Seriously, do we need really the scrum?

I think the scrum is kinda silly, but for those of you who say they HAVE to be uncontested... READ THE RULES :D I saw two scrums last year won against the head! so not always the outcome you might expect either! you CAN push, you CAN contest, just most teams prefer not to risk being given a differential penalty against them

The fact that Rugby League even exists particularly in it's current form, is indicative that the nature of both Rugby footballs is constantly changing. Even "the game they play in Heaven" has changed dramatically from it's origins.

I can't believe coaches and playmakers dont use the advantage of seven on seven from a scrum more often. I just don't get it. If you aren't going to use your set play now, when are you going to use it?

Well I have a book of about 10 different plays you make off a 4/3 scrum. A coach like Sheens etc could have a 50.

Agree with the article and like some of the possibilities being thrown around in here. A lot of ways the scrum could be effectively and more intuitively replaced/improved. "Could there be a ball-up as there is in aerial ping-pong (a.k.a. AFL)? A line-out, as there is in rugby union?" What a terrible day for Union when a League article can muster an insult for the AFL but not even a peep for the evil brother code?

how do you define a back?

gotta have set plays in the game

Code 13 Iam sure we can try it out on my mates jnr league side at training they love trying out new ideas it keeps training interesting . Iwill take some footage and put it on utube at a later date , thats a great idea , for to long i believe we have been putting the change of the scrum in the to hard basket their has got to be a better way than the current. Cheers to everyone who added to an interesting read of what is and will be a talking point for a long time to come .

Well I used to help out a mate's local side with defensive & offensive training exercises but not this year as he's coaching a team up in Northern Rivers now. By having 3-4 vs 4-3 you have a wider but shallower pack - less prone to twisting and collapses. You can pack it anyway you want but usually it's best with 11's & 12's becoming front row forwards and moving the hooker to second row - might sound bizarre but it words a treat given that the hooker's role has pretty much changed now i.e. Front Row - 8, 11, 12, 10 - The biggest guys using muscle to push the scrum & hook the ball back Second Row - 6, 9, 13 - all three can take a run or direct a play Keep the 7 behind the pack coordinating the backs for the play and/or to potentially receive. Any of the players in the second row can pick up the ball or the 7 once it's cleared the front row. Think about the options involved - * Five eighth can run the play * Loose forward can run the play - loose forwards would eventually merge into quasi five-eigths as some pretty much are * Half back can run the play - similar to a quarterback in American football Then of course there's only 6 others defensive players spread out on the field - usually 4 & 2 and they don't have to cover the line, they also have to cover depth because of any potential kick from the 7. I can why you would appreciate this steve b but I hope others can see the potential in it. Like I said I'm not longer involved in the local game at the moment but if any of you guys are, try it out and you'll see what I mean. Even post it on youtube for others to see.

Well I might stir up the old timers with this one but here goes - 1) After the infringement, one ref stands on the infringement line creating a 0.5m 'neutral' scrimmage line 2) The two packs bind either side of the first ref 3) Only forwards and halves can bind in a scrum (no backs) 4) Rather than a 3-2-1 formation which can lead to collapses during contested scrums, they should pack in a two row formation (i.e, First Row - 4 players, Second Row - 3 players). The additional man in the front row in addition to eliminating the third row stabilising the scrum minimising twisting/rotation and collapses. 5) Teams should be allowed to pack the halves and forwards in the scrum in any position they want - this is what allows teams to be able to execute different plays etc 6) Before the whistle is blown, the two outside players in each front row should have their outer arm touching the ground 7) Once the two packs are bound, the first ref blows his whistle and the second ref feeds the ball into the tunnel as the first ref withdraws 8) After the whistle is blown, the two packs engage and push/hook for the ball 9) The ball must pass the front row and can only be picked up by hand by a player in a second row - typical the 6 & 7 would be the outside players on the second row so they can execute the play from the scrum 10) However if a second row player unbinds too soon, their pack may no longer have the weight behind them and may get driven back so the timing is crucial 11) Because there are 4 players bound in the defensive front row and 1 more in the second, that immediately takes 5 defensive players out of the next play

100% agree with Mark andBarry. Scrum is a good reward for an attacking team to have a set play and union you have to watch it get packed and go down 3 times before the ball comes out or a penalty is blown for something no one knows what for!!!

maybe a hand over for a knock on and a line out for a touch finder. The good thing about a line out is it would encourage more body shapes in the game.

I've long agreed that scrums are a waste of time, and often yell that at the TV whenever I see a scrum repacked for the same nonsense reasons as Union scrums or a ball seemingly fed into the third row. My ideas for improving the mess, in no particular order: 1) Have the ref feed the ball, something I would advocate in Union too along with quicker packing 2) Replace the scrum by a handover and a play the ball--the scrum isn't contested so its always clear who will get the ball 3) Have a lineout, but without the dwarf tossing spectacle from Union 4) Have contested three man scrums a la Sevens 5) Have fully contested scrums with one team having the head and the other the feed

Sooooo,... Just change the nature of the game completely? Why not abolish offside and just torp it to a bloke up the end from 50m out and save all the counter intuitive backwards passing? Then make the ground twice as long and wide and play on an oval. Add a few players and whammo!!!!!!! Rugby League that people will come to watch in droves! But seriously, introducing a forward pass just turns it into American football without pads and more play time yeah? Actually sheek.... After my snorting before I can see the appeal...

"I have always wondered why a Union backline runs moves off a scrum that creat breaks, but in League they just hit it up without trying." It's all to do with possession in my opinion . In union you might lose the ball at the next ruck, so you might as well spread it from the scrum and take advantage of the space. In rugby league you'd be a fool (in most circumstances) to take chances with the ball before the count has even started, better to give it to a centre running hard and start the set with a modest gain. Of course there are exceptions, if you're close to the try line in league you're likely to try something a bit riskier. Conversely if you're in your own 22 in union you'll probably just boot it into row Z.