A Question from a RU Fan.

[Steve May]

When I first watched RL the scrum was the only time when I went WTF. It's the worst bit about the game and something needs changing. Don't actually know how it needs to change, but it does!! I can't imagine how many people it puts off the game when they are watching for the first time. When I am explaining the game to a friend (which is pretty regular) I just keep quiet when a scrum happens!!

I honestly can't imagine that someone would watch RL and think "This is terrific, but that scrum is a nonsense so I'll never watch again"

[Steve May]

2. The forwards in RL? They dont seem to do much different than the backs, how do you life long supporters differentiate between both?

In RU it seems to me that all the players have defined roles that they stick to fairly rigidly. In RL there are roles to be carried out and they are done by whichever player is best suited to do it at the time. We differentiate between the players by what they do rather than the number on their backs.

RL is much more flexible and fluid than RU.

[trakl]

If you think the scrums are pointless, you are coming from a union background. They are much better than they were and a whole lot better than union scrums, if only you can see them with fresh eyes! League scrums are just a quick(ish) way to restart the game.

I accept your point - one made by many others on this thread - that rugby league scrums are "just a...way to restart the game" but try to see these scrums from the point of view of those coming not merely from a union background but also a general sporting background.

These people might be thinking just why it is that something so contrived and artificial is a means to re-starting the game at all? Why does it look so shambolic, even risible? What skills are employed by the players taking part in this rigmarole? Why is a "hooker" still called a "hooker?" And precisely because there are relatively so few scrums anyway - why have them at all? Are they not a crumbling relic from a time when contesting possession of the football meant something altogether different?

I don't want rugby union scrums in a rugby league game. And even though I have long felt that re-starting the game with a scrum after a player has been dragged into touch is illogical as well as pointless - I want even less those pantomimic rugby union line-outs. Nevertheless, it seems to me that the game lacks the courage of its convictions by refusing to dispense with scrums and maybe looking elsewhere at other sports for clues as to how best to re-start the game. If my memory serves me well, Brian Smith wrote on just this topic many years ago when he had a regular slot in Open Rugby - although, er, I've forgotten just what he wrote!

Rugby league's rules surely have not reached a state of perfection? Are there any people in the upper echelons of the game charged with looking at ways the game of rugby league might develop and even improve?

And bring back "raking" at the play-the-ball...

[Bostik Bailey]

And bring back "raking" at the play-the-ball...

Seconded

[hindle xiii]

... I will always love RU ...

Give it time.

[Hornetto]

Perhaps the worst aspect of a Union game is the fact that forwards dont stay on their feet, choosing 99% of the time to go to ground hoping for a quick recycle of the ball, then they do it again, progress up field if any is very slow.

Watch league, granted two less players but top teams can and do make 40/50 yards most 6 tackles.

As an exception that proves the rule, I saw Nottingham Outlaws play at Underbank earlier this year and Notts' game plan was: as soon as they hit the line of defence, they went to ground immediately in a 'surrender tackle' and jumped straight back up for a super-fast play the ball. It absolutely killed Underbank for the first 20 mins and it was hugely impressive to see a team adhere to a plan so effectively.

The downside was that Notts burned themselves out after half an hour and Underbank simply bludgeoned them backwards for the remainder of the game. Could a fitter team keep this up for 80 minutes?

Also, last week at Fylde, Blackpool contested all of the early scrums: big pushes, lots of raking and they took one against the head. Ugly, but interesting.

Despite this, the scrum is a restart mechanism that takes the big defensive hitters out of the defensive line (and out of position) for one play: it's up to creative half-backs to exploit the space and open up the game.

And if you think that RL players are all of a 'template' size, I give you Rob Burrow, Swinton's Gary Hulse and our own Steve Roper as examples that it's seldom the size of the dog in the fight that matters, but rather the size of the fight in the dog.

[Wolford6]

What about us fat lads!!!!!

Plenty of room for fat lads in RL. Watch any amateur and semi-pro team and there are quite a few. The honed bodies in superleague are a reflec tion of: -

- full time training and dietary control

- the nature of the game doesnt require a bit of padding which is necessary for players in the RU forwards ... the full-time-RU pros aren't as fat as they were but still carry far more timber than their RL equivalents.

- the continual-interchange system means they only have to play in 20-minute bursts ... bodies can be honed for impact at the expense of endurance.

- the perfunctory scrum and playing in a summer season means no one gets heavily fatigued by playing in heavy mud and prolonged pushing and pulling in scrums and mauls.

Take no notice of the people on this board who disparage the RU scrum; they've never packed down in one and don't understand the value of wearing the opposition down, wearying both sets of forwards to allow the backs to flourish and the raising of morale that a strong pack can engender.

The RU scrum is fantastic to play in, but not so good for spectators ... that's why RL, which had to survive on its gates, reduced it to a mere restart. Most teams now put backs in the scrum to allow harder tackling/running forwards to either reinforce the defence and/or provide a battering ram for the first reception.

Both RU and RL scrums fulfill the separate purposes for which they are intended. I really enjoyed playing in both.

