Jump to content

The Slow Death of the Rugby League Scrum


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

But I think being fair to him, but frank, the OP is just being provocative.

A little bit but I really would put them out of their misery. We can decry the ‘disapplication’ of the rule book in relation to scrums but it’s no more than wishful thinking.

It may well be that we’re witnessing the final few years of the dodo before it finally becomes extinct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

For me I would scrap the scrum, replace with a tap to be played where or behind the knock on or forward pass happened and increase interchanges to 10 throughout the game. It gets rid of the shot clock idea on scrums that nobody at a ground without a clock had a clue how long was left to form. The advantage over Union we have is already speed and fitness and we should really play on that so Tom Johnstone and others are not seen as "freaks of nature" but the norm 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

A little bit but I really would put them out of their misery. We can decry the ‘disapplication’ of the rule book in relation to scrums but it’s no more than wishful thinking.

It may well be that we’re witnessing the final few years of the dodo before it finally becomes extinct.

Why should rules being applied be wishful thinking? Rules should be applied or if they are going to be ignored the rule book should be amended or changed. I am not sure if there is any sport that completely disregards its own rules and turns a blind eye to rules like Rugby League does.

Two common criticisms I hear fans from other sports make of Rugby League is that it is a made for TV product and it is repetitive. Rugby League has tweaked its rules and interpretations for as long as I can remember and many changes have fed these criticisms. The games administrators seem to have been on an unending quest to forever make the game faster, latterly through things like shot clocks, and cleaner, usually be eliminating competition for the ball. These have not all necessarily made it better and there has definitely been a cause and effect factor with some changes having unintended consequences which have led to more and more tweaks. The moment the referees clampdown on something and enforce the rules, whether that is scrums or play the balls, we have commentators and pundits like Phil Gould moaning. Referees then invariably ease off and things return to normal.

Scrums are a perfect example of just ignoring what goes on to get the game started as soon as possible and making them cleaner by eliminating competition. We even now have the 30 second scrum which just encourages anyone to bind as quick as possible so not to concede a penalty. I don't think anyone wants to see a return to the scrums of yesteryear, which were a complete mess but they can certainly be improved. Things like binding in the scrum until the ball comes out can and should be more strictly enforced and this creates more attacking space too. More space would discourage teams from having slower forwards outside the scrum to defend too. Similarly the scrum half could be forced to put the ball at least in the middle and not straight to the 2nd row or Loose Forward to encourage teams to compete. We have countless tweaks of the play the ball every year but the scrums continue to be ignored. Yes it will take plenty of penalties and moans initially but it would improve things considerably.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put this on another thread a while back . Make the forwards bind properly ,hooker must stay on his feet ,pushing very much allowed , scrum halves to retire to behind the scrum with their hand on the loose forward , ref to put ball in (ideal place to be in to spot any offence) , ball to come out the back of the scrum .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, ivans82 said:

Put this on another thread a while back . Make the forwards bind properly ,hooker must stay on his feet ,pushing very much allowed , scrum halves to retire to behind the scrum with their hand on the loose forward , ref to put ball in (ideal place to be in to spot any offence) , ball to come out the back of the scrum .

Ref to put the ball in?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Damien said:

Scrums are a perfect example of just ignoring what goes on to get the game started as soon as possible and making them cleaner by eliminating competition. We even now have the 30 second scrum which just encourages anyone to bind as quick as possible so not to concede a penalty. I don't think anyone wants to see a return to the scrums of yesteryear, which were a complete mess but they can certainly be improved. Things like binding in the scrum until the ball comes out can and should be more strictly enforced and this creates more attacking space too. More space would discourage teams from having slower forwards outside the scrum to defend too. Similarly the scrum half could be forced to put the ball at least in the middle and not straight to the 2nd row or Loose Forward to encourage teams to compete. We have countless tweaks of the play the ball every year but the scrums continue to be ignored. Yes it will take plenty of penalties and moans initially but it would improve things considerably.

 

The shot clocks are not there to reduce the amount of time it takes for the ball to go from entry into the scrum to back in open play. The different shot clocks were introduced to stamp out the gamesmanship that was becoming ever more prevalent such as players going down with "cramp" every time a scrum or drop out was required to buy their team some extra rest. Strangely players don't seem to get cramp at such times anymore. What a coincidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lowdesert said:

Ref to put the ball in?

 

I can't see that working.  We get enough calls of the ref's being bias without them actually taking part in the game.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I can't see that working.  We get enough calls of the ref's being bias without them actually taking part in the game.

