Scrummaging 101

[darkside lightside]

I openly admit to not having much of a clue about scrum-time - bunch of rotund guys leaning against each other - I know we have a couple of guys who know their stuff on here, anyone fancy educating me?

a while back a guy on lf.com wrote his brief two penn'orth, basically said that: on your ball, a good TH will go forwards a bit, LH will stay where he is to open the field up for the 8 & 9 - and on opponent's ball a good LH will try to put their TH under pressure, and your TH won't want to get ahead of your LH. So the main benefit of a good TH is likelihood of good set-piece possession, and the main benefit of a good LH is that you can go after their scrum - although presumably how well either can play depends in part on the other members of the front row. Is that more or less right?

Also, what is it that determines whether a player is more suited to play at LH rather than TH? It would seem logical for THs to be bigger, and quite a few THs seem to be huge, but then BJ is relatively small (both height- and weight-wise) and Paddy Mac, to take an example close to home, is pretty massive but plays as a LH

What are the things to look for to see who's getting the upper hand?

[WhiteKnightoftheWeld]

anyone fancy educating me?

would this involve the use of a heavy, blunt object?

[darkside lightside]

where are all the experts all of a sudden???

[bootlaced]

The front row at the moment is a bit of a lottery,we no longer have a proper front row,what we have as opposed to a loosehead,hooker and tighthead,is 3 tightheads,the current law allows for three big brutes to drive forward and take the hit or make the hit,the scrumhalf will feed the ball in at a crooked angle thus ensuring the hooker does'nt really have to strike their foot out to bring the ball back into a particular channel[,but I have seen props hooking the ball back,so there can be quite a few channels or permutations in getting the ball back from the front row],too much emphasis is put on the commands of the ref, and who can get the push on the quickest,there is no proper reffing of the bind,and there is no proper reffing of the scrumhalfs put in,the binding of the flankers and no 8 can also dictate how a scrum will perform,ultimately there is too much brute force and not enough skill.

[BR]

Not a front-row player - but I'd say that's a pretty decent assessment. Remembering of course the real heros of the scrum are in the 2nd row, it is their power that the props are positioning .

Good point about the lack of skill though. At top level when a scrum 'goes wrong' you see the ball popping out all directions in a way that a competent junior pack would not have allowed 20 years ago.

[bootlaced]

Having watched half a dozen ERC games or so over the weekend there would appear to a brand new reffing interpetation of Law 20.3 [d], which refers to the binding of the tighthead binding on the back or side of the loosehead, the refs seemed happy to allow the tighthead to bind on the looseheads arm,which is technically against the laws of the game.




http://www.irblaws.com/EN/laws/5/20/194 ... alty-kick/

The tight head prop must grip the loose head prop’s jersey with the right hand only on the back or side. The tight head prop must not grip the chest, arm, sleeve or collar of the opposition loose head prop. The tight head prop must not exert any downward pressure.

[bootlaced]

http://www.irishrugby.ie/ireland/21980.php

Coaches from the RBS 6 Nations participating Unions have thrown their support behind the IRB's commitment to address scrum issues at the elite level of the game.
13
Share Currently 60% of all scrums collapse in Tier 1 internationals and 40% of scrums are required to be reset, while the average time taken to complete a scrum has risen from 41 seconds to 53.
Despite a slight decrease in the number of collapses and resets since the new engagement sequence was introduced last year, the IRB remains determined to tackle the issues and ensure that this critical facet of the Game is a spectacle and a contest.

Coaching representatives from Ireland, England, France, Italy, Scotland and Wales pledged to work with the IRB to deliver a stable scrum platform at a highly positive and productive forum in London on Tuesday evening.

In addition to expressing their support for the scrum engagement sequence, the coaches also gave their backing to the IRB's policy of the strict application of scrum law, including ensuring straight put-ins.

The coaches also support the IRB policy which mandates that referees should crack down on illegal front row binding with a collective emphasis on ensuring that the tighthead prop binds on the body of the loosehead prop and not the arm, and the loosehead prop adopts the correct body position and binds on the body of the opposition tighthead.

This collaborative approach will be critical in assisting to address the problematic aspects of the scrum. Last year a similar approach agreed by all Tier 1 coaches led to a crackdown in key areas of law: offside at the breakdown, offside from kicks, illegal maul formation and strict application of the tackle law. This resulted in a return to attacking rugby.