It's just that some posters on this board think that, because RL is great, RU must be rubbish. Perhaps one day they'll grow up.

[Doghead]

Plenty of room for fat lads in RL. Watch any amateur and semi-pro team and there are quite a few. The honed bodies in superleague are a reflec tion of: -

- full time training and dietary control

- the nature of the game doesnt require a bit of padding which is necessary for players in the RU forwards ... the full-time-RU pros aren't as fat as they were but still carry far more timber than their RL equivalents.

- the continual-interchange system means they only have to play in 20-minute bursts ... bodies can be honed for impact at the expense of endurance.

- the perfunctory scrum and playing in a summer season means no one gets heavily fatigued by playing in heavy mud and prolonged pushing and pulling in scrums and mauls.

Take no notice of the people on this board who disparage the RU scrum; they've never packed down in one and don't understand the value of wearing the opposition down, wearying both sets of forwards to allow the backs to flourish and the raising of morale that a strong pack can engender.

The RU scrum is fantastic to play in, but not so good for spectators ... that's why RL, which had to survive on its gates, reduced it to a mere restart. Most teams now put backs in the scrum to allow harder tackling/running forwards to either reinforce the defence and/or provide a battering ram for the first reception.

Both RU and RL scrums fulfill the separate purposes for which they are intended. I really enjoyed playing in both.

It's just that some posters on this board think that, because RL is great, RU must be rubbish. Perhaps one day they'll grow up.

As I said above "Union made the scrum into a sacred institution" This post goes someway in proving my point,

[Chairman M]

I'm a bit of a Union novice but there is certainly more to the scrum than just winning the ball. I always thought it was similar to the way a forward pack gets on top in RL. If your forward pack are dominant then you stand a much better chance of winning.

Exactly. Scrums against the head are not that common in RU but if you have a dominant pack of forwards in the scrum then over the whole match this will show because the weaker pack will have been worn down. The only problem I have with the RU scrum is the bloody re-sets.

The RL scrum, as often seen by RU fans is not a joke. It takes players out of the defensive line and creates a tad more space. My only beef is that teams are now using more backs in the scrum instead of the forwards.

[MrPosh]

The RU scrum is fantastic to play in, but not so good for spectators ... that's why RL, which had to survive on its gates, reduced it to a mere restart. Most teams now put backs in the scrum to allow harder tackling/running forwards to either reinforce the defence and/or provide a battering ram for the first reception.

And there sums up the whole difference. 100 years of evolution in different direction - one for fans and one for players.

Wanted to finish with a monkeys and ELVs thing, but it would have been too convoluted.

[welshexile1963]

Give it time.

Why do I pick up so much negativity towards RU by RL fans? There's no need for it there's room in the world for both codes!

[terrywebbisgod]

Why do I pick up so much negativity towards RU by RL fans? There's no need for it there's room in the world for both codes!

Persecution from the RU authorities in the past.

[welshexile1963]

Take no notice of the people on this board who disparage the RU scrum; they've never packed down in one and don't understand the value of wearing the opposition down, wearying both sets of forwards to allow the backs to flourish and the raising of morale that a strong pack can engender.

Ah yes happy days eh? I used to love the scrum and rucks in the middle of winter getting stuck in, it's one of the main things I miss as an old git!! I follow Moseley RFC and get quite worked up watching a pack of forwards doing it's stuff to set up the glory boys in the backs to do their bit!

[welshexile1963]

Persecution from the RU authorities in the past.

I understand that but lets move on!!! God knows us Welsh could be really cheesed off with the northern clubs for coming down and taking our best players but that was a different era times move on yes?

[Bob8]

A few points here, firstly most if not all RU fans enjoy watching the physical battle between forwards at a scrum, but I do take your point, but you state "As for backs being the same as forwards, it's just not true. The roles in RL are pretty clearly defined for the most part and the forwards and backs have their own roles" please clarify.

If I could direct you back to my earlier post, I would say that there is a different emphasis on skills in rugby league, but the roles are rather similar. The forward has to make the hard yards, but in union, this will be done in set pieces and there is a greater emphasis on size and strength. As RL is rather more one-on-one, there is a greater emphasis on handling skills, as the forward has to have the option of passing well, thus forcing the defender to wrap up the ball in the tackle.

The actual role is the same, how to do it is different.

(from a chap who has had his time in a rugby union scrum).

[The Parksider]

1. What is the point of the scrum? There's no actual physical competition involved anymore so why not scrap it?

2. The forwards in RL? They dont seem to do much different than the backs, how do you life long supporters differentiate between both?

1. No point, it's a relic of the method of re-starting play, that by rights shoud simply be a tap ball. It remains because people do not like change, even those who favour it won't go too far.

2. RL Forwards, Paleeasina, Crabtree, Griffin, Fielden, Morley.

RL Backs, Riley, Burrow, Eastmond, Brough, Myler.

They clearly are NOT the same.

[paley]

The big difference between rugby and union scrums is in rugby you will never hear "brilliant, we knocked on"

[Wolford6]

RL Forwards, Paleeasina, Crabtree, Griffin, Fielden, Morley.

RL Backs, Riley, Burrow, Eastmond, Brough, Myler.

