The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

The effects of the IRB's changes to scrum laws

Wallabies Will Genia passes from a scrum. AAP Image/Mick Tsikas
Roar Rookie
28th April, 2013
15
1888 Reads

The IRB announced that there would be some rule changes and differences in interpretation for the 2013 season.

A major change to the setting of scrums was that the ‘crouch, touch, pause, engage’ protocol was modified to ‘crouch, touch, set’.

The expectation was that the removal of the ‘pause’ would result in fewer early engagements because the likelihood was that the cadence of the referee’’ calls would become more consistent.

The Six Nations competition for 2013 has now concluded and there have been 61 Super Rugby games to date. Have there been structural changes to the game resulting from the changes to the laws?

The table below summarizes a comparison of data drawn from a sample of 29 2011 Rugby World Cup games, the 125 games of the 2012 Super Rugby competition, the (61) 2013 Super Rugby games played to date and the 2013 Six Nations competition.

Time in Scrums/ Game (Mins)

Average No of Scrums /game

Average Time/Scrum (seconds)

RWC 2011

13.32

16.79

47.60

Super Rugby 2012

15.21

16.93

53.90

Super Rugby 2013

15.01

14.51

62.18

Six Nations 2013

14.27

14.27

61.02

 

There has been a slight decrease in the number of scrum per game but little change to the total time spent in scrums.

In fact each scrum is now taking longer with both Six Nations and Super Rugby now averaging more than a minute per scrum.

Advertisement

In eight of the Super Rugby games more than 20 minutes of playing time has been taken up with scrums with the Sharks/Cheetahs at almost 27 minutes taking the cake.

A closer analysis of the scrums shows the following:

Collapses

Resets

Free Kicks (Early)

Penalties

% of Scrums  completed

Six Nations 2013

29%

24%

17%

35%%

48%

Super 15  2013 (to date)

17%

18%

7%

17%

76.%

2011 RWC Sample

16 %

17%

1%

0.24%

60.32%

While there has been an appreciable improvement in the completion rate in Super Rugby and a reduction in the number of penalties awarded, the record from the Six Nations is hardly a ringing endorsement.

During the 15 games of the Six Nations competition there were 214 scrums. There were 80 collapses, 66 re-sets, 34 early engagements and 74 penalties. This means that only 103 (48 percent) of the scrums set were completed.

The rugby scrum continues to be terrorised by the effects of law 20.1(g) which requires the packs to move forward to engage.

The result of this requirement is clear to see for any person actually watching the game.

Advertisement

Players still pack early, front rows continue to experience difficulty establishing a stable bind, and scrums continue to collapse.

A mystifying aspect of the laws is that law 20.1(j) requires the scrum to be stationary and parallel before the ball is thrown in. An analysis of this aspect of the scrum provides the following data:

Stationary

Moving

Not Square

Six Nations 2013

20%

80%

11%

Super 15 2013

23%

77%

7%

 

Clearly the condition that the scrum be stationary is being met less than a quarter of the time and this can be directly attributed to complying with law 20.1 (g).

A further requirement is that law 20.6 (d) requires the ball to be fed along the middle line. In not one of the 214 scrums in the Six Nations competition, or in the 885 scrums to date in Super Rugby has this been the case.

It is true that there was one occasion when the half back almost complied with the law when his front row moved backwards unexpectedly.

To emphasise the point, not one of the 2116 scrums in the 2012 Super Rugby competition complied with this law.

Advertisement

To prevent referees needing to emulate the legend of Lord Nelson’s selectively defective eyesight at scrum time, the law relating to being square and stationary should either be removed from the law book or administered as written.

Many of us will have heard (and probably made) derisive comments about rugby league scrums; in this regard the rugby scrum is no better.

Until the scrums are restructured to achieve the stated objective of re-starting the game quickly, fairly, and safely rather than tinkering with current ineffective and internally inconsistent laws, players and coaches will find ways of circumventing even the best intentions of administrators.

The time is well past due that the laws of the game should be made internally consistent – and the scrum would be a good place to start.

close