The scrum in the NRL has long descended into two adjacent huddles engaged in a stop-work meeting. It is a farce and charade that has become an embarrassment to the code.
Is it salvageable? Do we even care?
The oft proffered 21st century reason for persevering with the scrum – the chance for attacking play because all 12 forwards are confined to the one space – is largely a myth; coaches have backs in the place of forwards in the pack, or a lumbering prop forward as five-eighth. A true backline play from a scrum is a rarity.
I’ve heard it said that rugby league must stick with with the scrum, even in a ramshackle form, as it is a tradition of the game and “we’d hate to see it lost.”
Hello? It’s already long been lost!
What’s left of a true “scrum” is about to collapse to the ground and throw up a roll of dust.
The scrum has become a source of ridicule both within and outside the game. It saddens old fans and puts off potential new fans. It gives rugby unionists a free shot whenever they have the inclination.
The time has come to take scrums seriously or to consign them to history. There is no middle ground.
Even if the packs are made to bind properly, if backs are kept out as backs, no one is going to let the forwards push and fight for possession of the ball are they? No hooker will be allowed to strike for the leather.
If by some freak of circumstance a scrum should ever go against the feed today, almost without fail the referee will blow his whistle and call for the scrum to be reset.
The only way to improve the scrum, to make packs properly bind, to make backs shudder at the thought of taking the place of a forward, to bring about more attacking plays from scrums, is to make the scrum a genuine contest.
Forming scrums for the mere purpose of a charade that nods to the game’s history is the most absurd reason of all for keeping it. The game and the scrum are crying out for reform, innovation, and replacing this present sham of a ritual provides a unique opportunity to enhance the variety of the game.
At the moment rugby league treats the scrum like a heritage protected building that no one is prepared to maintain and renovate – either due to the cost, or out of fear of not knowing what to do. If it hasn’t already, the scrum will soon enough have deteriorated to the point where the only option is demolition.
The scrum in rugby league can be saved, but only by innovation and taking a nod from the past.
The six man pack isn’t sacrosanct to rugby league, nor is the eight to rugby union. Scrums in the late 1880s involved 9-man packs along with a left and right-side half-back.
In 1895 when rugby league began the scrum was eight forwards packed in an arrangement of three in the front row, two in the second, and three in the back.
The 1905 All Blacks used a 7-man scrum with just two players in the front row.
In 1906 the league code was reduced to 13-a-side, with two players from the back row of the scrum made obsolete.
In the 1920s South Sydney, possessing a distinct advantage in forward power and expert scrummagers, routinely played with a 5-man pack and two 5/8ths – it gave the Rabbitohs greater scope in attack and a more formidable defence line.
What rugby league ought to do is put a few days into undertaking trials using different scrum formations, to see if there is an alternative that might work as a relatively trouble-free contest.
I’d be interested in seeing some work-shopping of a scrum using a 2-3-2 (a seven man pack) formation, with the ball placed stationary in the mid-point of the tunnel, and no hooking of the ball allowed – just pushing. The ‘contest’ could begin at the sound of the referee’s whistle.
Don’t like that one? Let’s try a variant. Have the half-back put the ball into the 7-man scrum, but only allow the front-rowers to hook for the ball using their outside leg.
With just two in the front row in lieu of the three-man front row, the ball won’t disappear from view, meaning the referees, the fans, and even the tv cameras, can easily see that the contest for the ball is fairly being fought out.
Having no traditional ‘hooker’ would ensure no return of the scrum penalties and referee interpretations that peppered the game in the late 1970s and finally led to the neutering of the scrum as a contest.
Making the scrum a seven-man contest would also create more space for an attacking play from the scrum.
Such an idea may prove to be a complete crock, but why not spend a few days, a week, whatever, testing out different scrum formations and options?
The best way to keep a heritage building viable and away from the demolition crew is to find a modern use for it. Ironically, the combination of the old and new may yet produce the most pleasing result of all. But we’ll never know if trials are never held and tested.
If such theories fail, and no other compelling variation can be found, then please pack off the rugby league scrum to history, and put it and us out of our misery and torment.
Paul Goode
Guest
As a Union fan who watched the England France League match I have to agree with the poster above. However the scrums in both codes need to be looked at seriously I agree with all those that say that competition should take place but no one wants to see scrums that take 3-4 minutes to reach a conclusion be they with a 6 man or 8 man pack. Don't have an answer by the way.
Chris Baxter
Guest
Just been watching England v France and can't see for the life of me , what the purpose of the scrum is its like they lean against each other while the (I presume the scrum half ) passes the ball to his own players . It seems to be meaningless
Boz
Guest
I agree Sean. A Stronger and more visible RLIF would do wonders for the game.
Sean Fagan
Expert
No reason the RFL or NZRL couldn't be the drivers behind reform. The NRL is supposed to be subservient to the RLIF when it comes to adopting rule changes to rugby league.
Sean Fagan
Expert
I think that is why a few days work-shopping various formations & options is worth pursuing. Try 'em all & see what eventuates. To do nothing but remain inert in the face of the current scrum system's failings won't provide any solutions, that's for sure.
