NRL Scrum Analysis

[Sports Prophet]

Cool article on the Aussie Beeb

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-10/nrl-parramatta-eels-souths-rabbitohs-scrum/12747922?section=sport

[unapologetic pedant]

6 hours ago, Celt said:

Interesting that they concentrate on winning the ball against the feed. I think a lot of the pushing tactics can also be useful in terms of forcing an error by the oppo (knock on, tackle way behind the gain line etc) even if they don't actually succeed in stealing the ball directly.

A much under-utilised tactic I feel.

This is the perennial problem we have when making the scrums authentically contested is proposed. It`s automatically assumed to be a call for the type of contest we used to have. Even in this article there`s a reference to "traditional hooking tactics" aka "cheating".

The Sharks` push against the Raiders is an example of the kind of genuine contest we could have as standard if administrators, officials coaches, convened to devise from first principles a contested RL scrum for the 21st century. Instead, any scrum debate quickly descends into "Back to the Future" rhetoric, where inevitably the "just get rid" brigade have the upper hand.

[Man of Kent]

54 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

The Sharks` push against the Raiders is an example of the kind of genuine contest we could have as standard if administrators, officials coaches, convened to devise from first principles a contested RL scrum for the 21st century. 

Surely it’s only a genuine contest if both sides pack down expecting one, rather than one shoving unexpectedly to catch the other off-guard?

How would you ensure scrums aren’t a crumpled mess when both sides push? 

[unapologetic pedant]

52 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Surely it’s only a genuine contest if both sides pack down expecting one, rather than one shoving unexpectedly to catch the other off-guard?

How would you ensure scrums aren’t a crumpled mess when both sides push? 

Would you apply the principle in your first sentence to ball-stealing? If a ball-carrier has the ball stripped in a one-on-one tackle, it`s only a genuine contest if he were expecting it to happen. "Is it alright if I try to steal the ball from you, mate?"

Your second sentence would be high on the agenda for any putative debate on the way forward. The question would have to be satisfactorily addressed. I appreciate you regard that as impossible. I regard your view as a counsel of despair.

[Man of Kent]

43 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Would you apply the principle in your first sentence to ball-stealing? If a ball-carrier has the ball stripped in a one-on-one tackle, it`s only a genuine contest if he were expecting it to happen. "Is it alright if I try to steal the ball from you, mate?"

Obviously not, no, because it is inherently a genuine contest by mere fact of a ball carrier making a carry in open play.

The ball-carrier knows to pay due attention to ball security because a loose carry will result in lost possession.

It’s like a boxing match. The mere fact a boxer is in the ring means they are liable to  be hit in the face and knocked out.

But if you had a boxing match where only one fighter was fighting or able to fight, it’s not a genuine contest. 

[barnyia]

Scrums are needed, I've been to a couple of catalans games and when you're at the ground, the game just suddenly stops and the players stand around for 30 seconds, it's like it's a perfect moment for a advertisement break for the TV, when I went to an NFL game the players just stood around for a while on every turn over, I asked a guy near me what was happening and he said it was for a TV ad break. Maybe a cunning plan from sky or the aussies as they do this on channel 9 I seem to remember. 

[redjonn]

Yep have to agree with above, the standing around rather than scrum is worse in my opinion, especially as the ref even warns them that the time is clocking down and to get into position to play.

I understand the wish to pause play, to gain breath so to speak and ensure full reset of defence but one moment we are speeding up play, yet we then allow such pauses to effectively slow play.

Either the game is too fast and in some respects too physically exhausting for players and we change some respects or skills become secondary to fittest as the game gets faster and faster. I know part of the game has always been to wear down opponents so last 20minutes opponents will struggle with fatigue but currently that fatigue kicks in sooner and sooner...

[Scubby]

There was a great try from a scrum yesterday from Souths. It is very useful, it breaks up the game and actually gives the fans a chance to breathe. It is also a nice link to the past. Sometimes you can mess too much too quickly. 

