Set to change: Scrum time:
The International Rugby Board has announced that a new scrum engagement sequence will be trialled next season.
The new call - "crouch, touch, set" - will replace the current format of "crouch, touch, pause, engage" when trialled across the globe next season.
The new sequence has received unanimous backing from the IRB's expert Scrum Steering Group. The trial was approved at a meeting of the specialist group - made up of Union and players' representatives, former players and other experts - in Bristol, England, last month.
The revised engagement process will be trialled alongside the five Law amendments announced in May forms one part of the IRB's ongoing commitment to improving the scrum phase of the Game.
The sequence will see the front rows crouch then touch and using their outside arm each prop touches the point of the opposing prop's outside shoulder. The props then withdraw their arms. The referee will then call "set" when the front rows are ready. The front rows may then set the scrum.
This sequence was one of six that were extensively researched at six different levels of the Game, including Women's Rugby, as part of the initial trial process. "Crouch, touch, set" was found to be the most successful and will now be trialled on a global level.
"Most people accept the scrum is currently a problematic area of the Game, accounting for roughly 17 per cent of match time in elite Rugby and with more than 50 per cent of scrums resulting in collapses or resets," said IRB Rugby Committee Chairman and former New Zealand captain Graham Mourie.
"The IRB is committed to addressing these issues and has tasked the specialist steering group to identify the causes and solutions. This is a positive first step, but it should be noted that we must wait for the outcomes of the three-year Scrum Forces Project before we can take an holistic approach to the scrum."
IRB Chairman Bernard Lapasset added that "The scrum is a complex, dynamic area and that there is no quick and easy fix."
"There are many contributing factors and we need to take a complete view of the scrum environment including engagement, Laws, forces and player welfare," added Lapasset.
The news calls got the backing from International Rugby Players' Association (IRPA) representative David Barnes, former France forwards coach and current Under 20 coach Didier Retière as well as England forwards coach Graham Rowntree.
"The number of scrum resets in the elite Game has reached an unprecedented level and the new three-step process is a significant advance in trying to address the issue. As the IRPA player representative on the Scrum Steering Group, players will have input to any potential changes being considered," said Barnes.
"Whilst it is vital for the scrum to remain an integral, combative element of the Game, the players fully support the IRB research into reducing the number of resets, while also ensuring player welfare remains the key priority."
Retière said it is "collective responsibility" of coaches and players "to buy in to this process and work together."
"We need to have less collapses and resets and anything that can improve this vital part of our Game should be applauded," said Rowntree.
"I will be very interested to see how the trial goes."
The revised sequence has yielded positive outcomes and it should be noted that the sequence is just one area of the scrum that is being reviewed by the IRB and its Member Unions.
The Group examined the results of extensive testing of engagement sequence variations in live and machine environments in a trial driven by the IRB Scrum Forces Project which provides in-depth analysis of biomechanical forces in the scrum.
The unprecedented IRB-funded three-year study is being run by the Sport, Health & Exercise Science group at the University of Bath in collaboration with the RFU and is intended to identify better playing, coaching and refereeing techniques for this key facet of the Game.
Comments
Herbman says...
Jeez, a lot of you are complaining here... doesn't the article read that the new system WORKS? Lets just be happy they are making a change and wait until next year before judging.
Posted 13:02 15th June 2012
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
Stellenbosched2 says...
Hi J_Hdk,
I had exactly the same thought. Three years and who knows how much money to come up with the sensational idea of droppng one of the words added a while back. In three years time the IRB may remove another word, which means we will be right back to where we were for the previous 130 years. I think the IRB is very similar to the European parliament in Brussels. Absolute waste of money 90% of the time.
Posted 05:56 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
Dangerous says...
Yep. Expected plenty of comments regarding these 3 words. Some Aussie commentator suggested he had patented a handle of sorts on the side of a props jersey. Not sure if he was taking the mick. but a strong pocket on the side of the jersey could be "handy". I'm sure the props will come to "grips"with it eventually. Oh never bind it probably won't work anyway.
Posted 20:20 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
J_Hdk says...
How much money and time did these expert committees spend coming up with this revolutionary idea?
Posted 17:02 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
mashona says...
The biggest problem at scrum time is the props losing their binds because of the modern day skin tight shirts they wear, and number of resets - fix that and we would see a lot better scrums I believe - sounds simple?
Posted 16:02 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
Trader2 says...
The main problem is one team having the weaker scrum so they will continue to try and get an advantage by moving around, dodging, ducking an weaving and doing their best to destablise the scrum. I am not sure of the stats but I would love to see the number collasped scrums in games involving the top 8 sides in the world over say the last 2-3 years. If I was a betting man I would place a small wager on the Wannabies winning that little competition. I could be wrong (it has been known) so if anyone could come up with those stats therein may lie a tale.
Posted 14:44 13th June 2012
Carpelone says...
tha_mai
LOL
Posted 14:38 13th June 2012
powerplay says...
After they have implemented this call, they will again change the call so that both props touch the each others nuts, and after theyve done that, all players in each side touch then touch each others nuts as well, and then proceed to simultaneously rub the refs but, untill he says "set" and then after that, the back row will fart until the refs smells it, and only then will he say. Engage!!!
Posted 14:05 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
JamieTheProp says...
@ makemehappy - they can push when the ball is in (that is and always has been the rule). Not that they stick to it - but then it is up to the scrum half to get the ball in quickly.
They should just go back to a crouch and then engage - it worked for years and was much better than this nonsense (having scrummaged under both sets of rules).
The thing they need to get right is feeding by scrum halves - that is the bigger issue!
And I do agree that there should be a loose area on a props shirt - scrummaging with these new shirts is almost impossible!
One other thing they could consider is that loose area being a different colour so a ref who has never played in the front row can actually see if a prop is binding in the right place.
And anyone who says that props not pushing straight is the issue doesn't know what they are talking about - props have never pushed straight through the history of the game and yet not so many scrums used to go down. I never scrummaged straight and very rarely caused any scrum to drop (unless I wanted to).
Posted 13:30 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
Trinats2 says...
Beer drinking will never be the same. Crouch (at the bar), touch (your beer) pause (admire your beer) engage (drink your beer)
Maybe start drinking Guinness ?? SET ! ......No............ Guinness is not the same outside of Dublin.
Posted 12:51 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
fozza says...
So to confirm... they engage on the word "set"? Erm... OK, we'll have to see how it goes I guess.
Posted 12:26 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