Rugby league scrums
Discussion
Just watching the challenge cup final, and I'm not too up on Rugby League.
Just wondering what the point of the scrum is? The players just stand there in the scrum position, but no-one pushes and the put-in is rolled directly to the back of the scrum?
Assuming someone who knows the game will give me a good reason for it?
Just wondering what the point of the scrum is? The players just stand there in the scrum position, but no-one pushes and the put-in is rolled directly to the back of the scrum?
Assuming someone who knows the game will give me a good reason for it?
cotney said:
Just watching the challenge cup final, and I'm not too up on Rugby League.
Just wondering what the point of the scrum is? The players just stand there in the scrum position, but no-one pushes and the put-in is rolled directly to the back of the scrum?
Assuming someone who knows the game will give me a good reason for it?
Basically the best way of re-starting the game when certian siuation arise. The scrum is in league is to keep in the spirit of the rest of the league game-speed. You know 99.9% of the time who is going to win the scrum so you set the field to suit if you're in attack or defence.Just wondering what the point of the scrum is? The players just stand there in the scrum position, but no-one pushes and the put-in is rolled directly to the back of the scrum?
Assuming someone who knows the game will give me a good reason for it?
There are rules thoguh but these are largely ignored, all a bit of a farce when you compare it to the technical nature of the union scrum.
Scrums and lineouts are merely ways of restarting the match. Some suggest Union players want a bit of a rest every now and again and that's what the scrum allows.
Despite the similarity of the title 'rugby' they are two different games that have evolved along separate lines. I'm a Union fan but can appreciate the continual nature of League.
Having met a couple of professional League players I would hesitate to, as Engineer here has done, call them girly woofters.
Despite the similarity of the title 'rugby' they are two different games that have evolved along separate lines. I'm a Union fan but can appreciate the continual nature of League.
Having met a couple of professional League players I would hesitate to, as Engineer here has done, call them girly woofters.
Engineer1 said:
Derek I only say it as I am safely in the Midlands where the real form of Rugby is played 
. I would agree in the past and at lower levels the scrum and lineouts in Union gave the powerfully built front row a chance to catch their breath or slow things down.
Nowadays, as players have got much fitter, the refs have struggled. The one change I've noticed in Union since privatisation has been the keenness of the ref to blow up for offside, especially after a bit of a run.. I would agree in the past and at lower levels the scrum and lineouts in Union gave the powerfully built front row a chance to catch their breath or slow things down.Beardy10 said:
cotney said:
Just wondering what the point of the scrum is?
I wonder what the point of Rugby League is myself....I know a lot of people love it and it is for example much bigger in Australia than Union but I just don't enjoy watching it. As for the point of the scrum, as mentioned it is a method of restarting the game which also reduces the number of players in the field and as such opens things up for attacking play.
What I would say is that plenty of people who watch League (myself included) think that the current situation is a farce and the sooner they get back to properly contested scrums the better.
ClintonB said:
As for the point of the scrum, as mentioned it is a method of restarting the game which also reduces the number of players in the field and as such opens things up for attacking play.
What I would say is that plenty of people who watch League (myself included) think that the current situation is a farce and the sooner they get back to properly contested scrums the better.
So why doesn't someone start contesting them then ? And how did it come about that they weren't contested ? What I would say is that plenty of people who watch League (myself included) think that the current situation is a farce and the sooner they get back to properly contested scrums the better.
Beardy10 said:
ClintonB said:
As for the point of the scrum, as mentioned it is a method of restarting the game which also reduces the number of players in the field and as such opens things up for attacking play.
What I would say is that plenty of people who watch League (myself included) think that the current situation is a farce and the sooner they get back to properly contested scrums the better.
So why doesn't someone start contesting them then ? And how did it come about that they weren't contested ? What I would say is that plenty of people who watch League (myself included) think that the current situation is a farce and the sooner they get back to properly contested scrums the better.
How did it come about? Not exactly 100% as I am (for some weird reason) hopeless at remembering anything related to sport. However, it has drifted in over the last 20 years or so as the push to speed up the game has almost become all consuming, an infection from our convict cousins. The rules are still there (I think), just conveniently ignored.
