Excitement is building to a crescendo as Julian Savea charges towards the line. He flings a pass back inside as the crowd goes wild, Smith gets a hand to the ball and knocks it forward.
Anti-climax reigns supreme as the ref blows for a scrum. Half the crowd get up to go buy a beer as they know by the time they get back the scrum will have been reset three times, a penalty will have been given and they’ll still be in time to see any action after the kick at goal and the restart.
Those watching at home recorded the game hours ago and are fast forwarding at 30x speed to get past the inactivity of the scrum resets.
Scrums are currently a blight on the game of rugby. Recent studies have shown that on average around 20 minutes of game time is lost between the ref blowing for a scrum and the ball finally getting back into play.
The same studies show that the ball comes out of scrums less than 20 per cent of the time. Most scrums end with a penalty. Something needs to be done.
There are two problems here. First, the time taken out of the game, and second, the desperate need for defending teams to stop the opposition getting good ball from scrums, which contributes the most to the mess scrums have become.
Many people have advocated stopping the clock when the ref blows for a scrum and this is certainly the best option to stop the time taken out of the game. But the TV powers that be don’t want this to happen as currently rugby fits neatly into 90-minute time slots with little chance of running over time and interfering with later programming.
So it would be a bold move by World Rugby to potentially increase TV time by 20 minutes or more.
Still, World Rugby needs to make this move in the interests of the rugby viewer, not the TV programmer.
The other problem is scrum penalties. Scrum experts generally can’t tell who’s done what to whom in the scrum and referees are simply guessing.
These days their guesses usually reward the dominant scrum. If you can push the other scrum back for long enough you will eventually win a penalty.
Once upon a time if the defending team managed to screw the scrum around 180 degrees they might get a reset and the ball, but today they will be penalised.
Virtually everything at the scrum results in a penalty: two collapses and someone will be penalised; screw it around – you’ll be penalised; get overpowered – you’ll be penalised; slip and go down – you’ll be penalised; have poor technique – you’ll be penalised; put your hand on the ground – you’ll be penalised.
Sometimes the penalty comes even before the ball comes near the scrum.
So what’s the answer? Certainly the first step is, as many people advocate, turning the penalties into short arm free kicks. But all that does is usually result in another scrum.
This is only the first part of the answer. To really fix the problem the free kick rule at the scrum needs to be tweaked. Remember the whole point of the scrum is to restart play with the ball given to the team that did not infringe, therefore we want play restarted with clean ball.
A free kick for a scrum infringement only does this if the rule further states that when a scrum free kick is taken, all forwards must remain bound to the scrum.
They may only unbind once the halfback (not the No. 8 who must remain bound) has tapped the ball at the base of the scrum.
Defending backs can remain five metres back from the scrum and do not have to retire another five metres.
If this simple tweak is added, the ball will be flung into the backline from virtually every scrum. Teams will be able to plan scrum moves knowing that it is likely they will get to run the move.
Either the ball will come out the back of the scrum and the No. 8 or halfback will play on normally, or a free kick will be given and the halfback will immediately run to the back of the scrum, tap and pass, before probably running the backline move which had been originally planned.
It will become the responsibility of the defending team to keep the scrum up, as if it collapses, they are likely to be free kicked and their flankers will have to get off the ground, where they are bound on the collapsed scrum, before they can chase the ball.
If the scrum doesn’t collapse, the defending flankers will have the extra fraction of a second start by running from a crouched position bound on a set scrum rather than bound much lower on a collapsed scrum.
Suddenly scrums will not be a blight on the game but a guarantee that play will restart with a sparkling backline move.
Make this change and I promise I will never again leave to get a beer, or fast forward through scrums and the penalty kick which follows. I will know that some sort of backline play will follow a scrum, not simply a kick at goal or the touchline.
Phantom
Roar Rookie
Without proper scrum sit is not rugby. Enforce the rules properly is the answer.
Who?
