EVOLUTION OF THE SCRUM 🏉 | 1967 - 2023
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 лют 2023
- An intergral part of the game, have a look and see how they have evolved over time.
This is the official channel for the Guinness Six Nations - Rugby's Greatest Championship
⬇️ Subscribe for highlights, interviews, features, classic archive and more! ⬇️
/ @sixnationsrugby
#GuinnessSixNations - Спорт
As a back I don’t see any change in scrum rules through the years… scrum is called, scrum collapses, ref picks someone randomly to be penalised 😂
Backs should stick to what they know, and let the big boys play the rugby.
if you think its random i reccomend you watch more rugby to further your knowledge
@@James-rc6qq it was a joke mate
@@callumgolding7191 I appreciated the joke, Callum. I used to work with a bloke who was also a Rugby Union ref; he once told me that nobody understood all the rules including the refs.
No mate, not true. Look at "Scene 1": The scrumhalf got penalised for not putting the ball in straight. Crazy, isn't it?
Wow! its amazing how informal and dangerous the first scrums were!
Almost closer to a maul than a scrum.
Dangerous? How so? They happened quickly, and remember most of those players back then were more normal sized, not the monsters of today. Owen Farrell would have been a second row or flanker, not a center or flyhalf, not that there weren't some sizeable back line players then, like the late David Duckham.
@@ldfreitas9437 exactly right, I was considered a player back in the 80's but now, I'd be lucky to bring out the drinks for the players due to my size. Some players these days are like mountains
@@ldfreitas9437 yeah smashing your heads/neck together with barely any time to line with a run up definitely isn't dangerous lol
yes, in the old days the ref's involvement was confined to 'scrum here, blue ball' - and the scrum was many many times more functional and produced fast ball
Agreed - great observation.
Wonderful (to my ears) to hear Bill Mclaren’s dulcet, Scottish tones in the first few clips. What a masterful rugby commentator he was, leaving gaps when the ball and the passage of play said it all.
It's been a while since I saw a dive pass from a scrum-half in the international game! This montage was a treat! 🔥
My initiation into schoolboy rugby in Cardiff in the 70s was as a prop. First scrum of the game and a punch in the face from my opposite number. Those were the days.
Did you marry his sister?
Might you still be concussed?
3:10 - that hit is genuinely terrifying. Amazing there weren't more serious injuries in the front row.
hard men back then no doubt, no HIA, no red cards for anything below outright assault...pretty brutal game in the 80s...
I remember a lot more neck injuries back when I was playing 80's in the scrum than now, the shouts of pain and "Neck, Neck" from within a scrum was always scary even at school levels.
@@EvilFinian you must have played for the scandal Ballet 15. Played all through the 70’s and 80’s and never heard any off the guff you remember.
@@dennism5731Ahh bless your little cotton socks.
@@dennism5731The fact you can’t remember might be part of the problem
Penalty against Gareth Edwards for feed not straight? We need that back rule back!
It's still in the laws but it was a shock to see it enforced.
@@joshuataylor3550 actually, it’s only a free kick if not straight (Law 19.15), but even then, agree that it should be enforced more.
They updated the law a few years back in recognition of how unenforced/unenforceable this was. The scrum-half now has license to feed the ball towards their pack, his/her outer shoulder merely has to be in line with the middle of the scrum
The hooker no longer has to hook the ball, the feeding is so blatant these days it makes League look more of a contest.
@@Thewouf Made 'unenforceable' by giving the ref nanny duties, back in the day the Ref said diddly-squat and got the job done.
My gripe with scrums is the refereeing they go to all that trouble of making the forwards get square on & engage properly no wriggle room for pushing in or down & then they let the scrum half put the ball in behind the second row , yet the same referee at a line out even when there is a gale blowing & the hooker has tried to compensate he will give a penalty for not straight? 😂
Couldn't have put it better myself. Watching the feeding after all that fuss is so annoying. Almost as bad as paying attention to the clock from when a scrum is given to when the ball is in open play again.
You should see how the NZ haka has changed. Back then it was a bunch of embarrassed looking blokes doing a pissweak jump around. Now it's 15 monsters more choreagraphed than the Royal Ballet.
This is truly fascinating. I love it 😃
Wow! A referee penalising a scrum-half for 'not straight'. What nostalgia!
