new scrum engagement trial

[esoj]

this looks like it could be interesting. in the air nz cup there will only be a 3 step process at scrum time. it will be just crouch touch and then engage with no pause command spoken out by the ref

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/536641/1958689

Since it was first introduced in January 2007, the " crouch, touch, pause, engage" sequence has applied at the scrum. But a three-step scrum engagement sequence will be trialled in the 2008 Air New Zealand Cup, comprising only the crouch, touch, engage commands.

In essence, the IRB agreed that the following scrum engagement under Law 20 1 (h) will apply in the 2008 Air New Zealand Cup:

- The referee will call crouch then touch

- The front rows crouch and using their outside arm touches the point of the opposing prop's outside shoulder. The props then withdraw their arms.

- The referee will ensure that there is a pause until the arms of the props have been withdrawn and will then call engage. The front rows may then engage.

- The engage is not a command but an indication that the front rows may come together when ready.

 

[cyRil]

Isn't that what we had originally?

 

[Prestwick]

So we've essentially gone full circle.

WHAT ABOUT THE BLOODY PUT IN RULE?!?!?!?!

You could make scrums about a million times more competitive if you actually got the scrum halfs to stop putting in the ball at all manner of weird and wonderful angles other than straight.

 

[candybum]

This is getting ridiculous by the IRB.

 

[O'Rothlain]

Uuuuuuuuugh. What the bloody F___, iRB? I don't get it. Why all the law changing? I am very fine with the current 4 call cadence.

 

[BLR]

Good, the four step rule ended Brendan Cannons career, get rid of it.

 

[Steve-o]

Silly change, the scrum is the one place where the ref has to be calling the shots. How can they let teams 'engage when they're ready'? Doesn't make sense from a safety and competitive stand point. The 'engage' command ensures that both teams hit at the same time and scrummaging can resume without anybody being at a disadvantage.

WHAT ABOUT THE BLOODY PUT IN RULE?!?!?!?!
[/b]

I agree, we got tips how to drop the ball unevenly into a scrum since u/9 rugby! They marshalling the wrong rule to increase competitiveness.


Has the Air NZ Cup started yet? Anybody seen it in action? They do make a good point about collapsed and reset scrums haven't decreased with the 4 step rule. I think they looking in the wrong place though. In the Tests between SA and NZ there were something like 4 collapsed scrums and in the Tests against Oz there were something like 19 collapsed scrums. Raises questions in the technique some teams use to compete instead of the engagement rule.

 

[BLR]

Has the Air NZ Cup started yet?[/b]

Starts tommorrow.

 

[Bullitt]

Sounds more like a League esq. Head and Feet scrum to me, removing even more collision.

 

[BLR]

Sounds more like a League esq. Head and Feet scrum to me, removing even more collision.[/b]

When Cannon did his neck he was on Inside Rugby the next week saying he wasn't a big fan of the 'pause' addition to scrum time as it causes all that power to stay static for a time and can cause severe injuries if a mistakes is made in the collision. It doesn't change the collision taking out the 'pause' it simply takes out some of the instability that is added to the scrum while the two scrums wait to engage. Less scrummaging injuries to the front row= good news.

 

[Bullitt]

What was wrong with the old Crouch-Hold-Engage? If the touch-pause is causing players to get whatever it is wrong and causing more injuries, why not simply go back to the old method?

Injuries will never go out of it completely, unless we do indeed move to the uncontested sledging huddles preferred by the Northern Union.

 

[BLR]

What was wrong with the old Crouch-Hold-Engage? If the touch-pause is causing players to get whatever it is wrong and causing more injuries, why not simply go back to the old method?[/b]

The 'pause' was the crux of the problem, now that is out of it I don't see why it will be much difference in function to the old style of scrummaging, the IRB probably just didn't want to admit they were wrong.

 

[Bullitt]

Aye, that probably more to do with it.

