Rugby league should bring back real scrums
Roar Rookie
By Corey, 3 Dec 2009 Bam Bam is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- NRL, Rugby League, scrum
Rugby league is a game that changes with the times. This is what makes our game great. Rugby league has for a long time tried to make the game faster, and because of this, have disposed of the contested scrum.
But maybe it’s time to reclaim it.
The scrum is the only spectacle rugby union has over our great game.
No matter what code you support, the scrum is one of the most beautiful and fearsome battles in the game. And rugby league used to have this battle.
But the league scrum today is dismal at best and it has been touted that the scrum should be scrapped from the game due to its uselessness.
The rugby league scrum (or the “lean on”, as our union brothers taunt) needs to be reintroduced and the rules need to be looked at. The league scrum is still very close to the union scrum in law, just not in practice.
The law of rugby league allows for uncontested scrums, but there are still laws allowing for them to be contested.
First of all, it is interesting to know that when the scrum is locked in, both teams are allowed to push-even before the ball has been fed.
Also, the ball must be fed straight through the legs of the front rowers of the opposing teams (the law states that only the hooker can rake for the ball. After they have come in contact with the ball, all players are able to play at it).
All this seems to state that the scrum is allowed to be contested, and that the referees could penalise a lot of teams for not feeding the ball correctly.
The scrum would take a lot out of the forwards and allow the backs to show off some of their brilliant footwork and speed to score tries.
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 League articles
- An open letter to Channel Nine (107)
- Gallop and some of his precious Sydney NRL clubs must go (101)
- The NRL is back baby! (65)
- The NRL’s scariest players (56)
- The NRL needs a vision (52)
- Federal Court has it wrong on sports broadcast copyright (48)
- Bulldogs setting benchmark for Sydney’s NRL clubs (46)
- Rugby league’s new era: where to now? (24)
- Federal Court has it wrong on sports broadcast copyright (49)
- An open letter to Channel Nine (109)
- The NRL’s scariest players (56)
- Is the All Stars match increasing the divide? (25)
- Channel Nine needs NRL-cricket ODI compromise (36)
- The NRL needs a vision (52)
- Explore:
- NRL, Rugby League, scrum
Freud of Football said | December 3rd 2009 @ 3:54am | Report comment
The funniest thing I’d ever seen as a kid growing up on AFL was a bunch of blokes smashing into each other trying to walk with the ball under their feet, it’s like a mini-game inside of rugby only (seemingly for me) without a point.
Dan said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:13pm | Report comment
without a point? The point is strength and technique and that the ball should always remain contestable. A well organised and powerful scrum is quite a beautiful sight to behold if you’re familiar with what’s actually involved.
Jaredsbro said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:20pm | Report comment
Also Freud you’d do well to remember that sport’s not like a movie in that it’s all strategically (or ineptly) placed where it is for maximum entertainment. Not even RL can keep tweaking its rules (certainly not every year) and hope to retain fans. This is in part why the code wars (if they exist at all) are largely all about seemingly trivial or awkward things (maybe even the idiosyncrasies) which make footy the way it is.
The code wars are partly about the much-hyped battle over the way footy is perceived, if you will a vision for the game and a desire to see that vision re-produced. The scrum is intrinsically valuable in RU asn opportunity to fight for the ball in a highly structured (which suits some people) kinda way. For RL it’s generally seen as an opportunity to take a breather or merely a set-piece to restart play.
Billo said | December 3rd 2009 @ 4:05am | Report comment
There is no doubt that the one element of league that prevents a lot of rugby supporters from warming to it is the non-contested scrum.
I’m not sure, though, that it will ever go back. Even when league scrums were actively contested, they were shambolic.
Leaguies say that the scrum is there merely to re-start the game with a less cluttered field, so maybe the rest of us should stop comparing league scrums to rugby ones.
They look deceptively similar in outline, but they are really quite different.
katzilla said | December 3rd 2009 @ 4:47am | Report comment
Just get rid of them all together. Just make it a play the ball, teams rarely ever score from scrums anyway so who cares if the field is a little cluttered.
jus de couchon said | December 3rd 2009 @ 4:48am | Report comment
Why do we have a tail bone? Because we used to be monkeys. The League scrum is similar in that it is a relic of the past.
Andy said | December 3rd 2009 @ 6:39am | Report comment
I am all for bringing it back but i think that one reason why they got rid of it was the injuries associated with it.
jmo said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:01am | Report comment
I reckon the league scrum is not such a bad thing as it is
> The forwards are removed from the defensive line for the first play
> Gives the attacking side a chance at a set move against a defensive line with more gaps.
> The defending team has a chance to redeem themselves for dropping the ball by winning the scrum against the feed, I have seen this happen at some critical times but agree it’s all too rare.
> plus it’s a good mechanism for a side to stop the clock when they pack quickly.
> plus there’s occasionally some biffo from them … not that we would condone that
> the mouse trap – always a good talking point for trainspotters
jmo said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:32am | Report comment
just to clarify i guess I basically agree with you Corey it would be good to see a few more contested scrums, my above post was more a response to Katzilla’s post.
one more thought too – coaches rely heavily on stats. I’m guessing that it’s a safer bet to defend for six and get the ball back rather than risk giving away a penalty contesting a scrum to get the ball back, so the defending pack is probably happy to just get on with it.
Justin said | December 8th 2009 @ 2:55pm | Report comment
Yeah we see so many attacking moves from scrums…
RickG said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:06am | Report comment
I’d love to see it but I don’t think it’ll happen. People who love league don’t seem to care that there’s absolutley no contest for posession whatsoever, ie you have the ball for 6 unless you make a mistake. A couple of seasons ago I saw a few instances of teams actually pushing and winning against the head, but more recently when that happens the ref tends to blow the whistle and make them re feed it.