The 60s and 70s scrums are hilarious. Grab hold and run at the other team, head down. Of course, the pack were about half the weight of modern packs.
Thanks for posting
55 years on, and still no one has a clue how to form a scrum.
Always a treat to hear the fabled tones of the late great Bill McLaren, the late great Eddie Butler and the great and hopefully still with us Nigel Starmer Smith. And the rare sight of a France team wearing Nike gear in 1895.
Se rompían la clavícula en ese Scrum del 79.
Scrums were much faster back then, but this was also, because the players were far less athletic than today, more like football-players. Just amateur-time. With the big, strong guys of today it's necessary to keep proper order and sometimes this can take a little for the ref. It's also for the safety of the players, especially head- and neck-area. When you look at the players from 67 and 79, a team of 12 or 13 players of today would probably be enough (when they come from a top-nation) to easily beat the 15 guys from back then. But that's only natural.
I would dispute your choice of the word "athletic". Australian Rules players are also "athletic" but they are not the size of houses! For me, this is the issue. When I played rugby, back in the late 19th century ;) players were, in general, far lighter than they are now, therefore the pressure on the front rows was far less. Plus, if you watch this piece, you'll see that the starting position for front rows has become progressively lower and lower, increasing the pressure. The "mindset" of front rows has to change and this can only be done by coaching from an early age.
Also, baggy shirts - This is not a stupid thing to say but it is almost impossible to get a proper bind on skin-tight modern rugby shirts!
@@ThePereubu1710 But, you know, the mindset is that they're professional players.
The players getting bigger and scrums getting lower are for the same end: winning. They're paid for that.
If they aren't better than the guy opposite them, sooner or later they'll find themselves out of contract.
How or why would you coach that out of them?
@@andrasszabo1570 Are you trying to suggest that players in 1980 didn't want to win? I think many would dispute that :)
There is no simple way to fix the scrum problem, and there is a problem but, firstly, I would suggest looking at what is right in the top-level woman's game where there are, generally, far fewer scrum resets.
As far as coaching is concerned:
1.Concentrate on keeping height in the front row - props should be holding up the scrum, not trying to force their opponent to the ground.
2. Make lifting your opponent in the scrum an offence in the same way that standing up is.
3. Coach scrum halves to put the ball in straight thus causing a real competition for the ball in the scrum and penalise them when they don't
4. Coach hookers to hook rather than have to hold the scrum up which appears to be their primary role now. This would become a real issue if 3 is implemented.
On the wider front, I would take every step to speed the game up, even if that includes shot-clocks and free-kicks for taking too long to set up a scrum/lineout. I would force a maximum of 2 scrum resets before some penalty - could be free-kick, could be a penalty or even a non-contested scrum (actually, I really like that one, can't see the Marler's or Genges of the world being happy with that!). I would also return to the days of injury only replacements, forwards will have to play the full 80 minutes. This will force them to be lighter and more aerobically fit .
Those are just "top of the head" suggestions which I know will, probably, have as many downsides as upsides but I am not hearing this conversation at the moment and as a lover of rugby union, I want to hear some real changes
@@ThePereubu1710 There's definitely too many replacements in modern rugby. Having few forward replacements might help open up matches towards the end of games
@@ThePereubu1710 Yes, the shirts: so it means more hard contact than shirt grabbing tackles. Also, the players are bigger, sometimes much bigger, and when there's 8 subs, the big and not so mobile guys sit on the bench until the last half hour. Going a full 80 hardly happens for half the team. The amount of meters a scrum can move forward might change things, as in U-19.
really enjoyed this
Also a good video for anyone who claims that there's a lot more kicking in the modern game....
4:25 The average forward weight in 1999 would be closer to the average weight of a back now.
look at the muscle mass difference in the players from 1967 to present , thats crazy
I wonder who will have lived longer? The wiry players of old or these muscle bound players of today?
Today's players will live longer but they'll get dementia earlier.
They are jacked up on special juice nowadays which is why they all look like WWF wrestlers.
@@championthewonderhorse9733 That is the easiest thing in the world to say..............so go on, where's your evidence? You know that sportsment are constantly drug- tested, don't you?