It would almost seem to me that League has become a backward passing version of American Football for healthy people and played at 100 mph. Highly impressive in terms of power and immense fitness, a lot less so in terms of exquisite skill.
Mind you, it isn't alone since Union has shifted somewhat as well & whether people like it or not, there has been a reasonably strong League influence on that (not from a biased POV).
ClintonB said:
There's actually nothing in the rules to prevent it and very occasionally you will see a team push - problem is that the ball has been fed pretty much into the second row, so it will take one hell of a push to prevent it.
How did it come about? Not exactly 100% as I am (for some weird reason) hopeless at remembering anything related to sport. However, it has drifted in over the last 20 years or so as the push to speed up the game has almost become all consuming, an infection from our convict cousins. The rules are still there (I think), just conveniently ignored.
It would almost seem to me that League has become a backward passing version of American Football for healthy people and played at 100 mph. Highly impressive in terms of power and immense fitness, a lot less so in terms of exquisite skill.
Mind you, it isn't alone since Union has shifted somewhat as well & whether people like it or not, there has been a reasonably strong League influence on that (not from a biased POV).
There are problems with Union scrums though. You can have matches where scrums take minutes to resolve. You also get the silly situation where a team might be fielding a second choice prop. The chap is outclassed by his opponent and then, just to rub things in, he gets carded for repeated collapses when he's doing his best and is replaced by the third choice who will be even worse. Then you get the stupid situation of the ref being more lenient.How did it come about? Not exactly 100% as I am (for some weird reason) hopeless at remembering anything related to sport. However, it has drifted in over the last 20 years or so as the push to speed up the game has almost become all consuming, an infection from our convict cousins. The rules are still there (I think), just conveniently ignored.
It would almost seem to me that League has become a backward passing version of American Football for healthy people and played at 100 mph. Highly impressive in terms of power and immense fitness, a lot less so in terms of exquisite skill.
Mind you, it isn't alone since Union has shifted somewhat as well & whether people like it or not, there has been a reasonably strong League influence on that (not from a biased POV).
League is more spectator based than Union, probably because of the commercial aspects early on. League is easy to watch for a novice although the depth is there of course if you want to look for it. Union, to the casual observer, is just an excuse for a fight.
Union seems to be developing but slowly. I feel something should be done about scrums, as do most people. But it is getting a concensus that's the problem. Different nations want different things.
I video my team's matches, both for the RFU and coaching purposes. I edit them for 'highlights', i.e. lineouts, backs, penalties, that sort of thing. When you put all the scrums together on a video the result can be absolutely dire. It is no way to try and attract a crowd.
I tackled a ref once, in the bar, about feeding the second row. He said it was a case of allowing that to get the ball back in play.
To be fair to those making the rules, I don't know the answer. There are more answers that players on the field, even after a prop has been carded. The game needs to keep its differences and its history but for those clubs struggling for funding, gate receipts are vital. A match that degenerates into repetitious scrums is boring and will put spectators off.
Rucks and mauls are fun to watch as well as be in. But surely everyone, forwards as well, are bored with scrum reset afer reset.
DocJock said:
All this scrum legislation (and the lifting and disco-dancing in lineouts) came about simply because NZ and Aus were getting destroyed in those phases, so they bleated about it long and hard enough to get law changes passed.
'You might think that but I couldn't possibly comment'Oh, hold on, I can. You are spot on. And there lies the major problem.
Edited by Derek Smith on Sunday 28th August 16:34
I suspect the professional game has meant that the players are now primarily sports men and want a game that will maximise their sports earnings, in the past with the Semi-Pro amateur game when the club found their star players a good job, expenses in the same way mp's had expenses etc. the players had jobs outside the game so injuries didn't ruin their main career. So with players who are playing for the love of the game rather than a big contract the game can be a shade more physical and possibly a lot less fitness oriented.
ClintonB said:
Beardy10 said:
ClintonB said:
As for the point of the scrum, as mentioned it is a method of restarting the game which also reduces the number of players in the field and as such opens things up for attacking play.
What I would say is that plenty of people who watch League (myself included) think that the current situation is a farce and the sooner they get back to properly contested scrums the better.