IRB Referee Manager Paddy O'Brien said: "The meeting was extremely constructive and highly productive. All found it beneficial and it was encouraging to see universal agreement from the coaches about the need to continue to penalise the clear and the obvious in the five key areas of law.

"In particular, the need to address the scrum issues that are currently experienced at elite level.

"We are encouraged that teams recognise there is a collective responsibility to ensure that the high number of collapses and resets is reduced.

"The coaches expressed their full support for referees to employ a zero tolerance policy towards engagement offences and have given a commitment that their teams will endeavour to be compliant in producing a stable, steady scrum by binding correctly.

"The scrum is an integral facet of the game and by working together we can target the issues while ensuring that player welfare continues to be the most important consideration."

A directive will be issued to all Unions reinforcing the message. The coaches' forum has become a regular fixture ahead of the RBS 6 Nations, Tri Nations, June and November Tests.

The forum underscores the IRB's commitment to an open and transparent process of collaboration and communication between the IRB and its member Unions in all areas of refereeing practice.




Glad to see they are concentrating on the put in and the binding

[Jackie Brown]

Hang on, how is the average ONLY 53seconds??!!??

[bootlaced]

Hang on, how is the average ONLY 53seconds??!!??

Hav'nt yet found the info where they are basing their figures on,but as a guess they might be using the time the ref blows for a scrum, and using the time from that whistle while the pack form up and engage , until it either collapses,pops up or the ref blows for an infringement,which then may exclude the further reset scrums,as they would be seperate scrums in their own right,so you may have 3 reset scrums in a 3 minute period.

[Jackie Brown]

Hang on, how is the average ONLY 53seconds??!!??

Hav'nt yet found the info where they are basing their figures on,but as a guess they might be using the time the ref blows for a scrum, and using the time from that whistle while the pack form up and engage , until it either collapses,pops up or the ref blows for an infringement,which then may exclude the further reset scrums,as they would be seperate scrums in their own right,so you may have 3 reset scrums in a 3 minute period.

Fair enough

[Setanta]

Biggest worry for me is not the players who know what they're doing, even if it doesn't always appear so; but rather the referees and their interpretation thereof. A prolonged 'pause' before the 'engage' allows a penalty against the team that lurches forward first OR a reset and try again. The point is, yet another situation where the referee can call the shots. This is open to abuse and easier to call than the breakdown; another area of contention. Why would a referee do that, you ask?
1. to show who's boss 2. because he favours the home team 3. because he can 4. to cancel an earlier mistake 5. because he doesn't know what's going on - take your pick. Referees are only human and part of Paddy's remit was to reduce the number of situations that allow a 'subjective' ruling. I am not sure the 'crouch, touch, pause, engage' has been a success. Not because it wasn't a good idea but because it is open to abuse by the referees themselves.

[bootlaced]

why did'nt the ref award a penalty try, two clips

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ1mSIns8_o

part two here,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L3MDgcN ... ure=fvwrel

[bootlaced]

Biggest worry for me is not the players who know what they're doing, even if it doesn't always appear so; but rather the referees and their interpretation thereof. A prolonged 'pause' before the 'engage' allows a penalty against the team that lurches forward first OR a reset and try again. The point is, yet another situation where the referee can call the shots. This is open to abuse and easier to call than the breakdown; another area of contention. Why would a referee do that, you ask?
1. to show who's boss 2. because he favours the home team 3. because he can 4. to cancel an earlier mistake 5. because he doesn't know what's going on - take your pick. Referees are only human and part of Paddy's remit was to reduce the number of situations that allow a 'subjective' ruling. I am not sure the 'crouch, touch, pause, engage' has been a success. Not because it wasn't a good idea but because it is open to abuse by the referees themselves.

Nigel Owens was on a recent Scrum V programme and he was blaming the players,he basically said that at the higher level of the game there are more penalty resets,whilst the further down the game you go the less resets you have.I still blame the refs poor reffing of the scrum,the players will always try and get away with whatever they can,up to the ref to stamp their authority at the first scrum, and hopefully the players will have had a straight talking to before the game to cleary state that the laws will be implemented from that first scrum and including that first scrum onwards.

[bootlaced]

Heres a Saints scrum against Newcastle http://rugbydump.blogspot.com/2010/11/m ... s-30m.html

[Rooster]

Heres a Saints scrum against Newcastle http://rugbydump.blogspot.com/2010/11/m ... s-30m.html

Newcastle were pure dung in that video, should have popped the scrum at the start and how on earth did they think 1 or 2 men would stop a rolling maul with most of the pack