Guest
The issue isn't the scrum, it's refs failing to enforce both the laws and the new scrum engagement sequence. It's not hard. It's actually rather simple! But it requires refs to switch their focus. Normally, they're whistle-happy and pedantic at the breakdown, and whistle-happy when the scrum collapses. Instead, refs need to be proactive at the set. Set up close. Bind correctly. With those two in place, there's much, much less reason for the scrum to collapse. Call the set. On the set, there must be ZERO MOVEMENT. It's almost impossible to find a ref who enforces this. I don't mind if it bobbles, but the scrumhalf shouldn't be invited to feed the ball until the scrum genuinely is square and steady. If a team pushes off the mark significantly (more than half a step), then penalize them first up. They won't do it again. Then, with a steady scrum on the feed, it's easy to police the feed. And if the scrum's steady, then clearly the front rows have had a chance to sure up their binds, reducing the likelihood of collapses. If it goes down, that's fine, just see if the ball's there. If it's there, play on, if not, then we consider a reset. It's critical to remember that the scrum is, unlike a free kick, a contest. That contest must be maintained. It's critical to remember that we do still see tight heads, and we still see the odd pushover. The Reds last year scored a pushover tight head! And it's a HUGE moment in a game when that happens. Scrum bashing is fashionable, but it's often based on old laws, old practices and a failure to recognize the shortcomings of referees. When well-reffed - and I've seen it happen once or twice - the engagement sequence leads to brilliant contests.
Mke
Guest
To what extent do the referees need more training, e.g. from someone like Mike Cron?
AndyS
Guest
Not much if only one did it, but as a rule they all would the moment it was permissible. As soon as it was allowed, every prop would do it to ensure he wasn't the one pinged for collapsing. In essence it removes the law requiring the prop to be bound.
Bakkies
Guest
Pulling the jumper before he lands to start the maul occurs.
Bakkies
Guest
Because they are infringing. Look at what the penalties are given for.
Zero Gain
Guest
That is right. As the author also said, there is a penalty blown for almost any scrum problem. Its the referees that are the real problem. stop blowing penalties and just play on. Why should a weaker scrum be penalised? This never happened in the past. Just sop blowing the penalties and make the stroinger team play the ball. Call use it and play on.
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
Yes I could live with that. Onus should be on the defending team to keep it up. Team in possession will get the ball no matter what. Either it comes out normally and play goes on, or it collapses and the free kick is awarded to the team in possession. If a tighthead has occurred the onus to keep it up switches to the team that put the ball in and lost it.
soapit
Guest
as a rule they would but if they slipped off now and then to steady themselves and prevent a collapse what harm would that do (genuine question)
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
The scrum certainly should be a contest, but the contest at the scrum is not the main point of having a scrum. The point of a scrum is to restart play. You have to have a competitive scrum in order to win your own ball, but you don't have to have a dominant scrum. Most of what is penalised at a scrum is not foul play at all. What's foul play about screwing the scrum? Putting your hand on the ground? Losing your bind? Hinging? Shoulders below hips? Not scrumming straight? Pushing over the mark? Pulling back? Even boring in is simply a technique that's outlawed, it's not foul play. All these things are simply technical issues that are against the rules. They are not foul play and should not result in penalties and shots at goal. Free possession for the opposition backs without the forwards defending the next play is all the sanction required.
Daffyd
Roar Rookie
I like the scrum, and I don't want to see league scrums. However I question why they can be used as an alternative to penalties and lineouts? I will argue that they should be just another part of the game, not be given the special preeminence that they receive. And I believe that there should be for "dangerous play" whether scrum or lineout but, generally lineouts the dangerous play is fairly obvious to spot, whereas in scrums dangerous play is much harder to spot... but if blatant, it comes under dangerous play. Bakkies a question, what penalties can occur at a KO? I can't think of any... Free for taking to long and lots of frees in 7s, (front to kicker, out on the full) but I can't recall penalties?
