Hope the IRB take note of this

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/8834455/Fran-Cotton-Mike-Burton-and-Ray-McLoughlin-submit-paper-to-IRB-calling-for-scrummaging-law-changes.html

They seem to talking a lot of sense here, really hope the IRB sort out the scrums, it is about time they listened to the in-depth knowledge of previous players when writing laws and directives.

All the trouble we are having at the scrum is putting people off the game and reducing the game’s chances for growth.

Always have hated the "crouch... touch... PAUSE... ... ... wait for it Gunner Graham... ... ... engage!" as I think the PAUSE causes more problems than it solves. Love the idea of the "Crouch, Touch, Engage, Push!" approach.

Personally I am also in favour of the choice of a scrum or a free kick being awared for a knock on. That would cut a lot of scrummaging out of games and teams could choose what is of advantage to them.

To give an example:

At the weekend I was playing for my local side and to say that we were dominant in the pack is something of an understatement. We were able to pretty much drive the opposition off the ball at will.

Everytime we knocked on (which was far too bloody often for my liking) you could see the look of horror on the oppositions faces.... and we promptly stole the ball back.

Now this may be an extreme case but the point is where was the advantage to the opposition for our error? None. None whatsoever.

Now had they been given the choice I'm pretty sure they would have taken the free kick and cleared their lines.

The answer is so simple. 99% of scrum problems happen during engagement - "the hit". Do away with it. Get the two front rows to bind then get the second and back rows to join. Then - and possibly most important - referee the put-in so that it goes down the middle of the tunnel.

Scarpia wrote:The answer is so simple. 99% of scrum problems happen during engagement - "the hit". Do away with it. Get the two front rows to bind then get the second and back rows to join. Then - and possibly most important - referee the put-in so that it goes down the middle of the tunnel.

Ahh... a return to the old days of building the pack from the front rows backwards. A lot of older players and fans still get misty eyed about this but as someone who has played in both versions I can honestly say this causes a whole set of different problems... some of which i think are worse than today.

A lot of the dark arts that people are so fond of alluding to used to happen in this era of bitten cheeks, cauliflowered ears, broken noses and second row headbutts. That's one of the reasons the "engage" was brought in to stop these shanannigans.

The modern way may have it's problems but it's still better.

Personally I like the big hit anyway. Allows me to tactically get position on my opposite number.

as already posted here -

https://www.606v2.com/t16478-could-the-scrum-finally-be-fixed

I wrote.

The teams should ONLY push when the ball is put in, not when the ref says so as this would be far too relevant on the ref and take the 'shove' sequence out the players hands.

Its quite simple.

Along with the above (existing rule) The feed gets put in straight (which, is, erm, and existing rule).

When the feed is put in straight the Props HAVE to prop as the Hooker HAS to hook the ball back and cannot really push much with one leg.

This reduces the impact of x3 front row 'props' crunching together (x6 props) in the front row like we get now as unless one side is very weak or cannot bind *assuming there is no illegal boring/pushing) the side getting the put in nearly always gets possession.

Crouch, touch, pause, engage, should stay as that stopped sides using the impact before put in to assert early dominance and make the opponents unstable.


Put simply, the scrum is nothing more than a organised fair push over the ball to gain possession, with the side that has the feed having the advantage of timing... nothing more.

Metal Tiger wrote:Always have hated the "crouch... touch... PAUSE... ... ... wait for it Gunner Graham... ... ... engage!" as I think the PAUSE causes more problems than it solves. Love the idea of the "Crouch, Touch, Engage, Push!" approach.

More often than not, its crouch... touch... ... ... ... wait for it,wait for it, wait for it
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.PAUSE,engage

Say pause after Pausing!!

The way I see it, the scrum is simply a means of restarting the game, with a marginal advantage to one side. If either side offends at the restart, possession to the other side in the form of a free kick. Should get the game flowing much more quickly. Agree with removal of pause, no pushing till ball is in/on instruction, no crooked feeds

all of which ... is in the existing rules!!!!!!

Look at scrums back on the 80s. They were great, in that the FRs came together passively they pushed and almost never collapsed. Let's not forget they are a means of re-starting the game and should give an advantage to the attacking side (side putting in).

The 'hit' is without doubt the reason for destabilising the scrum and causing re-scrums and pens.

Stand, touch, pause engage implies that they would engage from a standing position and therefore would eradicate the hit. Back to the 80s then.

Thoughts from Brian Moore: http://www.rugbyrefs.com/content.php?151-Scrum

This video is of Newport v Pontypool, 1992. There's a scrum 30 seconds into the video. I posted this the old 606 in a scrum thread as I think it demonstrates perfectly how the scrum could/should be. There's an engagement, a pause while the scrum sets, but most importantly no hit, and then no pushing until the ball is put in. The beauty is that it still does not penalise a dominant scrum as shown by Pontypool getting the shove on. I'm not one who thinks the scrum should be passive or just a way of restarting a game: I think it has a place as a tactical option for a strong scrummaging team in terms of securing position on own line, attacking a team on their line, as a penalty choice to chance the 7 points over 3, etc. That for me is one of the best bits of rugby. I love the duel between a scrummaging team vs a running team, etc.

Anyone else think there was nothing wrong with this sort of scrummaging? Why did it change? Who introduced the hit? Who allowed a shove before the ball was put in?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ksa2rKcKf8c&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Brilliant to watch that, and as always Chairman Moore is correct.

Someone get him in charge of the RFU