I think it would be great to see another aspect of forward play come back into the game (I hate the fact half-backs and hookers are interchangeable, or that a 2nd rower can play in the centres or vice versa) but it won’t happen.
Paul J said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:18am | Report comment
I read in a recent rugby article on the Roar that 20 minutes of your average rugby game is spent on scrums. Waiting for players to get to the scrum, setting it, re-setting it. If that is true that’s 1/4 on the game.
As jmo said we need the scrum to give the backs a chance for a backline play being free of the forwards.
And without flankers the league scrum will not set as well.
For rugby fans right now it’s all about getting a balance between allowing contested ball and still having running rugby.
Because league allows each team no more than 6 possessions it doesn’t need to contest the ball through scrums, line outs and mauls.
Possession is contested in league differently via handling errors, 40/20 kicks, penalties, 1 on 1 steals, players tackled in their own in goal area.
And possession is contested very quickly, as few stoppages as possible. Contested scrums would be seen as slowing down the game unnecessarily.
Corey said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:58am | Report comment
The other thing I think should be changed in League (along with others) is time-off time-on situation- I believe, in the best interest of the viewers and fans, they should stop the clock when the ball has gone dead (why should the clock continue to run when no players can do anything- most people do not get paid for lunch breaks) and only restart the clock when the ball is live (i.e. ball fed into the scrum, quick tap from penalty, or penalty kick, when the drop out is kicked, 20 metre re-start, and when the ball is restarted after points are scored), this would give the fans a lot more action and would make the close games even closer.
Springs said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:36am | Report comment
The reason the clock is not stopped is because games will end up going for too long and also the ball will be in play for a lot more minutes. At the moment the average time for the ball in play is judt under an hour, this is compared to Union in which the ball is in play only for about half the game. If the clock is stopped you can expect a flurry of points in the last ten minutes, with forwards being so tired.
anopinion said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:43am | Report comment
can someone tell me? What would happen if one team packed like a union scrum? Would they be penalised?
Brett McKay said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:36am | Report comment
I assume you mean as in packing and/or contesting like a Union scrum, not as in with the two flankers??
My guess – guess – is that the ref would blow it up, and probably tell the “contesting” side to just stand there and not drive through. Every now an again a team will contest a League scrum, for the surprise element, but even then it’s still fairly loosely constructed. There’s certainly no tight binding or anything like that.
Part of the problem nowadays is that in terms of body shape, the same guy could play wing, centre, five-eighth, backrow or prop. If you’re 6’3″ and 100kg, you can play anywhere. Contrast that with the body shapes of the same positions in Union..
LT80 said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:22am | Report comment
It’s a bit surprising that no teams have seriously tried to develop a competitive scrum technique. Even if it was only used in certain situations. Winning a scrum against the feed in a critical situation is the sort of thing that could really swing the momentum of a game if it happened.
Corey said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Brett, you’re right, they would blow the whistle and tell them not to drive through, but the problem with that (if anyone knew the rules- which shows you the professional level of our refs) is it is not illegal to drive through (RFL international laws Section 12.4) and if anyone on the field knew this could take it up with the ref. And your point on the size of players is also one reason why the scrum would be great for the game also. Rugby League needs its old warriors back. Imagine the contested scrums come State of Origin time.
anopinion said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:51am | Report comment
A long time ago the Broncos owned a scrum machine. I also know that Jake Howard (Wallaby Scrum Coach 1991) has been to the Broncos to teach scrumming. I assume that at some point they tried and have since given up trying to pack with some organsation.
Springs said | December 3rd 2009 @ 10:46am | Report comment
Contested scrums were never illegal, they were phased out by coaches who must of thought it was a waste of time. The refs pull up everything that isn’t going to their plan so most wins against the head are pulled up. The ref then says ‘no you didn’t do it right’ without explaining why. The Island nations in the world cup contested the scrums regularly, and you’ll often see a team in the last ten minutes contest scrums if they’re trailing by a few points.
The 80s scrums were always contested, but they would take three times to get it right and then it would be a penalty or something. In the 90s I remember wins against the head mainly from the hooker striking for it, as a hooker myself I strike for the ball but can’t reach it since the half only has to roll it behind one leg. My suggestion would be to make it compulsory for the half to feed it in front of the props legs, giving the hooker a chance to strike, and also for refs to let scrums go until they collapse.
I am also laughing at the idea that Preston Campbell can play prop.
netrug said | December 3rd 2009 @ 5:55pm | Report comment
I saw a game where a Rugby hooker played in a league team. He went in low as a Rugby players do and as he raised his head and shoulders up, he smashed into the opposing hooker’s face. The ref penalised the ex-Rugby hooker and told him “never to go into a scrum like that again”. The next scrum he justed nodded his head las the league players do to set the scrum.
I also have seen a league scrum push the opposition off the ball and were penalised for dangerous play. League and Rugby scrums are like chalk and cheese. Please do not confuse the two.
Actually, I think a line-out is more beautiful than a scrum as the players soar for the ball. However, because of league laws, I can;t see that ever being adopted in league.
Wylie said | December 3rd 2009 @ 7:46am | Report comment
Yeah it’s pretty much just decended into a bizarre form of interpretive dance. I guess it serves the purpose of opening up the field but you could achieve the same thing by making all the forwards lie on the ground or stand on the sideline while a tap is taken.