RugbyRebels

Good piece here http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugb ... 14371.html

i'm drawn to what Mallett says about the scrum -

"Feeding into the refereeing frustration is the mess at many scrums. If England’s top referee Wayne Barnes pleaded “let’s go” to the Wales and France packs once, he did it a thousand times.

“Teams are looking to eke penalties out of scrums and driving mauls, and the referees get pulled into refereeing static rugby,” said Mallett.

“That is not what the scrum is there for. It is supposed to be a restart. But it has become a means of getting a penalty so you exit your territory and keep the ball at a line-out, or you score points.

“I believe the solution is to take the penalty sanction away from the scrum, and give a free-kick for technical offences instead. That would bring it into line with the line-out and kick-off.”

Any converts to the idea of reducing scrum offences, or possibly some offences, to free kicks? As a former front rower i'm getting fed up with the time it takes to complete a scrum, by teams trying to get a penalty out of it and by refs penalising a side simply for being pushed backwards.

fivepointer wrote:Good piece here http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugb ... 14371.html

i'm drawn to what Mallett says about the scrum -

"Feeding into the refereeing frustration is the mess at many scrums. If England’s top referee Wayne Barnes pleaded “let’s go” to the Wales and France packs once, he did it a thousand times.

“Teams are looking to eke penalties out of scrums and driving mauls, and the referees get pulled into refereeing static rugby,” said Mallett.

“That is not what the scrum is there for. It is supposed to be a restart. But it has become a means of getting a penalty so you exit your territory and keep the ball at a line-out, or you score points.

“I believe the solution is to take the penalty sanction away from the scrum, and give a free-kick for technical offences instead. That would bring it into line with the line-out and kick-off.”

Any converts to the idea of reducing scrum offences, or possibly some offences, to free kicks? As a former front rower i'm getting fed up with the time it takes to complete a scrum, by teams trying to get a penalty out of it and by refs penalising a side simply for being pushed backwards.

As always, downgrading from a free kick to a pen just moves the propensity to foul from one team to the other.

I think Mallett gets closest with his point about Barnes urging teams to 'use it' when it's at the back of the scrum. I'd like to see a situation like we have at the mail where you have to 'use it' if not moving forwards. I've no great problem with a team winning a pen if going forward, though I'd rather they'd release their backs against retreating oppo. It's the static wrestling of the front rows hoping for a collapse that gets me. The scrum is an intrinsic part of the game and it shouldn't be neutered just because Healey has a tantrum ten times a match.

If we're taking it further, the real problem is the number of resets. I'm not sure anyone has a huge problem with a scrum that leads to a pen if the first scrum attempt is completed.

Mellsblue wrote:
As always, downgrading from a free kick to a pen just moves the propensity to foul from one team to the other.

I think Mallett gets closest with his point about Barnes urging teams to 'use it' when it's at the back of the scrum. I'd like to see a situation like we have at the mail where you have to 'use it' if not moving forwards. I've no great problem with a team winning a pen if going forward, though I'd rather they'd release their backs against retreating oppo. It's the static wrestling of the front rows hoping for a collapse that gets me. The scrum is an intrinsic part of the game and it shouldn't be neutered just because Healey has a tantrum ten times a match.

If we're taking it further, the real problem is the number of resets. I'm not sure anyone has a huge problem with a scrum that leads to a pen if the first scrum attempt is completed.

Agree with this.

Many keep saying that the ref is "guessing" when making decisions at scrum time, so the hell with resets, penalise (maybe some to free kicks) someone instead of resetting!

I'm not the brightest when it comes to scrums and the application of the applicable laws. Is Mallett suggesting (in downgrading from penalties) that the team awarded a free kick will not have the option of choosing a scrum?

oldbackrow wrote: Agree with this.

Many keep saying that the ref is "guessing" when making decisions at scrum time, so the hell with resets, penalise (maybe some to free kicks) someone instead of resetting!

I must be thick over this. He is saying, I think, that the penalty option should be removed to stop teams playing for them. That only makes sense if the free kicks then have to be quick taps or kicks (which, like restarts, give possession back to the opposition most of the time).

I agree that scrum re-sets etc. are boring but I find that place kicks are just as aggravating. I'd like to see the kicker have a strictly policed 30 seconds from the time the tee goes into his hands. I can't remember the last time a referee called time on a place kick.

I'm just trying to think if there will be unintended consequences.

