- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
It really does feel like scrums are a lottery these days. The constant resets, the very rare instances of a clean contest, and even fewer instances of clean ball coming from the back of them.
And I’m obviously not alone in thinking this. You only have to look at the number of articles and comments and social media ranting about scrums this season to know it’s the case. And with a northern hemisphere Rugby World Cup in September and October likely to be scrum-heavy, it’s hard to see how the issue will possibly resolve itself any time soon.
Something has to be done about the endless resets, and the amount of time lost in games as a result. It might also be time to consider removing the scrum as an option for short arm infringements. At the very least, surely we can move the game on by not allowing another scrum as an option from a short arm scrum infringement.
On Saturday, the Cheetahs gave up a scrum penalty in the second minute of the game against the Crusaders, after loosehead prop Danie Mienie was pinged for going down. The penalty came after a reset, required after Mienie also stuck an elbow on the ground.
Barely two minutes later, the Crusaders were penalised for illegal wheeling five metres out from the Cheetahs line. It was a fair enough penalty, as the Crusaders definitely did wheel, but why would they resort to such tactics when they had already established scrum dominance in the same part of the field, and which would remain all game?
An hour later, it took three resets and more than four minutes of live match time for referee Andrew Lees to finally hand Cheetahs tighthead Coenie Oosthuizen a yellow card. Before the fourth put-in, the Cheetahs were finally warned there could be no more scrum penalties, despite the fact they’d been happy to concede scrum penalties for more than 60 minutes already.
There were nine resets in the Waratahs-Brumbies match on Sunday, but the game had a much better flow about it, it didn’t feel like as much time was lost. That may or may not be the case, of course, and there was certainly as much scrummaging negativity from both sides as in any other game.
One Twitter comment over the weekend reflected the general view of modern scrums beautifully:
“Scrumming nowdays [sic] is what u can get away with, not about the laws. Sad.”
I’d take it further than that, even, and say that scrums are no longer about restarting the game, but instead just an opportunity to milk a penalty. It feels like it’s a rare event these days for the ball to be fed quickly – and straight, but that’s another column for another day – for it then appear at the back of the scrum cleanly, and for the scrumhalf to clear the ball effectively.
The engagement wrestle on ‘set’ takes away from the quick feed (and the required straightness). The inevitable second shove from the defending team while the attacking hooker has his foot in the air disrupts the ball moving backwards cleanly, and finally, the allowance for the defending team’s no.9 to be able to attack the feeding scrumhalf as soon as he pulls the ball out of the scrum provides just another unwanted level of mess.
But there’s an easy solution for all this mess, too:
The coaches can simply cut out the crap and stop coaching negativity at the set piece.
The coaches can’t complain about the refereeing interpretations at the scrum when they’re instructing and training their players in new methods – and of course, refining old methods – of scrum sorcery. If the coaches and players really want a proper contest in the scrum, then they’ll cut all the bulls**t out of their game, and instead just bind correctly, work with the referee’s sequence call, and then just drive straight and collectively with the right technique.
And if they’re genuinely being beaten in the contest, then they’ll use their technique to hold steady. No modern scrum gets pushed backwards as if they’re on roller skates unless they’re a man down; there’s no reason why they can’t maintain their technique and their shape even if beaten in the contest.
Furthermore, if teams are happy to concede – and even not contest – lineouts, then there should be no shame in conceding a scrum and transitioning quickly into defence. It’s exactly the same scenario as staying down from the lineout and readying for the driving maul.
I mentioned last week that my ESPNscrum colleagues broke the news a few weeks back that SANZAR had implored Super Rugby coaches not to use the so-called ‘disengagement’ tactic at the lineout. It’s perfectly legal to not contest the lineout and then not engage the driving maul, yet SANZAR believe this is not in the spirit of the game.
I’d argue that deliberate scrum infringements – collapsing, wheeling, early disengagements, the whole she-bang – are even less in the spirit of the game. So why is it tolerated?
As for the opposing scrumhalf following the ball to spoil at the back of the completed scrum, it’s as big a blight on the game as any other negative scrummaging issue.
The scrumhalf – or anyone acting in the role at the time – can’t be played until the ball is clear of the ruck, and Law 20.12 (d) and (e) specifically outlines the hindmost foot of either side of the scrum being the offside line for the scrumhalf of the team who loses possession in the scrum. How many times do we see the ‘losing’ scrumhalf tackling the ‘winning’ scrumhalf from beyond that offside line? Why are referees allowing this double standard?
Rugby supporters are very quick to scoff at the state of scrums in rugby league these days, but if we were honest, we’d recognise that endless resets and rarely clean way that the ball appears at the back of a rugby scrum really isn’t that much better.
The fix is easy, and it’s all in the hands of the coaches. So cut out the crap, and the game will immediately benefit.