They clearly are NOT the same.

RL Forwards, Paul Johnson, Lee Gilmour, Chris Nero, Sean O'Loughlin, Steve Menzies, Paul Cooke, Michael Monaghan, Kevin Sinfield.

RL Backs, Paul Johnson, Lee Gilmour, Chris Nero, Sean O'Loughlin, Steve Menzies, Paul Cooke, Michael Monaghan, Kevin Sinfield.

They clearly ARE the same.

Edited September 19, 2010 by Wolford6

[Wolford6]

God knows us Welsh could be really cheesed off with the northern clubs for coming down and taking our best players but that was a different era times move on yes?

I never realised that the Mosely RUFC badge had a dragon on it!

[The Parksider]

RL Forwards, Paul Johnson, Lee Gilmour, Chris Nero, Sean O'Loughlin, Steve Menzies, Paul Cooke, Michael Monaghan, Kevin Sinfield.

RL Backs, Paul Johnson, Lee Gilmour, Chris Nero, Sean O'Loughlin, Steve Menzies, Paul Cooke, Michael Monaghan, Kevin Sinfield.

They clearly ARE the same.

Go on then

[Trojan]

Plenty of room for fat lads in RL. Watch any amateur and semi-pro team and there are quite a few. The honed bodies in superleague are a reflec tion of: -

- full time training and dietary control

- the nature of the game doesnt require a bit of padding which is necessary for players in the RU forwards ... the full-time-RU pros aren't as fat as they were but still carry far more timber than their RL equivalents.

- the continual-interchange system means they only have to play in 20-minute bursts ... bodies can be honed for impact at the expense of endurance.

- the perfunctory scrum and playing in a summer season means no one gets heavily fatigued by playing in heavy mud and prolonged pushing and pulling in scrums and mauls.

Take no notice of the people on this board who disparage the RU scrum; they've never packed down in one and don't understand the value of wearing the opposition down, wearying both sets of forwards to allow the backs to flourish and the raising of morale that a strong pack can engender.

The RU scrum is fantastic to play in, but not so good for spectators ... that's why RL, which had to survive on its gates, reduced it to a mere restart. Most teams now put backs in the scrum to allow harder tackling/running forwards to either reinforce the defence and/or provide a battering ram for the first reception.

Both RU and RL scrums fulfill the separate purposes for which they are intended. I really enjoyed playing in both.

It's just that some posters on this board think that, because RL is great, RU must be rubbish. Perhaps one day they'll grow up.

I have. In fact I've packed down in the scrum at both games, granted in the contested scrum RL days. The argument for RL is that with contested scrums there'd be no wide running back rowers, because they'd be too knackered by the end of the game and more room for the half backs to work in. David Hobbs and the Fev pack combined to score Fev's winning try in the '83 final after a 75 minutes of contested scrums. Having said that the Hull pack were out on their feet. The problem with the contested scrum (again as can be seen in the '83 final) is that they had to be constantly set and re-set, with every other one resulting in a penalty. I don't know which I prefer. The open play in the contested scrum era seems just as fast as it is today. But the game was slower because of all the stoppages at scrums. The scrummage laws at RL haven't changed. There's nothing to stop a side putting out an old fashioned scrummaging six and trying to win by outscrummaging a lighter six. Who knows it could be the start of a whole new era for RL? Or would it force the RFL to update the rules, given what a dangerous place a contested scrum can be?

Edited September 19, 2010 by Trojan

[dallymessenger]

the rugby union scrum hardly ever results in a win against the feed so is essentially meaningless.

but in addition to greatly increasing the risk of neck injury, its slows down the game significantly and stops the flow of play with inevitable penalties for minor infringements

watching a union game always reminds me of the pointlessness of contested scrums

[Steve May]

RL Forwards, Paul Johnson, Lee Gilmour, Chris Nero, Sean O'Loughlin, Steve Menzies, Paul Cooke, Michael Monaghan, Kevin Sinfield.

RL Backs, Paul Johnson, Lee Gilmour, Chris Nero, Sean O'Loughlin, Steve Menzies, Paul Cooke, Michael Monaghan, Kevin Sinfield.

They clearly ARE the same.

Indeed. One of the reasons why rugby league is such a one-dimensional game with little interest outside the cloth capped Neanderthals that inhabit the gloomy mill towns of the North is that all the players are completely interchangeable and all the same size.

[Hornetto]

Indeed. One of the reasons why rugby league is such a one-dimensional game with little interest outside the cloth capped Neanderthals that inhabit the gloomy mill towns of the North is that all the players are completely interchangeable and all the same size.

It's a trick. It's easy to do...

[Lobbygobbler]

the rugby union scrum hardly ever results in a win against the feed so is essentially meaningless.

but in addition to greatly increasing the risk of neck injury, its slows down the game significantly and stops the flow of play with inevitable penalties for minor infringements

watching a union game always reminds me of the pointlessness of contested scrums

RL contested scrums were not pointless, and I would estimate that at least 20% went against the head on average.

RU scrums are more stable that is why they hardly ever win against the feed. However they are there to tire forwards out