That is why I queried it.

It would also be difficult awarding differential penalties.  Does he signal  by moving his arm up and down  or with a 'yes' fist pump?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Damien said:

...

Two common criticisms I hear fans from other sports make of Rugby League is that it is a made for TV product and it is repetitive. Rugby League has tweaked its rules and interpretations for as long as I can remember and many changes have fed these criticisms. The games administrators seem to have been on an unending quest to forever make the game faster, latterly through things like shot clocks, and cleaner, usually be eliminating competition for the ball. These have not all necessarily made it better and there has definitely been a cause and effect factor with some changes having unintended consequences which have led to more and more tweaks. The moment the referees clampdown on something and enforce the rules, whether that is scrums or play the balls, we have commentators and pundits like Phil Gould moaning. Referees then invariably ease off and things return to normal.

...

 

Broadly correct.   The game is too fast and too repetitive.  Oh it can be and should be exciting, the ball moves around quickly... we see quick hands, but it is far too easy to pick up the ball from the ruck and charge forward easy yards.... principally because of a 11yrd line.  There is no skill in this.  The ball moves up the field like a baseball game.  With some pitches like Castleford  you are 3 drives and you are on the try line. 

Where there is or was some skill is WORKING HARD to pass a ball in a tackle, there is some skill and effort to move the ball forward and win a quick ruck and keep the opponents on the back foot.

But we are increasingly making everything EASY for the attack, offering easy extra 6 tackles, allowing fake rucks, giving easy 11yd yardage.   Skills are  atrophying.

Abolishing scrums takes away the skills of the stand off and the centres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Damien said:

The games administrators seem to have been on an unending quest to forever make the game faster,

I agree with this . It had a bad impact  on the ruck as speed was the be all and end all and some things we saw there were farcical . You can have structure there and still have a fast game . I feel we’re trying to redress the balance after going too far the other way , which is good 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rupert Prince said:

Broadly correct.   The game is too fast and too repetitive.  Oh it can be and should be exciting, the ball moves around quickly... we see quick hands, but it is far too easy to pick up the ball from the ruck and charge forward easy yards.... principally because of a 11yrd line.  There is no skill in this.  The ball moves up the field like a baseball game.  With some pitches like Castleford  you are 3 drives and you are on the try line. 

Where there is or was some skill is WORKING HARD to pass a ball in a tackle, there is some skill and effort to move the ball forward and win a quick ruck and keep the opponents on the back foot.

But we are increasingly making everything EASY for the attack, offering easy extra 6 tackles, allowing fake rucks, giving easy 11yd yardage.   Skills are  atrophying.

Abolishing scrums takes away the skills of the stand off and the centres.

While I agree with the point about easy yardage I don't agree with the part about skills atrophying.  Some of the skills we see in the modern game would never have been visible in previous era's. 

The skills are different yes, but they are still there.  I remember UK fans going wild for a cut out pass that Wally Lewis threw to a winger and yet they are par for the course in the modern game.  For every canny ball playing loose forward that we have lost we have full backs who handle the ball and throw passes that full backs never threw before and we also have dummy halves who are much more skillful than ever, never mind edge forwards who have the skills to have been centres in previous era's.

This week in the NRL we have seen Lattrell Mitchell's wonderful cut out pass to his winger, Pangai Jnr's miracle offload in the Broncos game and the Zac Lomax flick pass to his winger in the St George game today.  All of these pieces of skill resulted in tries and there were many more.  The skills are still there in the game.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

Ref to put the ball in?

 

    Years ago York REF Gerry Kershaw proposed this at the ref's meeting.Needless to say they voted it down as it would have caused uproar if they had accidently not put it in straight.Shortly afterwards they came up with the present system letting the non offending team have a freebe by putting it in the second row.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, HKR AWAY DAYS said:

You find me a prop who agrees and I'll show you a liar 😁👍

An exactly how many present day props (or middles, as coaches call them) have experience in "proper" scrummaging?

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

Geoff Grayshon.

Do you mean Jeff Grayshon?

😉

 

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

I’m trying!

Sorry but scrums have no bearing on the modern game in terms of player development or selection.

And this is my whole point. They are completely peripheral and vestigial. A glorified play-the-ball. Get rid.

Absolutely. They do not feature at all in any way whatsoever.

