IRB tells refs to get tough on scrums and tackles

PeterK you have encapsulated the problem with International reffing. Maybe a simplified solution to the scrum is about the only thing they could cope with. The thing about this issue is Paddy O'Brien was pretty good at scrum time, if my memory serves me right. Why wouldn't he insist on getting a solution to the ref's obvious problems? Collapsing a scrum would be up there with the most important thing to fix if I was in Paddy's position. The safety aspect is a priority but it is also killing the spectacle and the competition for the ball. All speed and no brains is not a solution to our ref'ing issues. Kaplan tonight - a chance for the prancing pony to shine at Australia's expense. I do think we over react to ref's sometimes and I can understand why international ref's would hate us. We do have some form.

The problem of collapsing scrums would be significantly reduced if props were to keep their arms horizontal to the ground. Try it, it works!

Stillmissit the problem is that for referees assessment nowadays speed to breakdown is the most important criteria, not accuracy of decisions. So most refs at intl level are ex backs and/or have never played above junior level. They have no idea on scrums and often go on reputation i.e which team is reputed to have a better scrum. If it goes down they blame the weaker team or reset, the stronger scrum rarely gets penalised. Since they are professional fulltime referees surely though they could get taught obvious ploys, and how to detect them. Mind you at ref practise sessions for l2 and above I see most refs tune out, since they seem not to be interested or it is too hard. Also they are told the main thing is to get the ball out quickly. Hence the situation we are in now. Collapsing a scrum is a big deal, it is dangerous play and should be penalised at the minimum hence my radical solution.

OK Peter lets strike a compromise: IF it is not obvious who has collapsed the scrum then the ref gives a short arm to the attacking team. I seem to remember when I was playing (and knew little of the rules) collapsing the scrum was a big deal and penalties would be handed out. That Samoa game was soooo! obvious even an old retired ref like me would have got it. The ref's name was Fitzgibbon a young Irishman, maybe he will get better, but at international level I expect more than this.

stillmissit - Yes I am a current referee. Yes I did overlook that without a hit you can still collapse a scrum so maybe Jerrys solution wont work. There is an advantage to collapsing in the opposition if your scrum is weak. Imagine centre field 5 metres out, collapse it and then take a quick short arm whilst the forwards are still getting up. I agree it would be very obvious but your solution is balck and white in the attacking team gets the short arm, despite them collapsing it. What you overlook on my solution is that the officlas get time, slow motion and multiple camera angles to decide who pullied it down, then comminucate that dangerous play to the ref. They can have experienced props reviewing the footage to help them. Yes a very radical change and only works for televised games.

Peter K - you are a ref or an ex one arn't you? I would have thought you would have known better. If what you and Jerry say about collapsing scrums is correct, I dont believe for one moment that it is true, then all that would happen is that the collapsed scrum would still go on just without the hit. All we would end up with is another step on the road to tiddlywinks. You are also on the band wagon of the refs understanding who was at fault. I claim this is impossible to police and is best left alone. You misunderstand what I have meant. The short arm goes to the attacking team therefore there is no advantage in your opposition half. If you are attacking in your opposition half then they will do everything to hold the scrum up and it will be obvious that you are trying to collapse the scrum. Did either of you see the Samoa v Wales match? There was some of the worst referring decisions I have ever seen. Wales twice bored into the Samoa scrum and then collapsed it 5m from the Welsh line with the Welsh fighting to stay in the game. Scrum reset both times and no penalty. There were blatant offsides by Wales and no turnovers given to Samoa when they were on their feet over the Welsh player on the ground. With this level of refereeing incompetence, why attempt to give ref's the impossible task of deciding who is guilty in a pub fight?

It is very easy to drop or collapse a scrum if you want, just pull back instead of push and down at the same time. No way can the opposition stop from collpasing. Stillmissit's example of the knocked out prop was not active in trying to pull down the scrum so it does not count. Jerrys solution would work but would remove a lot of the testosterone challenge. Another option would be to view collpasing as dangerous play with every single one subject to post macth review for suspensions. Similar to suspensions for high tackles etc. The main fault with this is teams will pull down scrums for important matches and suffer suspensions for less important matches. The radical fix for this is for appointed officials to review all collapses during the game. Then say 5-10 minutes whatever it takes you inform the referee the person at fault should be yellow or even red carded. That would fix the problem and not delay the game since play continues whilst the review is happening. As to a short arm to the attacking team I do not agree. A weaker team on its own feed especially near either try line will pull it down and take either a quick tap or have a far better position to kick it out of their danger zone.

Atawhai Drive - Yes I think most of us agree about putting the ball it in straight it is just the senior refs dont see it that way. They want the scrum to be over quickly to reduce the risk of injury and the only thing that is happening is more and more scrum collapses which I argue are dangerous. Even at a local level it is mostly allowed to go in crooked. I kept my end of the bargain up as an old ref, but in the end the players just didn't get it and I would get questions from captains or half backs saying something like "Ref everyone else we have allows the ball in like this, what is your problem" Still I hung in there until the curtain came down. Now I coach and that has great interest. The scrum collapses are not simple and contrary to what Jerry says above, I think this is fixable at the front row level if the rules allow it to be so. Training young props not to collapse takes some getting out of but it can be done. The bridge analogy that Jerry uses above is a good one. if the two front rows come together under pressure then assuming they have their heads above horizontal (law) the natural thing is for the scrum to be stable unless it gets spun or a prop bores in. The default state for a scrum is to stay up not collapse you have to make it collapse. Short arm them and fix the issue once and for all.

