. it just has to be accepted that decisions balance themselves out over a season.

As has been pointed out the policing of scrums is very hit and miss by refs and I think that would be true regardless of the competence of the ref.

What is the point of the controversy over all the penalties for when as you say the outcome of scrums going against the feed is rarely different than it is with RL scrums?

Dave

[lucky 13]

One part of the game league is a 100 years behind is scrummaging. Its now obselite and people should not use the exscuse its a way of starting the game.

ERMMMM behind in scrummaging can live with that ,by being behind we are 100 years in front think RU will slowly come away from a competitive scrum to a way of restarting game while tying forwards up 'sounds familiar taking a lead from RL.[/b]


The ball goes no where near the hooker. Either do away with it or make it so that the ball has to go square in the scrum not thrown at the second rows ankle.


No for above reason , think we may go further and make forwards stay binded until first pass or tackle is complete

[adrenalinxx]

I think scrums are fine the way they are in Rugby League at the moment, having competitive scrums like in rugby union would slow the game down to much, I do watch the Saracens match when Farrell made his debut and was appalled at how long both teams took over the scrums. It took them 3 attempts at forming the scrum before the referee eventually awarded a penalty for something, but the players were falling over, dropping off the end of the scrum it wasted time and didn't make good viewing.

The Rugby League scrum is just a way of re-starting the game from were the incident occurred and it opens up the field for the backs. I do think that scrums are wasted a bit in Rugby League as many team just choose to take a drive like a normal set rather than work a set move, with player like Ashton and Calderwood in the team Wigan could really use scrum to good effect, especially with Barrett at Stand off.

As for the job of the hooker, well the traditional sense the job might have disappeared out of rugby league because of lack of competitive scrums but because of the play the balls in rugby league the hooker has a new role. The job of hooker is now to control the play from the play the ball rather than to hook the ball in scrums, if competitive scrums were removed from RU then the job of hooker might be questioned but not in Rugby League.

[thegimble]

lucky 13 posted:

One part of the game league is a 100 years behind is scrummaging. Its now obselite and people should not use the exscuse its a way of starting the game.

ERMMMM behind in scrummaging can live with that ,by being behind we are 100 years in front think RU will slowly come away from a competitive scrum to a way of restarting game while tying forwards up 'sounds familiar taking a lead from RL.[/b]


The ball goes no where near the hooker. Either do away with it or make it so that the ball has to go square in the scrum not thrown at the second rows ankle.


No for above reason , think we may go further and make forwards stay binded until first pass or tackle is complete

Competetive scrums in union will remain. I played as a prop and as far as i know 2 main rules changed. neck not to go lower than the hips. Thats a very good ruling which was changed 10 years ago and secondly packs come closer so the inital impact is reduced. Another very good idea.

As people who have played the game will tell you its very rare that a scrum being pulled down by a prop can cause serious damage. Its when the inital contact happens and the pack collapses that can put necks in a dangerous positions.

Its obvious you have no understanding of the importance of the scrum in union. The game will not allow the scrum to develop into the joke it is in league today.

There is a difference from un competetive scrummaging and making it safer. Do not mix the 2 and come up with your own conclusions.

[the_cow]

thanks gimble...you answered that argument for me. :eusa2:

i understand the argument of not slowing the game down which is understandable but it just seems like a competitive aspect of the game has been lost. i do agree though that more should be made of the play direct from the scrum...surely if your going to find a gap to step through or a chance to beat your marker its then. i guess the risk and worry is that the tackled player loses the ball and the opposing team score.

the scrummaging part of playing hooker in ru isnt the difficult bit, its the throwing in at the line outs. this is harder than anything else, other than drop kicks, i have experienced on a rugby pitch. its not actually getting the ball to go straight but hitting the jumper at the perfect time.

maybe it should be called a 'lean on' then both parties would be happy :doz:

[adrenalinxx]

Doing some research into why scrums were made less competitive in Rugby League I found this.

Previously, rugby league scrummages were competitive, as in rugby union. The main reason for the change to uncontested scrums was that during the 1970s scrum penalties for feeding the second row, packs moving off the "mark" or collapsing the scrum were seen as a major factor behind falling attendances. The ability of teams to win a game purely on goals from scrum penalties was also seen as unfair. In an effort to reverse falling attendances and improve the game's finances, rule changes were made that greatly reduced the number of scrums (through the introduction of the "turnover" after six tackles and after kicking into touch on the full) and authorities ceased enforcing rules about feeding the scrum and halfbacks could thus feed the second row unpunished.

There is a very valid point in there, a Rugby League match should not be won by the team who can push other players better, it is rugby not sumo wrestling.

In the end it is the choice of the team if they want to push in the scrum or not, Wigan have done it before in a match against Leeds but I think that it should be a quick way to restart the game rather than waste time giving needless penalties. Scrums are dangerous and people are going to keep getting hurt if they are competitive if more rules are brought into to protect scrums the there will just be more penalties. In Rugby Union they have a rule that scrums must be uncompetitive if the team is without a Prop, in Rugby League there are big differences between the sizes and weight of some Props some teams would just be pushed off the ball too easily and never stand a chance of winning.

Rugby League has developed well from uncompetitive scrums, the play is faster, props are quicker and more agile and are no longer just battering rams, with competitive scrums the game would slow down, props would have to train to push in the scrum and will probably become slower and less agile and the game wills suffer.

If it ain't broke don't fix it

[Matthew]

The RFU are currently looking at ways to reduce the impact of the front rows at the forming of the scrum. The have recently been using the "touch, hold, engage" method - in order to stop teams being too far apart and therefore charging into contact.

As was mentioned above - if either team cannot field a specialist front row then scrums are uncontested. Teams have been known to feint injury when getting turned over at the scrum in order to gain the advantage - not something that I would want to see in our game.

Refereeing the scrum is a very hard thing to do - as was proved in the RU World Cup Final where England were penalised when Australia could not hold them - that decision led to a penalty being kicked and extra time. This could ultimately have gifted the destination of the world cup to the wrong team.

Personally, whilst I think that it is a good thing when teams occasionally attempt to push at the scrum to force a mistake from the side with possession; I wouldn't want it to become a feature of our game and therefore become as messy an area as it regularly becomes in Union.

Likewise I wouldn't want players like Feka to have to spend time on practising the art of scrummaging rather than perfecting the art of running over the top of opposition players. Props in RL are exciting battering rams who makes holes in defences for fast and elusive players to exploit - one of the things that make me - someone who lives in the RU heartland a RL fan.