Small players tend towards the halves (and I include the dummy halves in that) in League because they are the positions in which size is valued least. Nothing at all to do with the scrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I’m misinterpreting , apologies if I am , but are we debating the need for scrum halves or small players if there’s no scrums ? If so I don’t see the connection . A trained monkey can put a ball in a scrum now , the modern scrum and feed is an irrelevance to the nature of a scrum half . A scrum half’s role is controlling the game , getting his team round the paddock , giving creativity , direction , kick plays ... all sorts . And if we generalise to smaller players , their size , their speed , elusiveness , agility , skill set is an attribute in the middle against bigger more cumbersome players and in generating point scoring opportunities . No scrums changes none of this 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Maybe I’m misinterpreting , apologies if I am , but are we debating the need for scrum halves or small players if there’s no scrums ? If so I don’t see the connection . A trained monkey can put a ball in a scrum now , the modern scrum and feed is an irrelevance to the nature of a scrum half . A scrum half’s role is controlling the game , getting his team round the paddock , giving creativity , direction , kick plays ... all sorts . And if we generalise to smaller players , their size , their speed , elusiveness , agility , skill set is an attribute in the middle against bigger more cumbersome players and in generating point scoring opportunities . No scrums changes none of this 

100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this conversation were happening 40 years ago and the scrum was potentially being removed, I would accept that there would be a worry that a need for the smaller player would be at risk.

But the last 40 years has shown us that with irrelevant scrums, often fed by wingers or centres, that this worry is completely unfounded.

There will always be a place for the smaller, skilful, fast, agile Rugby League player.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Damien said:

Why should rules being applied be wishful thinking? Rules should be applied or if they are going to be ignored the rule book should be amended or changed. I am not sure if there is any sport that completely disregards its own rules and turns a blind eye to rules like Rugby League does.

Two common criticisms I hear fans from other sports make of Rugby League is that it is a made for TV product and it is repetitive. Rugby League has tweaked its rules and interpretations for as long as I can remember and many changes have fed these criticisms. The games administrators seem to have been on an unending quest to forever make the game faster, latterly through things like shot clocks, and cleaner, usually be eliminating competition for the ball. These have not all necessarily made it better and there has definitely been a cause and effect factor with some changes having unintended consequences which have led to more and more tweaks. The moment the referees clampdown on something and enforce the rules, whether that is scrums or play the balls, we have commentators and pundits like Phil Gould moaning. Referees then invariably ease off and things return to normal.

Scrums are a perfect example of just ignoring what goes on to get the game started as soon as possible and making them cleaner by eliminating competition. We even now have the 30 second scrum which just encourages anyone to bind as quick as possible so not to concede a penalty. I don't think anyone wants to see a return to the scrums of yesteryear, which were a complete mess but they can certainly be improved. Things like binding in the scrum until the ball comes out can and should be more strictly enforced and this creates more attacking space too. More space would discourage teams from having slower forwards outside the scrum to defend too. Similarly the scrum half could be forced to put the ball at least in the middle and not straight to the 2nd row or Loose Forward to encourage teams to compete. We have countless tweaks of the play the ball every year but the scrums continue to be ignored. Yes it will take plenty of penalties and moans initially but it would improve things considerably.

 

I agree with the scrum half being made to feed the front row.  I'd also like to see the scrum stay bound until the scrum half has either, passed, dummied or taken a step.

“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BIG NEWS BREAKING!!!!!!!      Peter V`Landy`s  Head of the NRL has floated  the prospect of referees feeding scums in the NRL. Competitive scrums again,  Ref`s got his head right in there to police it, NO pushing maybe just the rest of the pack to provide a structure to support the hookers who would contest the ball. Touch judges could be used to police 10metres and that the rest of the scrum remains bound. Would be so good to have scrums a lottery again. Scrums are a unique aspect of our game that differentiates us from other codes where there is a bunch of blokes running around chasing an inflated pigs bladder and where else would brawls erupt from? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I highlight your last point as I think it is factually wrong. Props currently are noticeably heavier than second rowers and hookers are specialised positionally, just not for hooking. Some teams choose to play a style with 3 props with the 13 being a 3rd prop forward.

The scrums are basically an irrelevance in the modern game, yet smaller half backs persist. This is because the scrum hasn't been a feature tactically for the past 30 years at least. 

Should we not consider the opinions of those who really matter in terms of tactics and strategies - i.e. the coaches? I don't seem to recall many of the current forward thinking coaches referring to props, second rows, or even loose forwards. They refer to middles, outers, edges, pivots etc revealing the actual atributes that they look for in their players. Their abilities in and around the scrum are regarded as irrelevant, because they really are.

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.