Refs. haven't a clue about Scrums?

[johnmac99]

It has become clear to me over the years that referees, even at the top level, do not have a clue what's going on in the scrum.

The rules that govern scrums have been tweaked over time to make them safer, for instance by lessening the initial contact with the adoption of a more gradual process, giving time for proper binding etc..

In recent 6N games scrums have been reset multiple times and lead to unnecessary delays and puzzling awards against players. If binding slips or someone doesn't push straight etc., then a penalty is given, which I feel is now OTT as an award.
Is it really worth 3pts if it's within distance?

IMO if the powers that be are serious about speeding up the game and making it more entertaining then all they have to do is stop awarding penalties for a 'minor' scrum offence. Apart from the deliberate collapsing of the scrum, just give 'free-kicks' and immediately this will open up the game as the team with the ball will pass it to their backs, or run it, instead of kicking the ball into touch and having a line-out.

With the system as it is, teams can go practically from one end of the pitch to the other without passing the ball, which can't be right.

I think that once the majority of awards are just free-kicks then players will not see the scrum the same way they do now, a possible source of a penalty and 3pts..

 

[barkinghooker]

I'd be open for a tap and go from knock on's.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I agree with scrum offenses being free kicks, much less to gain from deliberately collapsing it for the attacking team. Also refs should not lecture players how to scrum, they know how but choose not to. 2 refs might solve the problem as 1 either side will give best vision. Also I think players should be penalised for not setting up quickly, I watched a video from the 70's and the players could all get bound and ready for a scrum in under 10 seconds.

 

[Thingimubob]

Not completely convinced on free kicks, but I like the rule that the Australian Rugby Championship trialed - can't kick at goal from scrum penalties. Can kick for the corner and have put in to the line out, tap and go, etc. Just no kicking for 3 points.

Might help cut down the illegal scrummaging.

I've also noticed some refs bringing in "Use it" to scrums too. If the ball is at the no.8's feet and the scrum is not moving, the ball should go imo. Get's annoying when one team keeps it in to wait for the other team to potentially give away a penalty.

 

[psychic duck]

How about they actually apply the laws as they are written?

They still say strictly no pushing before the ball enters and the ball must be put in through the middle.

A couple years ago led by Brian Moore it was widely agreed (barring Richard Cockerill and a couple others) that ignoring the laws was farcical and led to a mess, and even referees agreed they should start applying the laws properly. But they didn't. They didn't even do it for a full season so we could properly judge whether it worked or not.

Furthermore, if referees believe that ignoring feeding at the scrum is so important for whatever reason, then why don't they ask WR to change the law book before they take it upon themselves to enforce their own laws? Currently we just have ghost laws that are totally ignored and it's a joke.

 

[SelimNiai]

Refs job not helped by the battalion of refs in the crowd/pubs/homes who know the ref is wrong or biased and yet don't have and will never have the balls to qualify as a ref and show us they can do better.

 

[Tony Manx]

One of the great problems in the stability of the scrum is the continual binding on the arm of the opposite prop.

There is no way this is or should be legal and can only result in pulling the opposing prop down yet it is done right in front of the ref!

Binding should be on the shirt of the opposition and they now have plenty of time to do this correctly before formation.

Yet again I agree with Olyy.....enforce the rules!!

 

[smartcooky]

It has become clear to me over the years that referees, even at the top level, do not have a clue what's going on in the scrum.

The rules that govern scrums have been tweaked over time to make them safer, for instance by lessening the initial contact with the adoption of a more gradual process, giving time for proper binding etc..

In recent 6N games scrums have been reset multiple times and lead to unnecessary delays and puzzling awards against players. If binding slips or someone doesn't push straight etc., then a penalty is given, which I feel is now OTT as an award.
Is it really worth 3pts if it's within distance?

IMO if the powers that be are serious about speeding up the game and making it more entertaining then all they have to do is stop awarding penalties for a 'minor' scrum offence. Apart from the deliberate collapsing of the scrum, just give 'free-kicks' and immediately this will open up the game as the team with the ball will pass it to their backs, or run it, instead of kicking the ball into touch and having a line-out.

With the system as it is, teams can go practically from one end of the pitch to the other without passing the ball, which can't be right.

I think that once the majority of awards are just free-kicks then players will not see the scrum the same way they do now, a possible source of a penalty and 3pts..