Seriously, you're wrong. When two front rows come together, they're all leaning so far forward that in the absence of an opposing force they'd fall over forwards. They are essentially creating two halves of a bridge. They're also bound in such a way that they've only got one hand on the opposing player that they're bound to, and these days that's by way of whatever grip they can get on a fairly tight rugby jersey. In that situation, if one wants to direct his force down, the other guy is in no position physically to stop him.

As Stillmissit says, putting the ball into the scrum crooked is a travesty that is killing the hooking skill in union. Really, hookers might as well be described as "central props" for all the hooking they do. I seem to remember that hookers used to keep their feet forward, to facilitate striking for the ball. That also had the effect of making scrums more stable i.e. less likely to go down. But with crooked feeds and every scrum now an eight-man shove, after that huge intitial hit, scrum collapses are inevitable. Reset scrums are as big a curse on the modern elite game as the breakdown shambles, hated by union diehards and casual spectators alike.

Markr - Your dead right, the question is why should ref's have to look at this level of technicality? Any old scrummager can outsmart a ref on the outside (unless they are an ex prop themselves). That is why I am proposing the short arm solution everyone knows what its for and refs dont have to decide what is going on in the secret society that is the front row!

Jerry if we had a couple of old front rowers here they could tell you it can be done. A front row mate of mine in the 70's had an issue with his opp number punching him so on the next scrum he head butted him as they came together and then after the scrum was over unhooked his head and let him drop as he had been unconscious all scrum. You cant ask young props to answer this because most of them have been trained to drop at the first sign of trouble. The other issue is that if you are so dominate that the opposition wants 'out' it will be pretty obvious that they are trying to pull it down.

How are you supposed to hold a scrum up if they want to collapse? Heres a challenge. Find a mate and bind down as if you're in an opposing front row (ie crouched right down so your torsos are only about a foot and a half off the ground). Now tell him to go down to his knees and you try and stop him without pushing up or standing up (which are both illegal).

Lee I think this is correct. How wrong can you get it as a ref body than to allow this stuff to go on and assume the coaches will not use it? The coaches spend their entire working lives looking for an edge or advantage. Putting the ball into the scrum crooked is a travesty that is killing the hooking skill in union and has already killed it in league.

Lee this is a cop out what next the maul is too tight to affect a tackle, the tackler can hold onto the player for a short time etc etc that way lies madness. The hit has always been important. I think it was more so in my day of the 70's early 80's where you wanted total domination at scrum time. The idea was to destroy the opp. front row so that they didnt want to scrum against you.

You're right mate, international reffing is a joke! I've run touch for a number of Subbies games this year. Policing the offside is pretty easy. Even spotting illegal bindings on the opposite side of the scrum to the ref is fairly easy. And I'm short sighted! The difference at that level is that there is automatically assumed prejudice/bias in the touch judging, because each team provides one. The laws are reasonably well enforced (meaning, don't pull stuff up that makes you look like a pedantic little tw at) because of the advantage it can give your team. But things even out or you try to not look too biased because of the potential wrath of opposing supporters :P.

I was told at a reffing course, that refs at Super level had been instructed not to penalise players for going off their feet as it would ruin the spectacle and create more stoppages. If you watch any game from Super 14 up, there is ahrdly ever a ruck where players on the attacking side stay on their feet.

Actually agree with Jerry, the hit has become so important that if a team gets anything less than parity at the hit they ayutomatically collapse it. Nest way to stop collapsing is to stop the hit.

AC it is amazing to me that 3 professional refs can all miss players 2m offside at the ruck. Now that is what the IRB should be looking at! The players have a responsibility as do the coaches and there are penalties both on and off the field if you get it wrong. There appears to be almost no penalties to ref's who get it wrong, at worse case a demotion for a week. Teh only ref they have jumped on is the midget with the squeaky voice after the NZ media went ballistic and I dont think he got it all that wrong he was just implementing the rules as they are in the book with a couple of exceptions. Just goes to show how political the ref's are and how far away from the game they are getting.

The history of how refs got to this nightmare ruck state is quite simple. As MarkR says the players were hitting the ruck lower and the refs thought 'well they are falling over so we wont penalise them as they really cant help it'. The end result is a bed of bodies all trying to slow the ball down. Just bring in the on your feet rule and move away then let the coaches deal with it. This is what Thelma wrote about last week. The scrum collapses are a coach developed thing ie if you think you have lost the hit or scrum 'just collapse it' is how it was put to me by a coach. Now as an old ref and even older player I find this dangerous and gutless thus my simple idea to short arm them. I bet you collapsed scrums would not last a season if this was the case and we have had to put up with this rubbish for years. The refs should just implement the laws in the book and not go farting around with interpretations that were never meant to be in there or IRB bloody stupid rulings from camel designing commitees.