Wallabies scrum exposed once again

We need a Tight Five competition where scrums and lineouts dominate the contest.8 We need kids who want to scrummage for the 'fame and glory' of it. Somewhere in Australianright now there are five young men who could have the skills to be a world class tight five. And good enough to lift Bill. We need a Tight Five Competition, that is all about scrums and lineouts and making pigs 'glamourous'. It could be a point of difference too for competition with other codes as well.

Heya Front Row Clubbie you are correct - that was a particularly good performance. But the difference between NZ/Aust rugby packs is that NZ have the ability to fix their defiencies once recognised. Especially scrummaging. Yet Australia doesn't (to a greater extent) - especially against quality (ie: top tier) competition. Again, being able to tweak & fine tune their techniques.

I agree that there are real issues with our scrum. Some of them are technical, such as packing close, highlighted above. I don't agree that we should concentrate on scrummaging ability at the expense of ability in general play. Nor do I think there is any need to. A good forward should be more than capable of winning possession and creating space for his backs throughout the match - in the scrum, at the lineout, in rucks, mauls and broken play. Someone gave Bakkies Botha as an example - during his career he has maintained a high standard in every aspect. That is what we should be aiming for. We lack depth. 4 or 5 good top-level forwards (Robinson, Horwill, Vickerman, Pocock...who else?) are just not enough. I am not sure what the solution is, but it will NOT be just a matter of blaming the Walabies coaching staff, or just blaming the S15 coaches, or any one other group. The problem is a deep one, and will have to be solved at many levels.

To pick the best front row in the country all you have to do is watch the Brumbie V Crusaders clash in the Super 15 this year. With Alexander, Moore and Palmer. They totally demolished the Canterbury scrum.... NO other side even slightly troubled them the Crusaders, who are basically the All Black front row. Obviously Deans and co. only sees front rowers as only runners and ball handlers.. We have paid the price of their incompetence...

Scrum against the boks in quarter final was similarly patchy - one of the early ones they were monstered, yet in several others they looked rock solid.

*LOL* Perhaps Wallabies need him...

I only partly agree with you. The job of a forward is to create space and win ball. That job remains the same during every minute of the game, not just during scrums. I agree that a forward who can't scrummage is lacking a vital facet of his game. Yet the same is also true of a forward who is useless in general play, or useless at the lineout set piece. Robinson is a good example: he can do all. And there are even better examples playing for other countries.

That's not Alexander's decision. Robinson who was getting his form back during the Tri Nations is still the premier loose head in Australia. The Wallabies need a prop to play both sides in case Robinson goes down or gets subbed. Slipper is still young and Alexander is only in his mid 20s.

Schoolboy rugby is pretty massive in South Africa. Schools take pride in how many Boks they produce (like Grey Bloem, Paul Roos etc). The schools do have a role in getting players ready for pro rugby as a lot of them are now skipping colts and first grade at club level which used to be the natural step in to Super Rugby.

The other thing that has to change is at school boy rugby where the focus should be on developing ore rugby skills for the forwards especially, and the halves. And winning should come second, and i am saying right up to under level winning should come second , even if that means restricting matches a year and making most of the season training run.I played school boy rugby and now in hindsight heat they do in the elite private school system that i played in , it is appalling how they use there time at training. The scrum gets neglected big time and i am talking 1st 15 level that i played in. To be honest the type of men who dominate in school boy rugby are the big aggressive men almost where size is everything and you will get in the 1st 15 simply by being big aggressive and intimidating if you a forward. So in other words schoolboy rugby the stars are flat track bullies like Tom bowman and Timani, and rob simians. Mne who are simply big but don't actually have any core rugby skills. But at junior level and i would say colts level you can get away with that. But at the elite top level big big and mean looking is basically useless. Because all the big intimidating players at the elite level actually the good players actually have core rugby skills. Jerome kaino, Dan Vickerman, james hORWILL, BAKKIES Botha, simon shaw, victor matfield, keiren reid, brad thorn. They are actually rugby players as well as intimidators, not just bouncers in a night club, or school bullies. And at at school boy level rugby is a complex game and as it is school boy the ref standard is low and all the mistakes(eg coming into side of ruck, collapsing a ruck, simply lying on the ground if you big guy) does not get punished, plus effectively no pushing int he scrum so the scrum is meaningless at school boy level. But as none of these things are developed you then see men like tom bowman , and Timani, kepu, alexander, slipper, who at top level are useless or do not have the right rugby skills. Argentina italy, goergia, romania, scotland, wales, samoa, tonga, aireland, all seem better thn us in core rugby skills, it is very embarrassing. I got a hold of the USA rugby junior plan. ANd wow it was impressive, never seen any program as impressive as what Australia has had to offer. And the sad thing is people like john o'neil do not seem to make junior development and the right teachings of rugby important, very sad indeed. Winning should not be the focus of rugby until you after udder 20. from under 21 on it is all about winning, but until then it should be about skill development. Aussie soccer is now doing that.

