Username
Password
Steve's Blog - The Curse Of Uncontested Scrums

Grumpy Old Prop
By Old Prop Steve
July 3 2009
Indeed I would suggest that one of the most dangerous points occur when a semi-exhausted man, who has been battling away for seventy minutes, suddenly finds himself confronted by a testosterone-fuelled replacement who has been kicking his heels on the bench for over an hour. The authorities turn a blind eye to that one.

The Curse Of Uncontested Scrums - Surely There Must Be A Better Way?

A lady sent me an e-mail last week and said I had not been grumpy enough lately. Well Madam if there is one thing guaranteed to make an old prop not only grumpy but to become a totally miserable old git then it has to be uncontested scrums. I hate them!

If the Lions series defeat at Pretoria was not bad enough the sight of those great lumps of bone and muscle doing their version of the 'Ladies Excuse Me' must have made the old Boer farmers from the Northern Transvaal squirm in their seats. I know I did. What is more for all this to happen at Loftus Versfeld too - the spiritual home of the Blue Bulls and scrummaging - what a sacrilege. All we needed was to have Bruce Forsyth prancing about the pitch simpering "Didn't they all do well?" to have completed the misery. Ugh.

We Pirates do not have to go back very far for us to have suffered from the fiasco as well. Who can forget that farce at Birmingham-Solihull which resulted in the club being docked three points after Peter Cook was sin-binned and Sam Heard exacerbated a back injury as soon as he came on? Nobody could blame the match officials or even the National One committee reviewing the case - it was just a stupid rule to start with.

So what can be done? Even as one who is about as pleased to see an 'Elf and Safety Inspector coming my way as a dose of swine flu, I fully accept that the prospect of severe spinal injury to a player must be avoided at all costs. Indeed the plight of a young man like Matthew Hampson is truly heartbreaking - and there have been quite a few others. So accepting that safety is paramount, I again pose the question "Is there a better way?"

Rugby is not the only sport where significant changes have been instituted for safety - motor racing being an obvious example.

My niece competes all over the world as a professional Three Day Event rider and the parallels between that sport and rugby both in terms of deaths and paralysis are considerable. Indeed having several hundredweight of horse come crashing down upon you is about the closest thing you can ever get to being trapped under a collapsed scrum.

However, by a scientific approach to course design and some major advances in lightweight synthetic body armour, huge strides in safety terms have been made without ruining the sport as a competition or as a spectacle which the uncontested scrum rule clearly does.

Well let's begin with some simple physics. Modern coaches set enormous store by co-ordinating the 'hit' as the scrums engage to gain an initial advantage. So if the scrums line up with all sixteen men standing back and then crunching together the resulting impact is enormous. If the average weight of the forwards is sixteen stone (and it is often more) then that mass alone is well over one and a half tons over which the forward momentum serves to multiply the impact.

The 'crouch - touch- engage' routine has certainly helped in so far as packs no longer charge at each other but why not have the front rows go down first and hold, the locks to then go in, with the No 8 and flankers joining third? Not only would this be very much safer but I would suggest would massively reduce the number of scrums tediously collapsing to the ground and having to be reset constantly. Once down the players could push and scrummage as much as they liked - but only when the ball was put in.

The arbiters of the Laws also seem to labour under the pious illusion that as long as a team has enough 'recognised' props then somehow all is well.

This is utter nonsense. Some props are clearly bigger, stronger, fitter or more experienced than others and, as in any combined skill, are also heavily dependent upon the other players around them.

Indeed I would suggest that one of the most dangerous points occur when a semi-exhausted man, who has been battling away for seventy minutes, suddenly finds himself confronted by a testosterone-fuelled replacement who has been kicking his heels on the bench for over an hour. The authorities turn a blind eye to that one.

There are a number of practical steps which the sport in general - and a team in isolation - could take in the current climate.

One would be to coach all players in the basic art of front row play just as they all have to tackle, maul and ruck. Indeed certain players could have a 'Certificate of Competence' to show that they have played a certain number of hours in the front row during a competitive game - rather as amateur pilots do with flying hours also in the interests of safety.

This would be of value to the player when negotiating a contract with a club as it would mean that a man who would probably play virtually the whole season as a flanker or a line breaking centre could be always be called upon by his club to prop in an emergency and stay within both the rules and practical safety.

Certainly I would not employ specialist hookers who cannot double up as props - especially on the tight head. The Springbok captain Smit is a prime example of this and I understand that Pirates new front rower Brits can do likewise as indeed did Cook last season. Good move.

Furthermore it intrigues me as to why coaches continue to put all eight players into an uncontested scrum awarded to the opposition. By definition the other team cannot push them off the ball anyway so why not put just five or even three in the scrum and have the rest lining up five metres back in defence? Answers on a postcard please.