@@MikeAG333 wada give permition to take doping Simone Biles Nadal Michael Phelps, Norwey Asmatics winter atlets, Williams sisters , and a lot over americans
Thanks!
The very first clip - what a kickoff!
A) never seen a dummy runup before (I know that’s not a viable option now with dropkick restarts), but very effective as most defenders went the wrong way opening a huge gap in backfield.
B) he absolutely nailed that kick - must have gone out about 1m from the corner flag! 🤩
the fact the ball is no longer required to be put in straight has made scrums somewhat pointless in most cases
the farther you go back in time, the sillier it looks. But heck, that was a million times more dynamic
.....make that 2 million.....
Comparing the first example to the last is hilarious. In the first, when the Welsh tried a quick shove it didn't even appear that the English pack had even setup, it was like a sucker punch. Did some quick math and the average forward is about 12 kg heavier today than in 2000 who I would say were substantially heavier on avg than those in the 70s.
Where did you get your figures from? You're saying that the average pack is now almost 100kg heavier than it was 23 years ago - I can't imagine it's THAT much, surely? Edited to add: looking at a couple of articles it looks seems the 2019 England WC team forwards were on average 10kg heavier than the 1991 England WC team forwards which I definitely could believe given it's pro vs amateur era. I'd have thought the weight difference from 2000 to now would be a bit smaller though given the 5 years of professionalism?
Interesting stuff though, and with that context we couldn't go back to a 60s - 80s style scrum without risk of life-changing injury to players. That said, modern scrums can't go on the way they are as they're killing the game. I'd like to see an emphasis on the scrum as a way to restart the game rather than a means to win a penalty. Bring back straight feeds, and introduce a maximum 5 seconds for the attacking team to get the ball back into play or a free kick goes to the defending team. That'd speed things up...
In the video it shows the pack weights twice in 2000 and 2023. but I may have screwed up on the conversion of stones to kg. I used 6.35kg/stone. I was surprised a bit as well.
@@michaeltrumper Fair play mate, I didn't notice the weights in the video and after I posted my comment I did some digging and found the difference was much higher than I thought it'd be so I came back and edited!
@@linalmeemow No worries. I do find it astonishing how professionalism has had such a profound effect on the players.
Let's not forget the awkward teenage years of the current scrum cadence in 2013, when the call was "crouch touch set". My first season of rugby was the final season of "crouch touch pause engage"
🤟🏻 Great
🤟🏻 Nice content 💥
I started watching rugby in the late 80s and started playing in 93. I remember catching southern hemisphere games on a weird satellite channel. The scrums would engage so hard you'd hear a loud, low whoooof as all the air from both sides got squeezed in their lungs. I think everything changed in the professional era. The sizes of players just exploded and while I understand the changes to the ruck are for safety reasons, I also think they've neutered the scrum as well. It's creeping towards league play and I'm just not a fan as a former union player.
It is rugby league in the last fifteen to twenty years, after real rucks went away and setting up defensive lines became the rule. I just watched an old tape I had from 1996, Campese's last match, and the forwards were all in on getting to the tackle and fighting for the ball. By RWC 2011 the game had changed to what it is today.
@@ldfreitas9437 I have an interesting aside about league vs union. When I started playing college rugby in the US in 93 you joined the USA Rugby Football Union. In the bylaws, that no one read, it stated that if you played league you could be banned from playing sanctioned union rugby in the US. I imagine that all changed in 95 when the professional aspects were adopted.
I started watching in the mid 70s and I think the changes in the scrum, like the changes in the ruck are all about player safety. Too many times scrums ended up with faces in the dirt or players on the back of the neck with people piling on top. It needed more structure to keep it safe as player weight and power increased.
@@tmdillon1969 It's amazing that it followed the pattern in Britain and France. Rugby League was set up in the UK as a professional alternative to Union so that players from lower income backgrounds could play and make a living, whilst Union stuck to the upper class notions of paid work being for the lower orders. In France, when the Nazis installed the Vichy Government in 1940, League was suppressed as having overly British and socialist links for the same reason. The French Rugby Union was a collaborating organisation as well!
@Jon Barnes I knew the part about league being pro first and working class as well. I heard it was centered in the north of England. I had no idea about the French situation. It's also odd that Germany sucks at rugby to me. Millions of people and a history of big, fast athletes right next to all the 6 Nations teams.
