Uncontested scrums are a blight on the game
Roar Pro
By Old Man Emu, 6 Apr 2009 The Crowd is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- IRB Laws of Rugby, Rugby Union, rugby union scrums
Law 20 of the IRB Laws of Rugby deals with the scrum and accounts for eleven pages of the Laws of the game. With some glee, I have now learned that it is an offence under the Laws of Rugby to loiter near a scrum.
After witnessing the farce of uncontested scrums during Saturday night’s Waratahs Vs Stormers game, one more clause ought to be added to Law 20: it should be an automatic free kick if one side is unable to contest a scrum.
It is manifestly unfair for one side not to be able to participate in a vital contest for possession. If one accepts that it is fair enough to declare no contest when you run out of fit props, then why not no contest for lineouts if all your jumpers are injured and no kicking for goal if your goal kickers are injured?
It is common place in lower grade rugby for games to start with no contested scrums, having selected two extra breakaways in the front row and potentially gaining an unfair advantage.
The Laws should address this situation to ensure that the scrum remains a meaningful part of the game at amateur level.
And it would not be hard to imagine that the absence of sanction for failing to contest a scrum could be exploited at a professional level by canny coaches who know they have a vastly inferior scrum.
Pick four props in your team but instruct them all to cry injury at certain stages of the game and then finish the game with two extra back rowers on the park.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- France turns to Parra and Trinh-Duc
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (7)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (202)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- IRB Laws of Rugby, Rugby Union, rugby union scrums
Clarky said | April 6th 2009 @ 8:44am | Report comment
OME – interested to know which lower grade rugby you refer to, as the penalties in Subbies have been dramatically beefed up in recent years to stop uncontested scrums emerging.
I agree, what happened with the Stormers should not occur, and SANZAR should ensure suitable penalties are in place to discourage this type of thing.
OldManEmu said | April 6th 2009 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Clarky I was referring to NSW Central West Rugby.
What has NSW Subbies done to address the problem? Have they gone with a free kick for every no contest? That seems to be the logical solution.
Sin-ick said | April 6th 2009 @ 9:36am | Report comment
I understood that if your opponent requested non-contested scrums, you can opt for a free kick.
Also if a team calls non-contested scrums, they are then unable to make any substitutions for the remainder of the match.
OldManEmu said | April 6th 2009 @ 9:45am | Report comment
That is not what the IRB Laws state Sin-Ick. It might be that certain bodies have incorporated such laws into their own laws but the point remains that there is something a bit rotten when the IRB laws do not have these perfectly appropriate type of sanctions.
stillmissit said | April 6th 2009 @ 10:58am | Report comment
Lets not have this poncing around and ban uncontested scrums. If you cant supply a working scrum you lose. If all your props are injured the game ends there and you lose – unfortunate but life ain’t fair. I cant remember a game from my time where we lost all props in a game.
Easy ain’t it?
Harry said | April 6th 2009 @ 11:17am | Report comment
The rule about uncontested scrums is being abused and they should revert back to the old rules where all scrums were contested irrespective of the” alleged “condition of front rowers. The game was played for many years when teams had injury problems and they made do with what players they had. The tight 5 are supposed to be tough and can take anything so let them prove it and use a 2nd rower as a prop if neccesary.
PastHisBest said | April 6th 2009 @ 11:51am | Report comment
Won’t happen Harry. The first non-prop that becomes a paraplegic will bankrupt one or more unions with a lawsuit.
rogerw said | April 6th 2009 @ 11:53am | Report comment
As I understand it the French union introduced their own law in regards to uncontested scrums some time ago. If a team could not replace an injured prop with another prop, they played on with 14 men. I believe it fixed the problem.
PastHisBest said | April 6th 2009 @ 11:59am | Report comment
I like it rogerw! Doesn’t fix the actual uncontested scrum problem, but as you say it would stop the rorting of it pretty much straight away.
Clarky said | April 6th 2009 @ 12:55pm | Report comment
OME – Sin-ick has pretty much stated the Subbies interpretations for uncontested scrums. They’ve identified it as a blight on the game and are trying to stamp it out. The fact you can’t replace players is pretty key. You can’t tell me that the replacement Stormers hooker (who looked pretty big) couldn’t have handled a few scrums at loosehead? I think someone in Stormers land was telling porkies over the injuries firstly, and then secondly that the replacement hooker couldn’t pack down.