Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:35 pm  

I feel that these are a joke nowadays, in both codes of rugby. Leeds got told off tonight for "god forbid" striking for the ball! And in union they have about 5 scrums, all collapse and a penilty is conceded. Should we just have a tap re start, or are scrums a good opportunity for the backs to attack in these days of more organised defences

Re: Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:39 pm  

Scrap them and go for a tap re-start , or make them competitive .
As they are now they are an embarrassment to the sport .

Re: Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:42 pm  

Ferdy wrote:

I feel that these are a joke nowadays, in both codes of rugby. Leeds got told off tonight for "god forbid" striking for the ball! And in union they have about 5 scrums, all collapse and a penilty is conceded. Should we just have a tap re start, or are scrums a good opportunity for the backs to attack in these days of more organised defences

It’s just a way of restarting the game and coaches try and structure attacking patterns from the base of the scrum.

The scrum itself is irrelevant but adds an extra dimension to the game – keep um I say.

Re: Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:46 pm  

LS16_Rhino wrote:

It’s just a way of restarting the game and coaches try and structure attacking patterns from the base of the scrum.

The scrum itself is irrelevant but adds an extra dimension to the game – keep um I say.

I would like to see them stay, but I think there needs to be a happy medium of competing in the scrum, but not going the way of union where they have to be reset and slows the game down

Re: Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:50 pm  

LS16_Rhino wrote:

It’s just a way of restarting the game and coaches try and structure attacking patterns from the base of the scrum.

The scrum itself is irrelevant but adds an extra dimension to the game – keep um I say.

What he said.

They are what they are.

Re: Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:54 pm  

Bring back line-outs, there's not enough scope for really tall guys like Kirke & Crabtree in our game.

Re: Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:07 pm  

Ferdy wrote:

I would like to see them stay, but I think there needs to be a happy medium of competing in the scrum, but not going the way of union where they have to be reset and slows the game down

It's perfectly allowed to compete, most teams just choose not to, most of the time.

Re: Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:12 pm  

Richie wrote:

It's perfectly allowed to compete, most teams just choose not to, most of the time.

I appreciate that they are allowed to compete, but that is quite difficult when the ball somtimes goes behind second row, and a ref pulls the hooker up for striking for the ball

Re: Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:15 pm  

Ferdy wrote:

I appreciate that they are allowed to compete, but that is quite difficult when the ball somtimes goes behind second row, and a ref pulls the hooker up for striking for the ball

The rules are there for putting it near the middle (although not straight) and I've only ever seen hookers penalised if striking early, never just for going for the ball.
Pushing is the better way to compete for it anyway.

Re: Scrums : Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:22 pm  

Richie wrote:

The rules are there for putting it near the middle (although not straight) and I've only ever seen hookers penalised if striking early, never just for going for the ball.
Pushing is the better way to compete for it anyway.

Exactly, Wigan won a scrum against the put in vs Saints on Friday, shoukld have been penalised for a faulty scrum but not for pushing.
We used to do it occasionally some seasons ago but not much recently. A perfectly legitimate ploy in my view.