So why doesn't someone start contesting them then ? And how did it come about that they weren't contested ? What I would say is that plenty of people who watch League (myself included) think that the current situation is a farce and the sooner they get back to properly contested scrums the better.
How did it come about? Not exactly 100% as I am (for some weird reason) hopeless at remembering anything related to sport. However, it has drifted in over the last 20 years or so as the push to speed up the game has almost become all consuming, an infection from our convict cousins. The rules are still there (I think), just conveniently ignored.
It would almost seem to me that League has become a backward passing version of American Football for healthy people and played at 100 mph. Highly impressive in terms of power and immense fitness, a lot less so in terms of exquisite skill.
Mind you, it isn't alone since Union has shifted somewhat as well & whether people like it or not, there has been a reasonably strong League influence on that (not from a biased POV).
Scrums in Union make great attacking ball deep in opposition territory because it obviously ties up so many players. With Rugby League defences being so well organised you would think people would start thinking about Scrums as a great attacking platform rather than just a method to get the game going again.
Beardy10 said:
Interesting, I was going to make the comparison myself with Amercian Football but didn't as didn't want be though to be inciting a reaction!
I guess it might get a reaction from some but from those of us who have been watching a bit longer, there ought to be more sympathy (if viewed with a level head). Arguably the influence is from Australia and while it has had some very positive influences (no real fatties without much by way of skill have disappeared, the average skill level has increased significantly, the gap between haves & have nots has shifted to a degree and so on), there's probably too much emphasis placed on physical prowess (even though the fitness & strength of RL players is very admirable) and way too much emphasis on the mindset of yards gained, field position and so on.While I'm on a roll, another one would be water carriers appearing every 30 seconds to give instructions - Why?
I guess it has become the rugby equivalent of Sam Allardyce/Rafa Benitez/Jose Mourinho et al football. Very effective but all about a certain sub-set of the technical aspects of the game, plus the all-important "game plan".
There just doesn't seem to be much emphasis on the finer and sublime aspects of the game and the players who might not be perfect physical specimens, might occasionally be total dross but who are also capable of take your breath away pieces of genius. Take the current Wigan side for example. Very well drilled, very solid and efficient and so on, but nowhere near as exciting as the teams of the late 80's and 90's. As an example, someone like Andy Gregory (a complete barrel of a scrum-half) would probably get nowhere near the current team without changing his physique, which is daft. Another good example, would be Tommy Martin. Even though he had the misfortune to play for St Helens (
), wasn't quick or all that powerfully built, he was obviously a couple of steps ahead mentally and that was rather good to watch. Probably wouldn't play for one of the top teams now though and happens all too rarely.All of that ramble is in essence why it gets more like Yankee footy every year and on of the reasons why I might still watch regularly on TV but don't feel inclined to go and pay money to watch.
Beardy10 said:
Scrums in Union make great attacking ball deep in opposition territory because it obviously ties up so many players. With Rugby League defences being so well organised you would think people would start thinking about Scrums as a great attacking platform rather than just a method to get the game going again.
They do, but Union has issues and some of them are similar to those in League. The issue of physical prowess seems to be affecting both codes and in terms of Union scrums, it strikes me that they do need some degree of simplification. Properly contested scrums are great, a single scrum taking half a dozen attempts to get one going (for one reason or another) is less good, as are many slightly and sometimes very perplexing rule changes that seem to be meddling for meddling's sake.ExChrispy Porker said:
Do away with the crouch - touch - pause -engage nonsense for a start.
That is why more scrums collapse than ever used to.
I played prop for 40 years on and off, some at a pretty reasonable level. I never saw anyone seriously hurt on engagement. Collapses are far more dangerous.
having played at #3 for all my rugby years and am now a coach for a local team I agree to a point.That is why more scrums collapse than ever used to.
I played prop for 40 years on and off, some at a pretty reasonable level. I never saw anyone seriously hurt on engagement. Collapses are far more dangerous.
it needs to change to crouch, touch/engage as a 2 stage single movement, at the moment the props are trying to do the 4 stage but 2nd rows etc are hearing crouch and then just go for the big push so the props are trying to hold their own players back while lining up of the engage and then it gets messy and this is why in my view it needs changing
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff