new scrum law rushed in

Rizzo · Post by **Rizzo** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:38 pm

http://tinyurl.com/erbnk

makes interesting reading - any thoughts?

kevf · Post by **kevf** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:04 pm

to me it seems like a good alternative ..... but i don't agree with the last bit about the scrum is only a way to restart the game... tactically it is much more important than just a restart.....

EssexTiger · Post by **EssexTiger** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:10 pm

If it saves scrummaging - I go with it, especially if it saves a few necks!

kevf · Post by **kevf** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:12 pm

scrummaging is good it just needs to be safer... we don't want to do away with it... may as well move up north

JB · Post by JB » Thu Oct 05, 2006 3:05 pm

One of the great things about Rugby is that it is a game people of all shapes and sizes, and I think the move to de-power the scrum would endanger that. This article seems to suggest a superb way forward.

One hopes it will reduce the number of serious neck injuries.

The Countess of Welford · Thu Oct 05, 2006 3:08 pm

I dunno, BelperJon. Whilst I usually cannot stand the Daily Wail, their one redeeming feature is breaking news in rugby union, mostly from Peter Jackson. It doesn't say who wrote the article :?

But if it is true, then I hope it will prevent neck injuries. But, how different is this law from the old law? Any front rowers out there to enlightem me?

kevf. The comment about the scrum being just a means of restart was made by an Aussie! Wonder why? :roll:

mightymouse · Post by **mightymouse** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 3:41 pm

personally, having played under the old unregulated method and then under the current laws, I always found the referees "engage" instruction confused the situation and held scrums up far to long and created the bang down more often than not because it stopped the natural rythym of the two opposing packs. I do think the hold on the jersey prior to going down would help slow down the charge and help a more natural engagagement process. If you look back at old films of anything prior to the 80s the scrum tended to come together in a much more loose way and it was the rise of the orchesratrated charge that led to more accidents.

My recomendation would be "Come together, hold on jersey and scrum down" with no pause or holding by the referee- equally the calling down in time of the scrum by the players the "1-2-3 hit" type time calls should be the thing that is outlawed.

It should definitely not be banned - the day the scrum the lineout the ruck or the maul goes from Rugby will be the day I stop watching.

It doesn't surprise me that the Aussies want to ban it - they have done everything else in their power to change the laws to make the game like Rugby League so why not that - Then they could dominate a single game - I'm not interested in that.

westy154 · Post by **westy154** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 4:55 pm

If true, then it could be a good compromise. Could be...

Osprey in Leicester · Post by **Osprey in Leicester** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:14 pm

Cant see it making much difference, most injuries are caused when the scrum collapses.

k1 · Post by k1 » Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:44 pm

This was also reported in a couple of newspapers last week, so I think there is some truth in it. I'm not convinced as to how much safer this would make the scrum. Doesn't surprise me about the Aussies remarks either as they haven't produced a decent prop in a long time.

banbury tiger · Post by **banbury tiger** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 9:10 pm

JB completly agree with you !

King Kong · Post by **King Kong** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 11:01 pm

I can see how removing the hit can stop injury. Moving scrums before the ball has gone in is a principle reason for collapse. But the hit I think is important. its all about the side getting the upper hand, and getting into a good position. without a hit, neither team will be able to establish any kind of dominance from a standing start.

ronnied · Post by **ronnied** » Fri Oct 06, 2006 7:28 pm

I agree with anything that makes the game that bit safer. I am sure that those who play on the front line wuld appreciate our support for their sfaety first. I would also stop watching if union became more like league.

Moody_boy06 · Post by **Moody_boy06** » Mon Oct 09, 2006 9:27 pm

Adding a new rule into the scrums would only make things worse-- injuries only happen when people are not playing correctly- if all scrums were done well there would not be any injuries, and besides, the majority of the timescrums happen without physical injury; people are more likely to get injured during open play from a poleax or high tackle.

DCat · Post by **DCat** » Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:06 pm

Having never scrummed, I don't really know, but I understand from someone who has that if the charge was completely taken out of the scrum it would place more stress on the front row because of the pressure from the locks and the back row.