Should we have more competitive scrums in the NRL?

Granted that Union scrums can be a snore fest it would be Interesting to see if League could get it right though and find a way to make their scrums a genuine scrum without the appalling number of resets that befuddles Union.

do you have any actual number on this quite a few? my impression is that they are very rare.

I agree that the scrum should be a thing of the past for League and that its specialist nature has little relevance in our fast-flowing and entertaining sport. It currently does a job to commit players for a re-start and pull them out of position but for example, should a knock on not be punished by a hand over? That would make the game even faster. Not a massive issue to leave things as they are as long as we don't mind the irrelevant and silly comparisons with Union scrums.

Scrums seem to be largely a waste of time these days. Everybody in a scrum used to have a job to do. Hooker to rake the ball, front and second row to steady and put pressure on the pack with the lock to help hold it all together. All the halfback seems to do now is fumble the ball through the second row and it pops out again.

Hi Barry, there are negatives with getting scrums more competitive again, but I think the positives outweigh them. They might have to repack a few, but if you watch the old games, they basically packed, got on with it and off they went. I agree that I would hate to see it become a slow, time consuming procedure though, such as it has become in Union. In fact, watching old Union games involving the Ella brothers, Lynagh etc, it was amazing to see how quickly they packed their scrums back then as well.

Bring the contest in scrums back! It could lead to a change in players body shape and we could see more fattys like union props playing the game. It would open up a lot of holes in defense and we could see more smaller players display their amazing skills and blistering pace. It would make rugby league absolutely amazing. Reducing the number of interchanges could help a lot to head in that direction too. I'm sick of watching 34backrowers hitting the ball up and crashing into eachother. State of origin 2 this year has been painful to watch, I want a change.

I enjoyed watching it, but it has to go. For starters when 99% of scrums aren't contests to suddenly start pushing in one is dangerous. There were a couple of players that ended up in dangerous positions. In the last 12 months we've had shoulder charges and lifting tackles outlawed and a crackdown on punches. How can we suddenly have these types of scrums with close to 700kgs pushing forward? Secondly, I suggest that anyone that wants contested scrums doesn't remember them. Do we really want to see scrums packed and re-packed several times. If they're contested scrums and a hooker or a prop isn't able to pack properly the ref has to blow them up and re-pack. If they're contested the ball will need to go in the middle. Do we want penalties for loose arms, feet across, second row feed, etc, etc.

the laws state the scrums can be contested so the Warriors havent done anything illegal or revolutionary. Former Kiwi Hugh McGahan made an interesting observation in the demise of scrums in league. He said a while back the NRL effectively allowed the halfback to put the ball in through the 2nd rowers instead of through the middle so the attacking team always won their own scrums. They would then make a lot of metres or a break from the resulting scrum win. Coaches caught onto this tactic & put their better defenders in the backline to stop the line breaks from the attacking team & moved some backs into the scrums. The backs didnt know how to push in the scrums & it evolved into the farcical scrums we see today.

Parra were a shambles because of they weren't expecting a contest. If they were going to push as well, they would have bound together properly and their scrum wouldn't have fallen apart as it did.

Are you ignorant to the fact that for most of Rugby League's existence, that scrums have been competitive? Or did you just start following the game since the 90's? And as far as different body types, well I'd rather see a bit of variety rather than 13 backrowers playing against each other all the time.

Cameron...Boz...agree it makes great sense to have a contested scrum...this part of the game has atrophied over time and robbs us of a set piece off the scrum every time. I think today we see too many tries scored off bomb kicks (lottery) which does not require exceptional skill and is rather uninspiring to witness. By giving teams more space and time off the scrum will allow back lines to exhibit their brilliance thereby improving the spectacle.

Hi Cameron. Pushing makes a hell of a lot of sense. The flow on effect would also mean that the forwards would have to pack the scrum, rather than what we see today, with the prop standing at first receiver to take a hit up. Teams would need all their big men to help retain possession in the scrum, or risk being pushed off as happened to Parra. Also, if you get rid of the scrum, what are we left with? 9 players that all look like backrowers, with the halfback, five eighth, full back and hooker only being the point of difference.

Nicely said

Unions mistake might be they have 2 extra players at the scrum [8 forwards] which allows their side rows to disrupt the other teams attack. If leagues forwards are made to commit to a genuine contest it will make their game more open even . A win win situation for League.

I am pretty sure if you want to contest the scrum then you should have the players bind properly instead of this loose mess you have now. And what about putting the ball in the middle and making it a contest instead of just rolling it behind the legs of the front row. I am sure years ago I saw players penalized repeatedly for attempting the rake back hence the idea of a contested scrum was frowned upon by the NRL and what we have now

How would a scrum win or lose if it were contested influence the 40-20 rule any team attempting the 40-20 is doing so for territorial gain and attacking oppurtunity. I fail to see your point

A "real" contest for possession at a scrum might mean more space for the backs.

@ Gazzatron I think you are being a bit precious Banana man's concerns are correct. If not broken necks you will see injuries so there should be proper debate about the pros and cons of that sort of contested scrum. Having said that I agree with you on the scrum in league being almost pointless how its played.

Could not disagree more banana man. Sure scrums have developed into the uncontested version of today but for any team to turn up and expect the opposition to let them know they actually plan to play the scrum how it was envisaged by the founding fathers (I know) is just silly. Pushing makes sense. It can hold the opposing team in and can be used as an attacking platform rather than just a restart. Maybe it's just the rugby coming out in me where the scrum is sacrosanct.

Might lose the tall props like Shillington? But then again there are tall props in union like Sheridan from England...