Palmer won't switch across. Alexander stayed at the Brumbies as they promised him the tight head spot. With Young, Rea and Friend gone both are starting from scratch with Jake White. I say there will be a bit of rotation as the Super Rugby season is tough on front rowers. Alexander may start at loose head and go to tight head when Palmer is benched or rested. Palmer doesn't have the fitness that Alexander has and White might want to give Jono Owen some match time. Sanzar may introduce down the line the 8 man bench rule that has been used in Europe where two props must be on the bench so depth is needed.

I believe there are 3 key issues in the development of set piece success Australian rugby. At junior age representative level and through out the schoolboys rep programs, selectors are insisting on ball runners in the front row (props and hookers) and ignoring the fundamentals of rugby that in order to run the ball you must first win it and we see often find our front row players at inside centre looking for the ball carry instead of securing the ball at the breakdown. In my view, there have been some very good technical and tight front row forwards overlooked for flashier and far less effective players. The previous point leads to another problem, we consistently take back row players (remember the ball carry is everything now) and try and teach them to be front row players but they do not have the correct mental approach to be front row forwards (obvious exception was Richard Harry) and often are too tall to be effective scrummagers (Andrew Blades was only 178cm tall and was a brilliant scrummager and Ben Robinson is only 183cm tall is currently our best). The correct mental approach and aptitude is more critical to coaching the detail and for learning the current approach is often includes picking the biggest heaviest most intimidating ball carrier you can find.

There has been a lot of pressure from, in particular the ARU, to make the game faster and 'more attractive' because of the competition from other sports in Australia. This was one of the reasons for the ELV's and some of the subsequent positive law re-interpretations. However, the unintended consequence was that the scrum became devalued in Super 12 rugby and Australia has never really changed its mindset since. There has been an increasing recognition that the scrum had to be remodelled and made to work following Australia's obvious weakness in scrummaging over the last seven or so years. There have been periods when it has improved, but it is still a long way off competitive. I believe that this World Cup will represent a shift in thinking in Australian rugby where the value of having a strong setpiece combined with fast, incisive backs, creates the game that we have all been looking for. Australia was unable to use its strength in the backs because it was weak in the forwards, in both the set piece and breakdown. The only truly world class forward is Pocock and when he is refereed properly his effect is greatly diminished.

His paper is written in three parts; the history of the scrum, a scrummaging manual and a dissertation on the law. I know that it has been prepared and presented to a number of interested groups. I don't know whether it is intended for the public domain yet as he may be looking to use it to leverage a role in the game. However, I feel sure that if you contact him at the info@toporodriguez.com address he will reply.

Scarlet, I just googled one better and found http://www.toporodriguez.com/ which is his business, public speaking, motivator talks about bi polar and rugby. Under publications he states he started writing a scrum coaching manual back in 1997. That is what I want to get my hands on. Back to the website now to see if I can contact him!

Scarlet, because of your comment I googled and can see he has just written a paper as you describe - cannot wait to read it. He has written something else though years ago - was definitely under the impression it was a book but I could very easily be wrong.

will definitely be keeping an eye on Sona for the Chiefs next year - he was at the heart of it in the first game when the Tongan's gave the AB scrum an absolute seeing to. A very far cry from when he was part of giving away a penalty try against the Tahs this year (although to be fair it was his propping partner who copped the yellow that night)

I knew one of them had gone, thanks for clarifying it was Ma'afu. I still leaves Young with the test incumbent tighthead and one of the most promising young tightheads in the country. Alexander isn't getting any better as a loosehead but will probably play there again next year. I'll get very upset if they switch Palmer across so BA can stay at 3.

Bakkies, I think that is because Palmer is a better tighthead than Alexander, not that Alexander plays loose better than tight. Young should have grabbed Tilse when he poached a junior Tah, he needed a loosehead and could play Alexander and Ma'afu at tight. Had Alexander played the season in 3 where he wanted to he and the Wallabies would have been much better off. Instead he played 1 and was poor.

It's not a book, but a paper, with contributions from a number of senior players and ex players. Topo wrote it to highlight how to remedy the scrum deficiencies and overcome the blight of reset scrums - which is more prevalent in the SH. Topo would be good to have as a specialist scrum adviser, paid by the ARU, to work at provincial and club level.