So my three little suggestions are a) more players in a team coached and cleared to be able to prop b) to have each row of a scrum engaging one by one and c) not allowing purely tactical substitutions of props in the last twenty minutes of a match.

Yes we all know coaches could cheat with feigned injuries but no more than they do already with many so-called 'blood replacements'.

Well here are a few initial ideas - shoot them down by all means - but let us have some other suggestions. Whatever is tried it surely has to be better than these pathetic barn-dancing routines.

Grump over - I will now go and lie down in a darkened room.

View a Printer Friendly version of this Story.

Bookmark or share this story with:

Grumpy's Blog - The Curse Of Uncontested Scrums
Posted by: OLD PROP STEVE (IP Logged)
Date: 03/07/2009 10:38

What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009:07:03:10:45:01 by Dotcom.

Re: Grumpy's Blog - The Curse Of Uncontested Scrums
Posted by: Pirate Pig. (IP Logged)
Date: 03/07/2009 13:49

Interesting points and I think the French are promoting an idea that an extra prop is allowed on the bench but he can only play to ensure that an uncontested scrum does not take place.
Its a very difficult area too 'police' and in this day of 'health and safety' and litigation,no-one is likely to take any chances and when it comes to player welfare all risks should be minimised.

Re: Grumpy's Blog - The Curse Of Uncontested Scrums
Posted by: *Stalwart (IP Logged)
Date: 03/07/2009 16:21

Completely agree with your suggestion about each row of the scrum packing down separately, Steve. Seems obvious, really and it makes you wonder why the guys who spend their lives tinkering with the laws haven't tried it already.

Re: Grumpy's Blog - The Curse Of Uncontested Scrums
Posted by: woll (IP Logged)
Date: 04/07/2009 16:03

Steve speaks with authority on this subject and may just have proposed a sensible solution to a blight on the game. Uncontested scrums are a farce and can so often change the course of a game unfairly. They must be consigned to the history books with haste.

I sense his suggestion may also provide solutions to giving this institution a chance to rekindle old values, and make it a truer contest once more (or at least more often).

If you watch archive footage and see how (apparently) disorganised the scrum was, it is perhaps easier to appreciate how, by organising the process over the last 20 or so years, the element of competition has been eroded. With all emphasis having been geared towards the 'Hit', it's obvious that the pack with the feed has (more often than not) a clearer advantage, despite the rule about pushing beforehand.

Get this right and all too often the SH doesn't even have to crook his feed if he wanted too, as a straight 'un will go to the advancing second rows hooves anyhow.

By breaking down the scrum formation so, it should eliminate a lot of the policing that has had to creep in, and free up the officials to making sure the feed is governed properly instead.

I'd miss the 'Hit' component for sure; the primal element certainly adds to the theatre, but for the return of an 8v8 contest for the ball; I could live with that. I reckon Jnr would as well as his current 'steals per game' ratio would rocket!

If you're going through hell...keep going

Re: Grumpy's Blog - The Curse Of Uncontested Scrums
Posted by: *Stalwart (IP Logged)
Date: 05/07/2009 13:25

This reminds me of the way politicians fiddle about with education, even though most of them have no expertise in it.
I wonder how many of the people who came up with the scrum laws are actually front row forwards. Is OPS such a rarity - an intelligent front row forward? Just find a couple more, get them around a table with a few pints, and they'd come up with a workable set of scrum laws.
A lot of the problems, though, are down to poor refereeing - and again, not many refs are former props, so it's a pretty hard job for them to police this dark and mysterious world.

Re: Grumpy's Blog - The Curse Of Uncontested Scrums
Posted by: cheshire exile (IP Logged)
Date: 07/07/2009 09:19

Fair point Stalwart--it's all the more surprising , then, that Irish and Lions prop Syd Millar has been a leading light at the IRB for years.
Perhaps he's on the wrong committees.......

Re: Grumpy's Blog - The Curse Of Uncontested Scrums
Posted by: DaveAitch (IP Logged)
Date: 13/07/2009 09:41

Some very good points.

In terms of reduced numbers: several years ago three i.e a front row was the minimum number any one side could put into a scrum. That was changed a few years back, and the minimum is now (I believe) five.

If referees applied the law of 'not-straight' properly, it would also help. As it stands there is no need for a 'proper' hooker, as the side putting the ball in is always going to win it. This has allowed the front row to essentially be three props.

A while ago I looked up the information on props who had broken necks while playing (or training). From memory there were six that I could find information on: the eldest was 24, the others less than 22. That probably says something about body strength and/or technique taking time to develop.

Absolutely agree with you recommendations.

Goto Thread: PreviousNext
Goto: Forum ListMessage ListLog In

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 

Cornish Pirates Poll