What about the situation with a dominant scrum going for example a pushover try. The defending team presumably could just collapse immediately knowing the worst they can give away is a free-kick?

I haven't read the article but for me the whole scrum problem revolves around the constant tinkering with the rules which has led to more and more time consuming "answers". I can't for the life of me understand why the powers that be don't consider going back to the laws as they used to stand and be reffed. All this couch, touch,pause,engage nonsense and it's evolution is what's slowed the whole thing down. When a scrum is awarded it takes two or three mins just to get everyone formed to start with. Get back to teams engaging the scrum themselves and just penalise the team that pushes early (and penalise the crooked feed). I just can't understand why they want to complicate it so much. Refs have far too much to think about now, no wonder they are overwhelmed. I'm a former TH btw.

For me once the ball is at the back of the scrum it's use it or lose it, if you want to then set up a maul to drive the ball fine but the scrum is only a restart. If you want as a team to have a live scrum contest then keep the ball in the tunnel where it can be hooked by either side.

We've got to cut back the teams wanting to draw pens and move from setpiece to setpiece, though it is partly our teams' own fault. I saw in the Brumbies Vs Tahs game the Brumbies drive the Tahs back in the scrum and earn a pen, the Brumbies response was to spread the ball from the base of the scrum and to look to attack, and it was around halfway perhaps even being in the Brumbies half, simply their mindset is to want to attack.

Also on the scrum you should have a very limited period to form up ready to contest the scrum, anyone not ready can go the bin if they're wasting time, or if injured can just sit out the next few phases until there's a break in play and the ref brings them back in.

Digby wrote:Also on the scrum you should have a very limited period to form up ready to contest the scrum, anyone not ready can go the bin if they're wasting time, or if injured can just sit out the next few phases until there's a break in play and the ref brings them back in.

Agreed on the first (some classic examples in the Bath LIrish game that just had me shouting at the computer).
I see no particular reason why a scrum can't form up pretty quickly once the scrum has been called.
Personally I'd say that the team not formed up within a reasonable time (which 'd leave to the ref) gives away a free-kick - just like taking too long at the line-out (which also needs to be stricter on this)

thedman wrote:I'm just trying to think if there will be unintended consequences.

What about the situation with a dominant scrum going for example a pushover try. The defending team presumably could just collapse immediately knowing the worst they can give away is a free-kick?

I suppose if the dominant side has the ball at the back, it'd be very easy for a scrum-half to tap and go and score, especially if the refs were going to be more lenient about quick tapped free-kicks. Plus deliberate foul play would still be a yellow card.

Puja

Too much time lost/wasted, cause of failed scrum never entirely clear, if the main purpose is for restarts & tying the packs in, then uncontested scrum until 5 seconds say then free to drive.
Stay bound still until ball out.
Ref. to instruct on play or pay / use it or lose it thing.
If it then collapses, so be it...just a new type of ruck.

Mellsblue wrote:
As always, downgrading from a free kick to a pen just moves the propensity to foul from one team to the other.

This is the key really. It seems every proposed effort to encourage attacking play can be spun to allow more spoiling/slowing down of the game in defence.

I'd like to think there's a way to sanction the team in possession (quickly) if they refuse to use the ball from a static scrum, perhaps in the same way as a maul? Would that prevent teams just holding it in the scrum unless they're marching forwards? I'm sure there's a way this can be negatively exploited.

It doesn't solve the issue with resets though.

Which Tyler wrote:

Digby wrote:Also on the scrum you should have a very limited period to form up ready to contest the scrum, anyone not ready can go the bin if they're wasting time, or if injured can just sit out the next few phases until there's a break in play and the ref brings them back in.

Agreed on the first (some classic examples in the Bath LIrish game that just had me shouting at the computer).
I see no particular reason why a scrum can't form up pretty quickly once the scrum has been called.
Personally I'd say that the team not formed up within a reasonable time (which 'd leave to the ref) gives away a free-kick - just like taking too long at the line-out (which also needs to be stricter on this)

Yep, lineouts and restarts can take far too long to get the game restarted. The lineouts are getting as bad as cricket where the captain runs in from the slips to have a chat with the bowler with having a team debate over lineout options.

Mikey Brown wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:
As always, downgrading from a free kick to a pen just moves the propensity to foul from one team to the other.

This is the key really. It seems every proposed effort to encourage attacking play can be spun to allow more spoiling/slowing down of the game in defence.

