Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Sun Nov 22, 2020 11:14 am  

Scrums to stay, for me.

There seems to be two schools of thought: contested scrums or no scrums at all.

Those who yearn for contested scrums must have forgotten what they were actually like. A succession of collapses and messes and penalties. They brought in the differential penalty to stop teams getting points from a scrum infringement, or else teams spent most of the game kicking for goal.

Those who want no scrums haven't considered the "live" version. In place of scrums, we have four blokes milling around, watching the stop-clock, taking deep breaths. It just about works on TV because different camera angles and replays break it up, because the TV people know that watching four blokes take a rest for thirty seconds isn't good viewing. Live, it will look boring and weird and not speed anything up.

So, four blokes standing around and watching a clock, or twelve blokes packing down, creating a different attacking opportunity and actually looking like rugby? I know which I'd choose.

Scrums.

Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:45 am  

Slugger McBatt wrote:

Scrums to stay, for me.

There seems to be two schools of thought: contested scrums or no scrums at all.

Those who yearn for contested scrums must have forgotten what they were actually like. A succession of collapses and messes and penalties. They brought in the differential penalty to stop teams getting points from a scrum infringement, or else teams spent most of the game kicking for goal.

Those who want no scrums haven't considered the "live" version. In place of scrums, we have four blokes milling around, watching the stop-clock, taking deep breaths. It just about works on TV because different camera angles and replays break it up, because the TV people know that watching four blokes take a rest for thirty seconds isn't good viewing. Live, it will look boring and weird and not speed anything up.

So, four blokes standing around and watching a clock, or twelve blokes packing down, creating a different attacking opportunity and actually looking like rugby? I know which I'd choose.

Scrums.

I get what you're saying, but it doesn't have to be 30 seconds ( I thought they'd already reduced it to 25?). 15 seconds would be plenty to reorganise and plan a set move, much like a penalty, is the shot clock even needed?
As you say, I can't imagine any tidy way of returning to competitive scrums, so how does 12 random team members loosely touching each other for a couple of seconds look like rugby?
How many scrums are there in a game these days. We already have turnover on the last tackle, would a similar turnover on any infringement normally resulting in a scrum even be noticed?
If someone could find a way to bring back a form of scrum that looked anything like a 'rugby' scrum, I could live with it, but modern RL 'scrums' are just plain embarrassing.

Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:32 am  

coco the fullback wrote:

I get what you're saying, but it doesn't have to be 30 seconds ( I thought they'd already reduced it to 25?). 15 seconds would be plenty to reorganise and plan a set move, much like a penalty, is the shot clock even needed?
As you say, I can't imagine any tidy way of returning to competitive scrums, so how does 12 random team members loosely touching each other for a couple of seconds look like rugby?
How many scrums are there in a game these days. We already have turnover on the last tackle, would a similar turnover on any infringement normally resulting in a scrum even be noticed?
If someone could find a way to bring back a form of scrum that looked anything like a 'rugby' scrum, I could live with it, but modern RL 'scrums' are just plain embarrassing.

I don't disagree. It's a case of deciding the least-worst option.

At the moment, there seems to be an agreement that the markers can stand away from the play the ball for the full duration of the stop-clock and that they won't be penalised and the attacking team won't play the ball until everyone is ready. If the stop-clock was removed and teams penalised for messing around and delaying, it would probably solve the issue, but then you have the issue of player-welfare when playing the whole game at breakneck speed.

I know the NRL are looking at keeping scrums because they are part of the game's heritage, and that is sort of where I am. I agree they are a bit of a farce, but they feel like the least-worst option. Better than messy scrums and probably better for the players than playing the whole thing at the fastest pace throughout. At least they allow for a break that looks like something is going on.

None of the options are great, in reality, so I get where the no-scrum lobby is coming from.

Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:00 pm  

My only concern is related to injuries caused by fatigue. Already a fast game, this makes it even faster. Overall, the Scrum as it was, was pointless. Perhaps we allow teams limited numbers of brief time outs or a slightly longer rest period where there would have been a scrum?

Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Sat Nov 28, 2020 1:54 pm  

After watching the Grand Final, I've changed my mind on scrums.

All the way through relentless action, at no point did I think, "it just needs some badly-formed scrums to make the game complete". And at one point, when the ball went into touch and I'd forgotten there were no scrums, I remember thinking that this is where non-rugby people think the game is a bit of a joke.

So, I'm now with the no-scrum lobby.

Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Sat Nov 28, 2020 7:14 pm  

Slugger McBatt wrote:

After watching the Grand Final, I've changed my mind on scrums.

All the way through relentless action, at no point did I think, "it just needs some badly-formed scrums to make the game complete". And at one point, when the ball went into touch and I'd forgotten there were no scrums, I remember thinking that this is where non-rugby people think the game is a bit of a joke.

So, I'm now with the no-scrum lobby.

Strangely I was having identical thoughts to those of your own, Slugger. I somehow think that the game wouldn't have been the spectacle it was with ten or so stoppages. I may well be changing my own ideas on this matter.

Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Sat Nov 28, 2020 7:18 pm  

I’d already come to that conclusion, let them go they belong to a different era.

Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:09 am  

I'm happy to see them go - when the hooker was allowed/able to challenge for the ball they were great but did slow the games down - now after a few months of no scrums I like it, I'd still prefer to have scrums that were challengeable but if we aren't going back to them then this is the next best - all or nothing

Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:15 am  

I am in the scrap the scrum camp, for reasons I've given before, but this is clearly from a spectator perspective. These changes are all a bonus to the fans on the terraces, but perhaps we need to ask the opinion of the people who are directly affected, the players and the coaches. Is this level of intensity sustainable? What will be the longer term effect of the changes once the coaches have had chance to analyse the changes and adopt their tactics? The differences are not just from no scrums, the 6 again rule has also had a big effect. I guess someone could analyse and compare with the NRL where they kept scrums but had 6 again. I hope the Aussies can be persuaded that scrums have had their day. We'll have to bring them back if they keep them, especially with the World Cup coming up. It would be a big gamble to go a season without scrums then enter a world cup with them. It could pay off though, but I don't think the RFL are brave enough to make the leap. Is there any high level meeting to discuss the rules for next season? Interesting stats from the SL website: https://www.superleague.co.uk/article/1 ... out-stats- The increase in the number of quick play-the-balls per match is startling since the August restart. The figure has risen by 99% to an average of 61. The first three weekends of action in August saw an average ball-in-play time of 63 minutes and 20 seconds - a ten-minute rise on early season numbers (53 minutes and 12 seconds), and 11 minutes up on 2019. That figure has dropped a little and is now at an average of 56 minutes and 57 seconds post-lockdown. However, it is still higher than what we saw pre-lockdown in 2020 and in 2019, in which the average was 52 minutes and 4 seconds. There have been 61 games since Super League’s return with an average of 708 tackles per match. That figure is down slightly from the early rounds of post-lockdown Super League but well up on the pre-lockdown average of 658 and the 652 average in 2019. Some similar stats and interesting quotes from the St Helens Star: https://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/sport/18 ... er-harder/ Post-lockdown there have been more carries (up 23 per cent) and the number of metres covered with ball in hand is up by 17 per cent on pre-lockdown games - the most since 2010. Most interestingly 'since 2010', suggesting the game has gone backwards since then and this is maybe a return to better days? I was suprised to read that there was an average of 12 scrums per game, I would have guessed at half that. I may have to do some research during the off-season on TrinityTV. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... oronavirus With 12 scrums per game on average in Super League this season, that results in more than 1,500 occasions of close contact in every fixture. This is not so far away from the other code, which seems to be always having scrums, but I guess they take longer and many are reset. 10 years old and from Oz, but: http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/scrum- ... tatistics/

I am in the scrap the scrum camp, for reasons I've given before, but this is clearly from a spectator perspective. These changes are all a bonus to the fans on the terraces, but perhaps we need to ask the opinion of the people who are directly affected, the players and the coaches. Is this level of intensity sustainable? What will be the longer term effect of the changes once the coaches have had chance to analyse the changes and adopt their tactics? The differences are not just from no scrums, the 6 again rule has also had a big effect. I guess someone could analyse and compare with the NRL where they kept scrums but had 6 again. I hope the Aussies can be persuaded that scrums have had their day. We'll have to bring them back if they keep them, especially with the World Cup coming up. It would be a big gamble to go a season without scrums then enter a world cup with them. It could pay off though, but I don't think the RFL are brave enough to make the leap. Is there any high level meeting to discuss the rules for next season? Interesting stats from the SL website: https://www.superleague.co.uk/article/1 ... out-stats- The increase in the number of quick play-the-balls per match is startling since the August restart. The figure has risen by 99% to an average of 61. The first three weekends of action in August saw an average ball-in-play time of 63 minutes and 20 seconds - a ten-minute rise on early season numbers (53 minutes and 12 seconds), and 11 minutes up on 2019. That figure has dropped a little and is now at an average of 56 minutes and 57 seconds post-lockdown. However, it is still higher than what we saw pre-lockdown in 2020 and in 2019, in which the average was 52 minutes and 4 seconds. There have been 61 games since Super League’s return with an average of 708 tackles per match. That figure is down slightly from the early rounds of post-lockdown Super League but well up on the pre-lockdown average of 658 and the 652 average in 2019. Some similar stats and interesting quotes from the St Helens Star: https://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/sport/18 ... er-harder/ Post-lockdown there have been more carries (up 23 per cent) and the number of metres covered with ball in hand is up by 17 per cent on pre-lockdown games - the most since 2010. Most interestingly 'since 2010', suggesting the game has gone backwards since then and this is maybe a return to better days? I was suprised to read that there was an average of 12 scrums per game, I would have guessed at half that. I may have to do some research during the off-season on TrinityTV. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/ ... oronavirus With 12 scrums per game on average in Super League this season, that results in more than 1,500 occasions of close contact in every fixture. This is not so far away from the other code, which seems to be always having scrums, but I guess they take longer and many are reset. 10 years old and from Oz, but: http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/scrum- ... tatistics/

Re: Scrums - Stay or go in 2021? : Sun Nov 29, 2020 8:49 am  

I’ve said it before but I’ll say it again. Scrums, passing and aspects of tackling are the only similarities now between the two codes.

Clearly passing and tackling stay but scrums can go for me. In a stroke that truly separates the two codes. They are now about as similar as Aussie rules, Gailic football or the NFL. Slight exaggeration don’t take literally.

Drop the word Rugby and just call the sport League and we’ve finally done it.

I get the fatigue issue but a simple way around that is to enforce the 10 meter rule. It’s impact that causes the problem imo, this wouldn’t reduce the energy loss but would reduce the physicality, which is the issue to me.