Nice generalisation. Here's another for you

"Players don't have a clue about the Laws"


I'll tell you what. Front Row players could make life a lot easier for the referee (and then we could all end up with a better game) if they would scrummage according to the Laws of the Bloody game, for example, bind correctly
& push straight instead of trying to cheat by dippng, twisting, boring or lifting their opponent....

 

[psychic duck]

One of the great problems in the stability of the scrum is the continual binding on the arm of the opposite prop.

There is no way this is or should be legal and can only result in pulling the opposing prop down yet it is done right in front of the ref!

Binding should be on the shirt of the opposition and they now have plenty of time to do this correctly before formation.

Yet again I agree with Olyy.....enforce the rules!!

Binding on the arm is indeed illegal and frequently ignored.

I'll tell you what. Front Row players could make life a lot easier for the referee (and then we could all end up with a better game) if they would scrummage according to the Laws of the Bloody game, for example, bind correctly
& push straight instead of trying to cheat by dippng, twisting, boring or lifting their opponent....

The only way you can't get players to play to the laws is by enforcing them. You can't expect the prop not to take an advantage with an early shove when the refs so often allow it.

 

[LukeFitzgerald]

Some decent analysis of the Ireland v England scrums:
http://www.the42.ie/ireland-england-scrum-analysis-3-2636970-Mar2016/

 

[smartcooky]

One of the great problems in the stability of the scrum is the continual binding on the arm of the opposite prop.

Any structural engineering student immediately recognise the front rows of a scrum as forming an arch. The Laws even call the space between the front rows, "the tunnel"

That student will also tell you that an arch is only as strong as its "keystone"

If the keystone is weak, that arch will collapse.

Correct binding is the keystone of the scrum. If the binding between both opponents, and at both end of the tunnel, is not strong and even, the scrum is likely to collapse... its pure mechanics.

 

[Every Time Ref]

For me rigidly enforcing shoulders above hips would be a big start. Fits in with the keystone theory.

I also like the idea of specialist scrum referees, supported by the main ref the other side.

 

[optimuswolf]

Some decent analysis of the Ireland v England scrums:
http://www.the42.ie/ireland-england-scrum-analysis-3-2636970-Mar2016/

Thanks. That analysis was definitely comprehensive. There are rules there and refs and touch judges should follow them. I still think penalties are the right sanction for most of these offences. They're deliberate foul play.

I do like that refs are starting to demand that the ball is used once it is at the back and the scrum isn't moving.

 

[gaston le gaff]

I thik no one has mentioned that the front rows of every team are like tricksters, they know every trick in the book including the rules and they try and obtain penalties through their knowledge. If you have one policeman (ref) and 16 crimmals (scrum) who is going to come out on top????
30 mts from the try line normally the ball would come out quick for a possible try score but how often to you see the ball kept in the scrum and the penalty that follows. I played back row nearly all my rugby career and there is so much illegal stuff going on, one ref has no chance in hell to see all that is going on!!! Then of course you have the crowd as soon as it comes uop on the big screen they often sway the decision .

 

[ncurd]

I feel like a broken record on this one, remove most penalties from the scrum so a team doesn't gain territorial advantage from it. Also tell the ref he isn't ever allowed to reset it, if can't make a decision team putting in gets a free kick. He should also state this so it's clear he's not stating the defending team were breaking the laws.


The reason why players take the **** is a lot of advantage can be gained from the scrum. Way more than just flinging the ball out to the backs.

Even the no penalty kick for goal rule means that unless it's in the opp 22 (probably closer) the other team has a clear advantage playing for a penalty.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Nice generalisation. Here's another for you

"Players don't have a clue about the Laws"


I'll tell you what. Front Row players could make life a lot easier for the referee (and then we could all end up with a better game) if they would scrummage according to the Laws of the Bloody game, for example, bind correctly
& push straight instead of trying to cheat by dippng, twisting, boring or lifting their opponent....

But that would take all the fun out of it....

Up to a point I'd just let them get on with on with it providing a few basics, like the feed being straight (hah!) are met. Agree that technical infringements should be reduced to a free kick, but would upgrade deliberately dropping the scrum to serious foul play and an automatic yellow. Coaches would get the message pretty quickly. It does depress me that even excellent scrummaging sides use it more as a means of winning a pen than getting an advantage on restarting play

 

[TRF_heineken]

This problem will only get solved when a prop becomes an IRB referee.