[barnyia]

At least with the scrum the players can rush to form the scrum to stop the clock so there's at least movement on the field 

[Sports Prophet]

5 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

. Even in this article there`s a reference to "traditional hooking tactics" aka "cheating".

 

I don’t understand what you mean. Are you saying hooking in the scrum is illegal?

[unapologetic pedant]

2 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

Obviously not, no, because it is inherently a genuine contest by mere fact of a ball carrier making a carry in open play.

The ball-carrier knows to pay due attention to ball security because a loose carry will result in lost possession.

It’s like a boxing match. The mere fact a boxer is in the ring means they are liable to  be hit in the face and knocked out.

But if you had a boxing match where only one fighter was fighting or able to fight, it’s not a genuine contest. 

Where has the idea come from that it`s either illegal or unsportsmanlike to push in a scrum? Or, as in your final sentence here, that only one team are allowed to push.

When a team pack a scrum they know (or ought to know) that the opposition are entitled to push. That if they want to protect their ball against disruption, or even lose it, they might need to put some effort in themselves. If they choose not to, they are not the victims of some sneaky practice catching them off guard. Just as a ball-carrier knows he must protect the ball in a one-on-one tackle.

[unapologetic pedant]

2 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

I don’t understand what you mean. Are you saying hooking in the scrum is illegal?

No, although I think initial striking should be banned in favour of pushing only. This is if we want to avoid a shambles, and have scrums make sense both inherently, and in the context of the modern limited possession game.

By "cheating" I mean the non-offending team`s hooker and his open-side prop pinching the loose head by means of not binding correctly, or not binding at all. Amongst other malpractices.

[The Rocket]

1 hour ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Where has the idea come from that it`s either illegal or unsportsmanlike to push in a scrum? Or, as in your final sentence here, that only one team are allowed to push.

When a team pack a scrum they know (or ought to know) that the opposition are entitled to push. That if they want to protect their ball against disruption, or even lose it, they might need to put some effort in themselves. If they choose not to, they are not the victims of some sneaky practice catching them off guard. Just as a ball-carrier knows he must protect the ball in a one-on-one tackle.

And as you said before on another thread why should not the team feeding the scrum utilise the sudden push as a tactic sometimes. Potentially taking out the entire other pack,  potentially 6 players, and the corresponding chaos caused in the opponents defensive line as the players tried to regain their feet and rejoin the defensive line.

Funny enough, the same as how in the old days it was legal for the tackled player to take out the first marker after playing the ball.

[barnyia]

I had this done to my team v Avignon, 10 mètres from our line, they pushed with the head and feed and the lock picked up the ball and put it down for a try as our pack just disintegrated. 

They called it mushroom. I was gutted but impressed! 

[Rupert Prince]

58 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

No, although I think initial striking should be banned in favour of pushing only. This is if we want to avoid a shambles, and have scrums make sense both inherently, and in the context of the modern limited possession game.

By "cheating" I mean the non-offending team`s hooker and his open-side prop pinching the loose head by means of not binding correctly, or not binding at all. Amongst other malpractices.

Yes, the open side prop would do a lot of "hooking" Danny Gardener come to mind, and of course a good hooker like Bill Sayer was cute with his loose arm. Ah, happy days.

I wonder if Colin Clark was the first modern hooker?

[Man of Kent]

6 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Where has the idea come from that it`s either illegal or unsportsmanlike to push in a scrum? Or, as in your final sentence here, that only one team are allowed to push.

When a team pack a scrum they know (or ought to know) that the opposition are entitled to push. That if they want to protect their ball against disruption, or even lose it, they might need to put some effort in themselves. If they choose not to, they are not the victims of some sneaky practice catching them off guard. Just as a ball-carrier knows he must protect the ball in a one-on-one tackle.

You’re denying reality. The unwritten rule is uncontested scrums, and that is abided to in the overwhelming majority of cases.

Feel free to go down the rabbit hole of ‘bring back contested scrums’ but you need to demonstrate how it would/could arise to different circumstances than that ultimately led to uncontested scrums.

