The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Who really cares about the time taken on scrummaging?

Rugby union should stop attempting the perfect scrum and borrow from rugby league.
Roar Rookie
20th March, 2014
13

Watching the Waratahs v Brumbies game last weekend, this correspondent was so fixated by the overall spectacle that he let himself become overwhelmed by the amount of time it was taking to set and reset scrums.

This was the case especially in the final ten minutes as the Brumbies hung on to a slender lead that seemed to be shrinking as time went on.

With a bet hanging on a Brumbies win, there was immense relief when the final whistle sounded.

What a riveting exhibition of running rugby this was.

It should be compulsory viewing for all fans keen to see a rejuvenated Waratahs team that does not kick as first choice and a Brumbies team that is reminiscent of their Super Rugby-winning era.

As I planned an article for The Roar about the minutes lost in scrummaging, I read the comment of Waratahs coach Michael Cheika.

“I was very disappointed, first of all with the amount of time it’s taking to scrum. It’s just taking far too long,” Cheika said, adding, “within 30 seconds the ball should be in”.

The theory about time lost suddenly changed when the win was confirmed, dividend paid and it no longer mattered how long it took to set and reset the scrum.

Advertisement

Suddenly the dawn broke and I realised ‘who cares’?

The losing coach did, it would seem, but not the fans of the victors who suddenly saw the time wasting as a strategy that had won the game.

So how seriously should the time wasting be taken? Is it just another strategy that must remain as an option for both teams?

Research tells that “ball in time play” varies greatly around the different sports.

The worst is the National Football League in the United States. In a near four-hour game, the ball is in play only 11 minutes (or six per cent of the total time).

Baseball, as Sydney is about to experience, has only 10 per cent of time with ball in play.

Basketball is significantly better with the ball in play 35 per cent of time with the ball in play over a two-hour, 18 minute game.

Advertisement

Hockey is marginally better with 42 per cent (or 60 minutes of ball in play time) in a two hour and 20 minute game.

Soccer is much better for a viewing experience with 64 minutes of a near two hour game with the ball in play.

Many will say that a lot of the soccer ball in play time is ‘dead action’.

But it then becomes a matter of whether the time in passing the ball from one player to another is more enjoyable to watch than a rugby scrum with the ball going nowhere and a penalty eventuating from the set piece.

The big difference is between rugby league and rugby union.

In league there is 60 minutes of ball in play time (75 per cent) while in union the figure is down to around 45 minutes at best (or 56 per cent).

With league the ball is moving quickly around the field and with the play-the-ball is allowed to move quickly between phases.

Advertisement

On the other hand, union has a consistent contest for possession in the breakdown, meaning that interest is kept throughout.

Aussie Rules is the final game in the mix. In the AFL, the ball in play time is almost complete with the clock being stopped whenever the ball is not in play.

Food for thought and such analysis makes the time wasting in scrums as a fairly minor worry compared with the time lost in other aspects of the game such as penalty time, stoppages for injury before timeout is called and line out play in preparation and execution.
http://www.theroar.com.au/wp-admin/post.php?post=236153&action=edit#
An important KPI according to this writer is the time ‘contesting for possession’ in all sports and this will be examined in a future article.

close