Bluebags1908
Guest
Hi Sean, Further to my earlier post - I would love to put my hand up to be on a working group to come up with ideas, modifications, or innovations to revitalise the scrum, to then present to the RLIF, NRL, and RFL. Let's face it scrums ar a joke not only in the NRL but worldwide. I'll put my hand up! Let me know when adn where and I'll be there.
NashRambler
Guest
Considering how well the 3 vs 3 scrums in Rugby Sevens seem to work an idea I have for "work-shopping" is a 3 vs 3 scrum with the addition of 3 forwards from each side (one forward behind each of the three players in the scrum) required to line up a meter or two behind the scrum like the dummy half and second marker line up at the play-the-ball. This formation maintains the concept of 6 forwards being momentarily out of play with space created for the backs. The meter or two of space between the "front row" and "second row" is to allow for the scrum-half to pick up the ball after it emerges and the "second row" players would be required to remain standing behind the scrum until the scrum half picks up the ball. What do you think Mr. Fagan?
Rod
Guest
I still firmly believe we have taken too much contest for the ball out of the game. A proper scrum in league wont happen. But Adam S idea of a line out is not a bad one. I hate the strip rule, that needs some serious revision plus I would love to see striking in the play the ball, like the old hookers used to do. I recall Noel Cleal made a bit of a habit kicking through and scoring tries from the play the ball as well. Just little elements of the game that are gone, that make the game a little more predictable.
Statties
Guest
Replace with a tap. Kicks finding touch restart with a tap 10m in like a penalty and taps at the point of infringements. Keep it simple as this is the best part of the game
Statties
Guest
Replace it with a tap. Kicks finding touch then restarted 10m in with a tap like penalty restarts and at the point if from an infringement. RL is a simple game, lets continue in that theme
AdamS
Roar Guru
I think it's too late for scrums. The skill is long lost, while the reason for its devolvment is still going to be there. If you want a chance at backline play on an open field, scrap the scrum and have a line out. The skills are easier, fewer problems and quicker to do.
Warren
Guest
A majority of fans would like to see a contested scrum - crap!! It is though RL fans have got amnestia about the scrums of old. They were nothing but a mess that resulted in some serious injuries as well. The modern day scrum as Warren Ryan stated once is simply now a way to introduce the ball back into play. On Warren Ryan you should all remember how he used the old rule. Newtown would hit the ball up for six tackles have a scrum and try to win it. Totally boring. Who cares what Rugby Union people think of our scrums. I watch the Wales v Wallabies last year and 2 scrums took over 5 minutes in total to be repacked. And are they really a contest? how many are lost by the side feeding the scrum?? The game has some more serious issues to deal with as a spectacle including the wrestle tactics to slow the play the ball down. If anything RU looks a better spectacle than RL when it has the quick ball from the mauls. Instead RL in most cases has 3-4 people in a tackle locking the ball up and in a lot of cases either lost ball or penalties from these same tactics.
Sean Fagan
Expert
Boz. The NSWRL tried that in the 1920s. It failed for the reason in your last sentence.
seven dollers worth
Guest
Maybe Tom Waterhouse could feed the ball while giving live odds?
Boz
Guest
Hi Sean, Great to read your thoughts on the game again. I have often thought it would be good to have the ref feed the scrum, as it would eliminate most of the issues regarding the existing scrum today. The big drawback would be any perceptions of the ref favouring one team or the other.
Nomenclature
Guest
Tragically I think John Farraghar , a Penrith prop was badly injured in a RL scrum collapse but unlikely to happen today...
Sean Fagan
Expert
Referees tend to call back or penalise anything unexpected. It stifles innovation. Think I can recall two instances of a pack breaking up in a way for their half back to run straight thru what was the middle of the scrum, and bolted away for a try, but both times the on-field ref dumped it off to the video ref, who found a means to rule against it (obstruction).
Nomenclature
Guest
Yeah what would happen to all those guys that want to play the game and are as wide as they are tall...
Stanley Robson
Roar Rookie
As a Union man I must say League scrums are an eye sore - better just to eliminate it from the code all together or go scrum properly - there is no in between. Union is experimenting with new scrum rules to eliminate the hit and feeding the ball straight to avoid resets and to make the scrum a true contest. Next season we'll get a chance to see if it works, but logic says it should make for much better scrums. Otherwise the scrum's place in rugby needs to be seriously considered. I'd prefer to see scrums being optional when there has been a handling error. A team should be allowed to take a quick turnover free kick instead. It would be another way of playing the advantage rule to the attacking team.
RickG
Guest
Great read as always Sean. I'd love to see a contestr but think it's pretty unlikely. I don't understand why coaches don't encourage defending packs to push every now and then, just to see what happens - they'll probably push the attacking team off the ball and regather (unless the ref blows it up of course). Re someone above saying a contest is still in the player's nature: my 6yr old boy in one of his first games was in the front row of their 3-man scrum. Defending sides obviously can't contest, but he still brought his foot up and hooked the ball back beautifully! (I was so proud, even though it was reset). This coming from a kid who knows nothing about the game and doesn't watch it on TV; it must have been instinct.