[Rupert Prince]

13 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Cool article on the Aussie Beeb

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-10/nrl-parramatta-eels-souths-rabbitohs-scrum/12747922?section=sport

If scrums disappear (i hope not but...) then what name should we give to the no9.  And if you have no scrum, then what do you call the 7?  And with no "scrum half" then the no6 has no one to "stand off" from...  And to continue, the 13 has nothing to "lock" since all forwards become "loose".   And 11 &12 are "second" to nothing.

Ideas on a post card please...

[Bostik Bailey]

We have been there, seen, done it and got the T-shirt. Scrums need to go. Have they been missed over here?

[barnyia]

Yes, for me they are as I mentioned above, I like the moving the position of the scrum in the nrl for improving attacking options. 

[Sports Prophet]

9 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

You’re denying reality. The unwritten rule is uncontested scrums, and that is abided to in the overwhelming majority of cases.

Feel free to go down the rabbit hole of ‘bring back contested scrums’ but you need to demonstrate how it would/could arise to different circumstances than that ultimately led to uncontested scrums.

There is no such thing as an “unwritten rule” and there is certainly no gentleman’s agreement or anything similar that teams are not to push in the scrum.

[Sports Prophet]

4 hours ago, Bostik Bailey said:

We have been there, seen, done it and got the T-shirt. Scrums need to go. Have they been missed over here?

The NRL to follow a SL initiative... don’t count on it.

[Sports Prophet]

9 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

If scrums disappear (i hope not but...) then what name should we give to the no9.  And if you have no scrum, then what do you call the 7?  And with no "scrum half" then the no6 has no one to "stand off" from...  And to continue, the 13 has nothing to "lock" since all forwards become "loose".   And 11 &12 are "second" to nothing.

Ideas on a post card please...

I’m happy w Dummy Half, and Pivots. Second Rowers can change to Bopper, Props change to Big Bopper and the Lock can be Smart Bopper.

[unapologetic pedant]

16 hours ago, The Rocket said:

And as you said before on another thread why should not the team feeding the scrum utilise the sudden push as a tactic sometimes. Potentially taking out the entire other pack,  potentially 6 players, and the corresponding chaos caused in the opponents defensive line as the players tried to regain their feet and rejoin the defensive line.

Funny enough, the same as how in the old days it was legal for the tackled player to take out the first marker after playing the ball.

This comparison between scrum and PTB should be more deeply drawn. Historically they share common, fundamental principles. When we banned striking at the PTB if, in the interests of symmetry, we had also banned initial striking against the feed, the scrum might not have declined to its current anaemic state.

Remembering that the original version of the PTB was seen as a mini-scrum, the players over the ball either side of the mark would have been pushing and grappling each other as they sought to rake the ball back. Presumably this remained legal until expressly outlawed.

"Take out" is open to interpretation, but I definitely remember tackled players fending markers to keep them further back from the ball. More recently "Brick with eyes" Glenn Lazarus could sometimes have a handful of the first marker`s shirt. When Les Boyd was the tackled player, he invariably picked an argument with the marker, tying him in and opening up space around the ruck.

The reason for qualifying the ban on striking against the feed with "initial" is so that a pack who pushed the opposition off their own ball would still be able to use their boots to channel the ball out. 

The half would feed his own hooker who would have a free, unmolested initial strike, and the ball would have to touch his foot before anything further was permitted. Which is precisely the process of the contemporary PTB (if the laws are properly enforced), where the tackled player has the same free strike, his foot should touch the ball to be in play, but if subsequently the ball sits there behind him the opposition are entitled to claim it.

[Man of Kent]

8 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

There is no such thing as an “unwritten rule” and there is certainly no gentleman’s agreement or anything similar that teams are not to push in the scrum.

Feeding....

[Davo5]

9 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

There is no such thing as an “unwritten rule” and there is certainly no gentleman’s agreement or anything similar that teams are not to push in the scrum.

Correct