It doesn't help we try to play the blame game or look at changes in laws etc. The problem is that simplification is needed. And a prop who knows all the tricks of the trade and has devoted himself to the referees panel, will be the only way of getting the scrum sorted out, or at least streamlined. It doesn't help they get consultants, as those consultants still have a responsibility to another team/country/club/franchise, and they won't be as transparent as a referee when consulting.

I played Loosehead, tighthead and hooker in my younger days, and all 3 of those positions are of vital importance to the scrum and in keeping it's shape. There are so many tricks that it will be damn near impossible for a referee to pick up on it if he wasn't playing in that position, as well as the speed of the scrum from stable to getting the ball back. Japan's scrum in the WC last year is a perfect example. If that scrum phase was slowed down, I think a lot of errors would have surfaced, but because of the speed of feeding the ball to getting it back, was so fast, neither the ref nor the opposition had a chance to get the upper hand.

 

[McTallshort]

We can all blame the ref but lets be honest there are lots of teams out there who see scrums as a way to get penalties not restarting the game. I agree that free kicks should be given instead of penalties but I would go further, if you have a player who constantly cheats in the front row I would bring in a citing process. After every game someone would review the scrums and if you have a Gethen Jenkins type of player who is constantly dropping the scrum then they are sanctioned. Lets not forget how dangerous collapsing a scrum is and the front rows need to start taking responsibility for the blight scrums are becoming.

 

[smartcooky]

For me rigidly enforcing shoulders above hips would be a big start. Fits in with the keystone theory.

Absolutely.

Law 20 currently talks abut "shoulders no lower than hips". I would like to see that tweaked so that is says "shoulders must be above hips" in order to get the pivot point above horizontal. I think we would have far less collapsed scrums.

I have had some other referees disagree with that, saying that you would just change from having collapses to having a lot of standing up in the scrum, but I disagree with that view, because of the dynamics. It is far easier to stop someone pushing you upright from a crouched position than it is to stop them pulling you down. For a start, gravity is working in your favour. Also, pulling someone forwards is a far stronger action that pushing them away... any martial arts expert will confirm.

Also, being pushed upright is far less dangerous than collapsing. Being pushed up does risk neck injury through "hyper-flexion" (chin-to-chest contact) if you get your head too low and get it caught under your opponent's shoulder as he drives you upwards. However, collapsing risks both "hyper-flexion" and "hyper-extension" (occiputal skull to upper thoracic spine contact); the potential for serious injuries is much greater in a collapse.

I also like the idea of specialist scrum referees, supported by the main ref the other side.

I'm not sure I would go so far as to have a second referee, but a second pair of eyes looking at the other side of the scrum from where the referee is would be useful.

I have suggested in the past that the referee should always be on the openside, and that the AR on the blindside should come onto the field as far as he needs to get a clear view. Once the ball is in, he scampers back to the sideline.

.

- - - Updated - - -

We can all blame the ref but lets be honest there are lots of teams out there who see scrums as a way to get penalties not restarting the game. I agree that free kicks should be given instead of penalties but I would go further

I think WR should trial having an Indirect Penalty Kick for scrum penalties. I envision it as being half way between a Penalty Kick and a Free Kick; you would not be allowed to kick for goal, but you could kick it directly into touch for a gain in territory, and get the throw into the line-out.

 

[Willodell100]

I agree with scrum offenses being free kicks, much less to gain from deliberately collapsing it for the attacking team. Also refs should not lecture players how to scrum, they know how but choose not to. 2 refs might solve the problem as 1 either side will give best vision. Also I think players should be penalised for not setting up quickly, I watched a video from the 70's and the players could all get bound and ready for a scrum in under 10 seconds.

Couldn't agree with this last point more. I have the feeling the sport has become too laboured over the past two decades (in particular) in the set piece area &, as a result, has contributed to the change in physique of players.

I would like refs to be stricter on the time at lineouts too. England were probably the first team to do it regularly under Sir Clive but you see many teams now kick to touch for a penalty & visibly linger while they have a 20 sec chat about the proceeding line out call. I personally think it was a Woodward tactic (part of his famous 1% advantages) to give his players an extra 10 seconds to recover but it has to be stamped out.

I'm not sure on the specific laws in this area but when watching live games the general discontent is always about the taken away from the game at set pieces.

I'm not sure about the level of punishment for technical errors in the scrum but certainly if teams do not setup quick enough then a tap and go free kick should be awarded against the offending team.