Daffyd
Roar Rookie
Agreed Spanner, but it is also being able to call a scrum for lots of other things: Stop allowing scrums for penalties, frees, lineouts (second throw in no choice given, It's crazy, every one is lined up and read to go for a lineout and boom... scrum. Third lineout original team gets the alternative call) Free kicks -- like in sevens -- free kick for kick off infringements. free kick for forward passes or accidental offside. Scrums only for knock ons, from rucks and mauls (no result), and those weird things like hitting the ref with the ball. Resets for ball out same tunnel, and if the scrum collapses before the feed occurs The scrum will still be a contest. The defending team has to keep it up to be in the contest or lose the ball by default. And if the scrum does go down because the attacking team causes it, there's no penalty shot at goal. Instead, they may well lose quick ball if its stuck in the middle of the scrum, or it's play on if it's at the back and the forwards are down risking a turnover if a back gets isolated. The risk I would see is the defending team hanging on to the attacking forwards,.. but thats as old as the hills and will never change BUT to make it work effectively it is also important to get the backs further away from the scrum. That is, 10m from middle of the scrum. Then they are automatically onside for a free. They can go forward immediately after the tap. As it stands now the backs still should be retreating a few metres before coming forward. Have them already "onside for each scrum -- sand for consistency it's the same distance as a lineout which has forwards & receiver. Importantly it makes it easier to ref All backs are onside (except half or 'receiver") All forwards are offside. It's cleaner and neater and I believe will encourage more running whether from fast scrum ball or the free. Oh, one last comment ... maybe not as you suggest, a free "for halves looking sidewise at the ref" -- or we'll never get a scrum. :)
AndyS
Guest
For mine free kicks is too far, but I wouldn't mind seeing the posts option removed from scrum penalties being trialled. Tap, another scrum or line-out, but no points.
AndyS
Guest
So the front rows would not actually be bound together on either side...?
AndyS
Guest
In which case it won't make the scrum any less a raffle - as now, the perceived "strong" scrum will focus on the first few scrums and do whatever is necessary to confirm the perception of dominance, then milk the scrum from then on for the apparent advantage. It won't solve anything, nor will it encourage teams to scrum properly. Probably quite the opposite.
Daffyd
Roar Rookie
I agree with you on that BB... the ball has to be fed to have a scrum, if it goes down before the ball is in, well we haven't had a scrum have we? (Maybe I didn't make it clear the ball had to be fed.. apologies) And I also don't have an issue with the feeding team calling the "set" rather than the ref... Need to work on the sequence and who calls it .... Ialbeit in the good old days the forwards just lined up and went for it without a word from anyone. Ideally all the ref should do is make the mark and ensure both front rows are at an optimal distance from it.
Spanners
Guest
And that would be a problem because....? I appreciate that rugby is a multifaceted contest. At every ruck, maul, lineout and scrum each team are able to contest the ball. But what rugby scrums have degenerated into now is a blight upon the game. I am what people call a "rusted on" supporter, but geez, there is a limit. I'm all for short arm penalties (tap only, no reset) for any scrum infringement, but only against the team that committed the original knock-on. If any of the frontrow collapses, BAM Shortarm! If a bind comes loose BAM, shortarm! If the halfback looks at the ref sideways, BAM shortarm! The attacking team still get a stable platform (providing they go quickly). The onus is on the defending team to hold the scrum up. Sure it will kill the scrum as an actual contest, but hey, if they keep going at this rate it won't really matter anyway, because no-one will be watching. And that there is the bottom line, keep the integrity of the scrum contest, or keep people watching the game. And what is wrong with the ref feeding the scrum? Certainly would eliminate the penalty for incorrect feed and would also ensure the ball was feed quickly.
soapit
Guest
not anything like reliably. it does happen but we're nowhere near the point where we can be reasonably confident the ref is mostly making the right call. eg even when it does happen it doesnt mean the ref is correct.
soapit
Guest
not to mention the penalties are usually related to the maul, not to the lineout themselves (might be basically the same point i was making above) plus you regularly see mauls pulled off successfully which make the unsuccessful ones that result in penalties less of an issue
soapit
Guest
sounds reasonable tho open to interpretation when to march them just had a thought whether a free kick to whoever has the ball under them at the time of collapse would fix it. ref to retain option for reversal for clear collapse under pressure and full arm / penalty try for persistent infringing. my base premise is if we put the onus on one side to keep it up then it will make it easier for the ref to police who is causing the collapse.