So what to do about the scrum? As it is, it’s a mess! Reset after reset as front rows go to ground, free kicks or penalties at the whim of whichever referee happens to be in charge. Hardly ever a clean scrummage, just delay to the flow of the game.
In my humble opinion, the main problem is the emphasis on the ‘the hit’, the impact as the two sets of forwards come together on the engage, like a couple of juggernauts meeting head-on in the same lane of the motorway. The result can only be disaster. The resulting infringements, and dangers to the health of the players, are obvious to see. Packs engaging early to get the advantage of momentum, props failing to get a legal bind on before the drive – exacerbated by the modern style of tight-fitting shirt – driving up, down or sideways as direction is sacrificed in the rush to hit hard and fast. Scrums frequently collapse before the ball is released, often resulting in in injuries and/or stoppage in play.
Forget the calls from some in the Southern Hemisphere to de-power the scrum. The solution seems simple What is needed is to change the emphasis from the ‘hit and drive’ to ‘hook and drive’. To do this, it would be necessary to scrap the referee calling the sequence of crouch-touch-pause-engage. This causes more problems than it solves, partly due to the vagrancies of timing of individual referees, and partly because of the actual sequence of events themselves. With reference to the former, some referees hold the packs for such a ludicrously long time on the pause that one or both sets of forwards inevitably go into the engage early. Also Law 20.5 states that as soon as the front rows have come together, the scrum half must throw in the ball without delay. This currently seems to be completely ignored by referees, as scrum halves are allowed to delay the put-in while both sets of forwards drive prematurely as they struggle to gain the upper hand. This is illegal as, according to Law 20.7, the scrum cannot start until the ball is put in. If the attacking side gets the momentum, the scrum half then feeds the ball into his forwards feet, rather than down the centre line, as stated in the law. If his forwards fail to get the advantage in the initial drive, the scrum half delays the put-in, hoping to get a penalty. Only if no penalty ensues will they grudgingly let the ball go.
Instead of this less than satisfactory situation leading to numerous reset, free kicks or penalties, my suggestion is to call crouch – bind – hold the push – ball in now, or something similar. On the ‘crouch’, front rows would assume the correct body position, on the ‘bind’, props would secure their bind which the referee checks, on the ‘hold’ both packs steady themselves ready for the drive and must stay on the line of the scrum, and on ‘ball in now’, the scrum half must put the ball in as soon as the word ‘now’ is heard. This would mean re-wording Law 20.5, which is no big deal, as it is patently not being applied anyway. By following this sequence, the imbalance of the big hit is taken away, and the scrum will be formed correctly and balanced correctly for the start of the drive.
As soon as the ball leaves the scrum half’s hands, the scrum would begin, as it states in Law 20.7. This law is currently also being ignored by referees as mentioned previously, as it is obvious that the both sets of forwards start scrummaging as soon as they come together on the engage, and not when the ball is put in. In the new sequence, this law could now be easily applied. ‘Now’ is the cue for the drive to start, so any delay by the scrum half would immediately bring about a free-kick. Any substantial forward movement before this due to an early drive would also result in a free kick.
In this way, many infringements would be avoided completely, and the influence of timing of the referee’s calls would reduced drastically. The emphasis would, with the application of a straight put – in, change from the impact of the hit, to the skill of the hook, followed by a continuous exertion of pressure by the sets of forwards to ensure the ball is either delivered to the back of the scrum if the strike is won, or is disrupted if the strike is lost.
Would it work? I am convinced it would substantially reduce injuries, massively improve the current situation of refereeing anomalies and undue influence, reduce the free kick and penalty count dramatically, and increase the time that spectators see the ball in play, rather than in the hands of the scrum half.
Leave a Reply