Fans shortchanged by scrum resets

Scrums resets will almost disappear when they bring in the pre-jersey bind rule in.

+1 for jeznez's comments, except, while I agree that a well contested, solid scrum is a fantasic thing, unfortunately they are all too rare!

Speak to any of the props or scrumcoaches and they'll tell you the hit causes most of the problems at the moment. Depowering the hit is therefore a neccesary cange at this moment. How it will affect what'll happen in future, I don't know, but time will tell. Then we may see a slight law change or a change in emphasis to accomodate this.

You can't allow mauls to be sacked. Mauls are in the game to free up space for thew backs theoretically, how and what you need to do for this to occur I don't yet know though, but collapsing it won't work since it only needs one person, thus ending in slow ball and no space.

Interesting article and responses. In a way you are all correct. I love rugby the way it is, and it does need to maintain its different facets of play. However, there is no reason why these facets of play cannot be improved (as is happening next year with the scrum). A lot of people are against change, they believe in 'tradition' and experience. However, both can be bad teachers and make good men look like fools. There is nothing to be proud of in scrum resets or collapsed mauls. The scrum is wonderful, the current execution is poor. What we need to do is improve the game in a way which doesn't compromise it.

You forgot about braiding each others hair Jez.

KP - call me optimist but I think Dan will be back to try and challenge for the next WC.

I like the idea of time being stopped as soon as a scrum collapses and then being re-started once the ref is ready to call the first step in the process, think it might be crouch. I agree that too much time is wasted between the time a scrum has collapsed to the scrum being ready to engage.

Sadly it will only be of use in helping Montpellier overcome their foes.

mania, agree that the attitude of front rows and their willingness to scrummage is the biggest key. That is why I am such a fan of Dan Palmer - he has the right attitude. He is one of the few props in the Super comp who if he is getting driven backwards actually holds his body position rather than collapsing. Wish more props had that attitude.

+1 mania. Very well said mate.

biltong, I think the new pre-bind rules are going to make the jersey tightness a moot point. Players should be able to get a good and fair bind prior to engagement. Who knows what the other consequences are going to be but I am certainly keen to see how this plays out.

Bunyip, I think I preferred you when you just complained about the Waratah halves while offering no solutions of your own. Now all of us who like forward play are dinosaurs and should just cop your ideas such as removing two or three forwards from the pack, make changes to reduce scrum resets, ban mauls. League and 7s don't provide you enough options to watch people run the ball with a reduced emphasis on what stands as traditional forward play and competition for the ball? Why don't you go back to your knitting circle and dream up cut-one, loop moves and then discuss feelings. Scrums are one of the most beautiful things in sport when they are done well. You have your alternate options already available to you so feel free to join your masses and turn off. I never think of rugby as a sport for spectators anyway - I pretty firmly believe the game is primarily for players and since 53% of players on the field are forwards don't be too surprised when some of us appreciate forward play.

I posted this on another article but it's probably relevant on this one too. Maybe I just like to repeat myself. With all the rule changes in the world or with none at all it still comes down to two things. One, how the man in the middle interprets those rules and two, how rigidly he is prepared to enforce them. Referees seem to fit in somewhere along a broad spectrum. At one end are the pedantic, dogmatic little guys who seem to live mainly in the Northern Hemisphere and at the other end guys who are a lot easier going and who generally live in places with more sunshine. Rather than more rules or rule changes maybe the best thing to do would be to cut the guys in the middle some slack and tell them to use more common sense during a game and ref it in the spirit of the game. Why for instance does a scrum need to be reset a hundred times? If a scrum collapses but the ball comes out to the feeding team and there’s no skullduggery going on for God’s sake let’s just play on. I do take your point though about how rugby playes have evolved as athletes since the game's inception. Fitter, faster, stronger, bigger. Maybe they have evolved past the original rugby concept that suited fifteen amateur players on a field a certain size. The nostalgia for "running rugby" may be no more than nostalgia for the days when most players ran out of puff at the sixty minute mark.

Bunyip re: reduce number of players on the field. I would love to see a top level game WITHOUT breakaways. Players continue to be more athletic, bigger, stronger, can kick further and run faster. It would be a good experiment to see if the game opened up some and I have no problem with it. Obviously I don't eat Rugby Pops for breakfast or live and breathe rugby 24/7 so this would be seen by many as Rugby heresy by many

To the OP, he was probably told to stop because a) it's not in his power to call time off for scrums, and b) broadcasters weren't prepared for games to suddenly go for 100 minutes.

^ Agree that a scrum after a crooked lai out is silly, especially when the ball isn't fed straight. A reversal of the lai out would be better. Not sure a bad throw is worth a tap.

Pretty much spot on Markus, the scrums now remind me of Swan Lake. Much shuffling about and bowing but without the grace. On an associated matter, why is a scrum set after a crooked lineout throw? Why not give the throw to the opposition for another attempt at the lineout?. Better still, give a short arm penalty for incorrect (illegal) throws and get the game going again. Rugby is entertainment as much as sport and watching slow scrum sets and numerous resets may appeal to the purists (?) the great unwashed are mighty unimpressed as falling patronage shows.

Fox are replaying the 2001 Lions Series at present (quite a few times, I don't object though). The one thing I noticed is the amazing speed at which scrums are set and engaged. Referees calls a knock-on, both packs are set and engaged within 30 seconds, and the collapse rate was minimal, even with journeymen Stiles and Rod Moore as the anchormen. It's fairly apparent that the more the referee is involved in a scrum, the slower and less steady they have become. They should go back to the engagement sequence of that time, with the major referee duty being blowing short-arm penalties against whichever pack is p***farting around the most.

1937 Bok tour,sorry for being a troll.