I rather like the rugby league scrum, and I would hate to see it go.
I bring this up in the wake of the ball boy issue that occurred at ANZ stadium on Friday night.
The quick tap from a 40-20 rule has been a failure. This was outlined by Brad Arthur on the weekend when he stated that 20 of 25 attempted quick taps have been pulled back this season.
The Tigers went on to have one pulled up after he said this, so now it sits at 21 from 26. That means that less than 20 per cent of quick taps from 40-20s have been deemed legal.
This statistic shows the players don’t fully understand the rule, the ball boys don’t understand the rule and as a fan, I don’t understand it either.
It took the incident on the weekend for me to fully make sense of the rule – previously I was left wondering why they pulled it up.
The NRL rules committee will meet on Thursday, and if you believe the press, the rule may be changed back to how it was last year. I would consider this a positive move – receiving the ball from a scrum after a 40-20 is reward enough.
Pursuing with the quick tap basically gives the attacking team a try or a penalty and possibly even a man advantage after the professional foul sin-dinning, too much advantage for doing a really good kick from within your own half.
Scrums in rugby league have received plenty of flak over recent years and many fans have called for them to bite the dust. But scrums provide a great opportunity at some open field play. They are the NRL equivalent to the trick plays you see attempted in American football.
Some of the tries scored from scrums over the past few years, particularly from Melbourne and Manly, have been beauties.
They do take a lot of time, and yes it is a tedious watching the referees make forwards re-pack and halfbacks re-feed. But surely with some tinkering we can speed up the process.
You hear commentators and fans also getting upset with backs packing into scrums, but this is another modern interpretation I enjoy. One team lines up their best attackers and the other their best defenders for a one tackle, seven-on-seven play. May the best team win.
Birdy
Guest
Defiantly my last word on scrums! I would love to see contested scrums and more ball contests in our game. Artie said that 10 years ago. In the early 80's parramatta re introduced the wedge it was promptly banned because even blind freddy could see how dangerous it was. A few weeks ago the warriors pushed parramatta off the ball and regained pocession everyone applauded the move , journalists players fans. No one could see the danger to the unexpecting parra team. Bring back the scrum was the media cry. It sent shivers down my spine every time I saw it replayed on TV ! In league the players don't train for a contested scrum. Players packing for a scrum can push 3 times their own weight. Imagine that pressure on an unexpected forward pack? Despite that the modern game does frustrate me with the lack of bAll contests love to see contested scrums but let's train our players first.
Birdy
Guest
Defiantly my last word on scrums! I would love to see contested scrums and more ball contests in our game. Artie said that 10 years ago. In the early 80's parramatta re introduced the wedge it was promptly banned because even blind freddy could see how dangerous it was. A few weeks ago the warriors pushed parramatta off the ball and regained pocession everyone applauded the move , journalists players fans. No one could see the danger to the unexpecting parra team. Bring back the scrum was the media cry. It sent shivers down my spine every time I saw it replayed on TV ! In league the players don't train for a contested scrum. Players packing for a scrum can push 3 times their own weight. Imagine that pressure on an unexpected forward pack? Despite that the modern game does frustrate me with the lack of bAll contests love to see contested scrums but let's train our players first.
In Brief
Guest
It might be possible to have contested scrums in league without the colllapses. The answer is less players in the scrum. Rugby 7s has 3 players per scrum, and they don't collapse. A 5 man scrum would probably be pretty stable too.
Boz
Guest
How do you know this? Are you basing this by comparing a League front rower with a Union front rower, and assume the Union body type is the one is what is needed for scrummaging? League has had competitive scrums for nearly a century with a very low incidence of serious injury. League forwards today are stronger, full time professionals. I don't think it is beyond them to be trained to scrummage.
AJL
Guest
Training won't change the fact that League forwards are not physically suited to contested scrums. In time this would change as clubs recruit the right players, but until then we are massively increasing the risk of catastrophe. The only winners will be lawyers who sue the hell out of the NRL.
Box
Guest
That's the point though. Make it known they will be contested and teams will have to train for it. If you want to not have an Alex McKinnon type injury, you better ban tackling too.
AJL
Guest
And see how many McKinnon-like injuries occur from players attempting to contest scrums with no training and with completely wrong body types. No thanks. One player suffering that is more than enough. Abolish the scrum. The once in a few weeks scrum moves are not worth it for the million re-packings a week we get now.
Muzz
Guest
Hot pies and line breaks don't go well either !
Birdy
Guest
I agree with muzz ,bring on the beer !
fiver
Guest
I prefer 40/20s to contested scrums to be honest
Muzz
Guest
I like the new age non contested scrum.The ball goes in and pretty much out first go.Scrums also give you a chance to down your beer and take a couple of deep breaths.I also enjoy seeing set plays from the scrum base and watching the team in D scramble to re-align.
Birdy
Guest
I agree keep the scrum . Great launch pad for an attack but move it back to the 10m line from touch , opening up the whole field while still allowing for our newly discovered acrobatic wingers to score on the blind side! And while on scrims for the sake of safety we must ban pushing in a non competitive scrum how there hasn't been a serious neck or back injury from a surprise push I'll never know! If you asked a rugby union forward to stick his head in a scrum and told him his team mates probably won't brace and the other team may push he would sue the nrl and his club for lack of duty of care
Birdy
Guest
I agree keep the scrum . Great launch pad for an attack but move it back to the 10m line from touch , opening up the whole field while still allowing for our newly discovered acrobatic wingers to score on the blind side! And while on scrims for the sake of safety we must ban pushing in a non competitive scrum how there hasn't been a serious neck or back injury from a surprise push I'll never know! If you asked a rugby union forward to stick his head in a scrum and told him his team mates probably won't brace and the other team may push he would sue the nrl and his club for lack of duty of care
I Know Everything
Guest
Boz - agree with you 100%. League needs contested scrums. Feeding the ball into the locks/third row feet is simply BS. League has traditions and history, unfortunately it's been hijacked by sports entertainment and branding specialists. Scrum rules can be simple - pack correctly, feed the ball into the middle of the real tunnel (as you say) and the ball comes into play only if it comes out of a different channel. No need to constantly repack scrums, allow 1 reset. If the scrum fails a second time, there will be a penalty & if in doubt as to the cause of the failure, the team feeding the ball gets the penalty (a tap restart). Contested scrums will add to the spectacle of the game instead of a breather for whoever packs onto the current "scrums".
Boz
Guest
The only thing I disagree with in your article is the comment about scrums taking a lot of time. Back in the day when they were contested - they would pack them much faster than today. Other than that - I would love the NRL to come out and state that all scrums are to be contested, and that the halfback must feed the ball straight into the middle of the tunnel. If that was to occur, I think you could get rid of the 40/20 altogether - as giving the opposition some chance of winning the ball back would make finding the line deep into the opposition's territory reward enough.
cedric
Guest
nothing wrong with the scrum, it is what it is. If you want tight pushing scrums watch rugby, but you may fall asleep waiting for that scrum to even start. Our scrum is for a reason and one of those is not to let you go to far from the tele or the stands. I don't know why the Warriors haven't tried to much from the scrum, with the likes of Johnson & Hurrell I'd be givin it a go. Yes, that 40/20 tap is a joke, it's a bit like touch footy. The huge advantage you get from a good kick is not on!
Hutchoman
Roar Pro
This is the only alternative to a scrum, i.e. an opportunity to run a play with reduced numbers for both teams. It would be interesting to see this trialled at a schoolboy tournament.
Ken
Guest
Not the point of your article (sorry) but the ballboy actually helped Parramatta. Sandow, a first grade footballer, didn't realise he had to tap the ball rather than just run onto the pass in from the winger. If the ballboy had placed the ball properly it would have been a penalty against Parramatta. On topic, I agree, the scrum is the answer
fiver
Guest
I agree, nothing wrong with the scrum. It opens up the play briefly and teams can use it for set plays. Remember that Brett Mullins try from many years back, i think it was against the Bulldogs - it was the most perfectly executed scrum player ever, was beautiful.
turbodewd
Guest
The locks never put their heads in the scrum, thats whats wrong with them. They never push. They arent contests. They are faux scrums. Drop the scrum! Replace it with a tap where the forwards must all have one foot on the sideline, thus allowing the backs one free play with an open field.