bk47 says...

So these "experts" have decided that four calls for scrum is not working so they come up with returning to three and changing a word... the IRB are really run by muppets isnt it?

Keep engage, get rid of touch call and tell refs not to slow down the damn calls! Most of the problems are becuase refs take too long. Even when I play senior club rugby in NZ the biggest problem is holding back 800 odd kgs because the refs love twiddling with their thumbs calling the calls.

It won't fix it all but its a start. Also the idea of addressing the props jerseys could be good too

Posted 06:43 14th June 2012

pierredelot1 says...

The problems are twofold. The first is that at the top level, the weaker teams try to draw attention away from their failures by attacking in different places at each set. Quite often they are driving in on the tightside, with the other side driving up. Slipping bindings is an obvious one, but those with canny old skills, (Probyn had a PHD in it) could take it down, bring it back up and go where they wanted. Trouble is most referees were backs, and certainly never played in a front row, so are not always able to see the slight shift in body position enabling the skulduggery to take place in the first place.

Secondly even at the top level, many of the top referees opt out of refereeing the scrum when faced with these problems. Poite did this last Saturday, Clancy was guilty a few weeks ago. This give the impression that in truth they haven't a clue what is going on. More honest TV analysis by guys from the coalface would assist the viewer, but with the exception of Brian Moore, most of the ex front row players on view avoid entering the debate. Surely by doing so they could educate the viewer and even the powers that be, in order to find a sensible solution, before competetive scrums are dropped altogether. Straight put ins would be good, as well as eight bound in until release of the ball, both of which have been ignored of late. Many contributors to this page don't realise that the latter two offences become a pain in the bum for regular society referees, who when they penalise one or the other get the response. " Well nobody banged the International teams yesterday and they do it all the time" One law for some, one law for the rest. Consistency, education and firm refereeing thats what it takes. They get paid for it.

Posted 23:29 13th June 2012

jontheref says...

Anyone watching the U20's?

Don't see many problems with their scrums.

There are also some monster props in those teams, so nothing to do with size of players.

I also would like the props jerseys to be addressed, but the iRB certainly don't seem to be able to think outside the box.

Posted 18:12 13th June 2012

connaughtabu says...

If one sees old footage of games played in the 60-70, the current emphasis on the "hit" were absent. Frequently, the frontrows went down and settled and the locks and backrows joined later. Then the main focus of the scrum was the hookers striking for the ball. In addition, the players wore loose jerseys so it was easy for the props to get a grip of their opponent, so collapsing on impact I suppose was less frequent. Worth considering?

The modern prop wears a jersey 3 sizes too small for him, so it is extremely difficult for the opponent to get a grip at the moment of impact (see Backing Leinster)! The props jersey should perhaps be fitted with a small handle under the armpit which the opposing prop grasps just before the call to "set" or "engage"? This would reduce the frequency of scrum collapsing when the combination of difficulty getting a good hand grip and the collision of 1900kg of manhood can lead to the collapse.

Posted 16:23 13th June 2012

NHsaints says...

If they start penalising the put in not being straight then it will add much more diversity to the scrum and make the game an all the more entertaining spectacle with more chance of the ball coming out either side and hence more counterattacking and tries. The next thing that needs to be addressed is the front rows leaning on each other and 'getting the shove' on. They need to be in a position where they can comfortably hold their own weight before the ref calls engage and then they should be able to hold the push until the ball is in.

Posted 15:11 13th June 2012

Carpelone says...

tha_mai

LOL

Posted 14:38 13th June 2012

melkdave says...

I can see the same problems ,as we have now even with the new calls..Really only 3 calls are needed crouch ,set. engage,where the set means the packs form the scrum,and engage means they push. and the ball can be delivered Just what does SET mean in the new calls needs clarification imo.

Posted 13:36 13th June 2012

makemehappy says...

But when are they allowed to push? Is it an active 'set' where there is a rush to engage, or a more passive one (which is what they need), where pushing only occurs after the ball is put in??

Posted 13:11 13th June 2012

GCP_JONES says...

Whats the bets that in 3 years time the consultants will come up wih the exact recommendations that postors on this site have been saying for years, then charge the IRB a vast sum of money for stating the bloody obvious.

Another thing how rugby players are inviolved in the process?.

Posted 12:27 13th June 2012

SkinnyProp says...

Good to see this getting a global roll-out. Hopefully it will speed up the engagement process, especially given the ridiculous length of time refs take over the current 4 call sequence (particularly in the NH).

Also getting rid of the two syllable 'engage' is a good move and hopefully the 3 call sequence will see a reduction in early engagements.

Posted 12:21 13th June 2012