I'd like to think there's a way to sanction the team in possession (quickly) if they refuse to use the ball from a static scrum, perhaps in the same way as a maul? Would that prevent teams just holding it in the scrum unless they're marching forwards? I'm sure there's a way this can be negatively exploited.

It doesn't solve the issue with resets though.

Again, it's the speed of engaging that's a big issue. Can we sort that as a starting point?

Beasties wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:
As always, downgrading from a free kick to a pen just moves the propensity to foul from one team to the other.

This is the key really. It seems every proposed effort to encourage attacking play can be spun to allow more spoiling/slowing down of the game in defence.

I'd like to think there's a way to sanction the team in possession (quickly) if they refuse to use the ball from a static scrum, perhaps in the same way as a maul? Would that prevent teams just holding it in the scrum unless they're marching forwards? I'm sure there's a way this can be negatively exploited.

It doesn't solve the issue with resets though.

Again, it's the speed of engaging that's a big issue. Can we sort that as a starting point?

I've no problem with the speed of engagement as long as it's only one engagement per scrum.

Recalling when I first played and looking at old films its amazing how quickly a scrum was formed and the ball was put in. We might not be able to get back to that but a quicker engagement is perfectly possible. Forwards just need to be told to get on with it.

With regards to resetsafter the 1st reset if the scrum goes down again, stop the clock & only restart it when the SH puts the ball in
& do this for all subsequent resets.
As for the line-out from the time the hooker gets the ball in his hands 10 secs to throw in or freekick to oppo

belgarion wrote:With regards to resetsafter the 1st reset if the scrum goes down again, stop the clock & only restart it when the SH puts the ball in
& do this for all subsequent resets.
As for the line-out from the time the hooker gets the ball in his hands 10 secs to throw in or freekick to oppo

Most of us don't have the time to watch three-hour games !

belgarion wrote:With regards to resetsafter the 1st reset if the scrum goes down again, stop the clock & only restart it when the SH puts the ball in
& do this for all subsequent resets.
As for the line-out from the time the hooker gets the ball in his hands 10 secs to throw in or freekick to oppo

What if the hooker is slow to retrieve a ball, or even goes down with cramp?

If they actually enforced the off side line at scrums then the team with the advancing scrum might be inclined to use the ball. Similarly if they understood that being pushed back in the scrum is not a penalty offence, there might not be such an issue

Shifting things to a free kick only delays the pain - eventually they'll have to escalate to a pen or they'll have to do it because they deem it to be deliberate. Nonetheless I still think they should make the change. In no other aspect of the game are you penalised just for not being very good. Back lines aren't penalised for not being able to execute simple passing movements - to the relief of Lancaster's England teams - and even the line out only has penalties for safety reasons. At the moment the one aspect of the game in which referees largely guess whether there's an offence comitted has the biggest sanction. That cannot be right.

Digby wrote:

belgarion wrote:With regards to resetsafter the 1st reset if the scrum goes down again, stop the clock & only restart it when the SH puts the ball in
& do this for all subsequent resets.
As for the line-out from the time the hooker gets the ball in his hands 10 secs to throw in or freekick to oppo

What if the hooker is slow to retrieve a ball, or even goes down with cramp?

Please note I said from when the hooker gets the ball in his hands & of course any injury would be taken into consideration

fivepointer wrote:Recalling when I first played and looking at old films its amazing how quickly a scrum was formed and the ball was put in. We might not be able to get back to that but a quicker engagement is perfectly possible. Forwards just need to be told to get on with it.

yep, said it a while ago. Not sure why we can't go back to it, as well as enforcing a straight feed. See beasties point above.

belgarion wrote:

Digby wrote:

belgarion wrote:With regards to resetsafter the 1st reset if the scrum goes down again, stop the clock & only restart it when the SH puts the ball in
& do this for all subsequent resets.
As for the line-out from the time the hooker gets the ball in his hands 10 secs to throw in or freekick to oppo

What if the hooker is slow to retrieve a ball, or even goes down with cramp?

Please note I said from when the hooker gets the ball in his hands & of course any injury would be taken into consideration

I'd be concerned that they'd be slow to get the ball on purpose if you time it from when it's in their hands. And I'm not much in favour of stopping the game for injury, if the player's not available just play on without them, if they're needed for the setpiece then the team without a man down get a choice of an uncontested restart with the 'injured' player having to sit out until ready AND called back into play by the ref.