 

[O'Rothlain]

What was the problem with "pause"? I've never heard there was a problem. It, personally, makes a lot of sense. I like the 4 call cadence currently practiced. <strike>Does anyone have any articles or anything on it?
</strike><blockquote>"It was found that some players had problems with the four-step sequence as they were 'primed' to engage following the touch call, and the extra call often resulted in an early engagement. Through this Air New Zealand Cup trial we will be able to determine whether the three-step sequence helps to further reduce early scrum engagements, resets, and collapsed scrums."
</blockquote>Still, it seems stupid to trial it. Now there are a lot of players primed for the 4 cadence call. You can't flip flop on it like this.

 

[MDickie]

Silly change, the scrum is the one place where the ref has to be calling the shots. How can they let teams 'engage when they're ready'? Doesn't make sense from a safety and competitive stand point. The 'engage' command ensures that both teams hit at the same time and scrummaging can resume without anybody being at a disadvantage.
[/b]

The part about 'engage when they are ready' has alway been in the rule, both teams are just always ready at the engage. This isn't actually a change, the only thing different will now be no "pause".

 

[Steve-o]

<div class='quotemain'>
Silly change, the scrum is the one place where the ref has to be calling the shots. How can they let teams 'engage when they're ready'? Doesn't make sense from a safety and competitive stand point. The 'engage' command ensures that both teams hit at the same time and scrummaging can resume without anybody being at a disadvantage.
[/b]

The part about 'engage when they are ready' has alway been in the rule, both teams are just always ready at the engage. This isn't actually a change, the only thing different will now be no "pause".
[/b][/quote]
Yeah I understand what you saying, perhaps I'm over analysing it. I just feel that when the ref calls 'engage' teams shouldn't have the choice to wait until they're ready.

 

[MDickie]

<div class='quotemain'>
<div class='quotemain'>
Silly change, the scrum is the one place where the ref has to be calling the shots. How can they let teams 'engage when they're ready'? Doesn't make sense from a safety and competitive stand point. The 'engage' command ensures that both teams hit at the same time and scrummaging can resume without anybody being at a disadvantage.
[/b]

The part about 'engage when they are ready' has alway been in the rule, both teams are just always ready at the engage. This isn't actually a change, the only thing different will now be no "pause".
[/b][/quote]
Yeah I understand what you saying, perhaps I'm over analysing it. I just feel that when the ref calls 'engage' teams shouldn't have the choice to wait until they're ready.
[/b][/quote]

For sure, not to mention they're gonna be on their heels in every scrum.

 

[BLR]

What was the problem with "pause"? I've never heard there was a problem. It, personally, makes a lot of sense. I like the 4 call cadence currently practiced. <strike>Does anyone have any articles or anything on it?
</strike><blockquote>"It was found that some players had problems with the four-step sequence as they were 'primed' to engage following the touch call, and the extra call often resulted in an early engagement. Through this Air New Zealand Cup trial we will be able to determine whether the three-step sequence helps to further reduce early scrum engagements, resets, and collapsed scrums."
</blockquote>Still, it seems stupid to trial it. Now there are a lot of players primed for the 4 cadence call. You can't flip flop on it like this.[/b]

There was a huge problem(over here at least) with the rule when it first came out with props essentially because the 'pause' call had them basically holding back all thier power in the scrum and when they eventually went together they could have been off balance or they'd (as noted in your article) jump the gun and put in a early hit as they were trying to gain dominance. I seem to remember once it was put in place collapsed and reset scrums went up almost exponentially in the Super 14 and collapsed scrums can cause major injuries, as was the exact case with Brendan Cannon.

This NEEDS to be put in place world wide for the next world cup, it would revive the scrum and make it a whole load cleaner then it is atm with huge amounts of resets.

 

[back row youth]

It seems to me they have just change the old "hold" command to "touch" essentially just regulating the distance between the two packs and this new change wont actually change much apart from making it easier because the "pause" was a pain anyway as the timing seemed to change not just from match to match but even from scrum to scrum. ill be happy if this comes in because as a prop it will be easier to get a rythem going at scrum time.

 

[jawmalawm24]

May as well take it right back and just don't let the ref say anything. I was watching a old game a while ago and whenever a scrum was called both teams would just lock and there were no colapses throught the whole game. There was no crouch, touch, pause or engage calls they just let the players get in the scrum and it all happened alot faster than it does these days.