Kudos to the Gray brothers being around for over a decade.
"A Rugby scrum is the perfect visual representation of human society."
None of the players we see in the 2018 France squad still plays for France today. It was only 5years ago, Galthié reshaped completly the team
Maybe Fickou, and some others like Dupont, Couilloud, Taofifenua who were around there as substitutes. Not a lot indeed
I love scrums!
My coach told me the best scrums stays still.On your ball the key is to keep it steady,so the backs have a solid platform.Otherwise you push only when it's their put in,and when you're 5 yards out.
@shane Morrison I don't know if I agree with your coach. Yes, you want the platform to be stable, but you can achieve the stability after your scrum has put the defense on the back foot. We have a cadence that we use. We all push together or we don't push at all. When we're defensive we try to absorb then counterattack and I try to hook the ball when it's near enough.
@@R.J._Lewis thanks for your reply ,not that it matters but are you a front rower, I am have played hooker prop for 40 years,now I'm not saying your wrong but you ain't right either.Srum is an art pushing is not effective when not in unison that's why binding and flankers are important.ask any front rower who has put their head in a million scrums,rucks,mauls and tackles if I'm WRONG!!!
@shane Morrison yeah, I'm a hooker. I've propped before, but only in sevens. I don't like propping, to be perfectly honest.
The 1999 scrum looks interesting, they should bring those ones back!
Lots of hand bags there!
THANKS!
It's been a while since I'm waiting for this subjetc.
With a bit of narration, and description of the rules occuring for each dates presented, it would have be a 11/10!
In the 2000s to the mid-2010s, scrums made the game unbearable with early engaging, intentional collapsing and seemingly endless resets. For years and years, my bright idea to fix scrums was drawn from tug-o'-war where you 'take the strain' before engaging and remove 'the hit' completely which teams were obssessed with getting and intent on sabotaging scrums if they didn't get it first. So the front rows would interlock (like rugby league), keep the scrum stable (i.e. take the strain), then engage on the refs mark when the ball could be put in. So, when the latest procedure on scrums came in I was delighted. Not exactly like I envisioned, but it works well for the game.
A rule I would add is that if you win a penalty in the scrum, you can't have an option of another scrum. It's a bit rubbish for the spectacle when you see teams play for a yellow card or a penalty try. I don't think in rugby you should intentionally play for penalty tries - you should play to actually touch the ball down in the goal area for a try. Also, scrum halves need to start feeding the ball to the hooker...!
good to see the legendary kev phillips - i once saw him auction off a young lady on the top of a taxi outside the Angel Hotel
As a former Wing/Fullback, I can agree with what the commentator said, things he doesn't know about.
3:07 The French Loosehead, Pierre Dospital, is offering a jaw displacement, throwing in a chiropractic neck adjustment free of charge. That angle 📐is something else.
Is anyone besides me suggesting going back to like the *really* old days (much older than the examples here) when there was no distinction between set and loose scrums, and no tunnel requirement? They'd put the ball down as in League, but with scrum sides formed around them. Loose head? Who cared who had that, if the ball didn't have to be put in past them? So you could have as many or few as you wanted in the front row, and it hardly mattered how they bound.
Wheeling would not be unfair either if they'd just let you break off and come around to defend.
AFAICT the game could be improved if you just got rid of most of the rules.
Great video. I played in the 70's and 80' (tighthead prop). As others have said the players were smaller then but even so I knew a couple of ex props still at university with neck problems who could no longer play. I can only imagine the additional pressure now.
I was wondering a couple of months ago about the line out throw in when I started playing: I thought am I going senile but back in the day didn't wingers throw in at the line out, and there you have it in the first clip. When did hookers start throwing in?
Maybe Bobby Windsor for Wales in the early 1970s?
Anyone can throw. It just the way it has evolved. Wingers used to as they could quickly move behind the maul. Hookers due to their being small had no purpose in the line out so could afford to throw then join the mail.
In some teams it was the only time a winger touched the ball, that's why I moved to the back row at school!
Scrums used to be crazy
When I used to play, I remember it being "crouch, touch, pause, engage!"
They should bring it back not going to lie
We used to sort of lean back against the second row and then slam forward. Always a chance of a sly yosser, totally by accident of course.
The word “engage” being 2 syllables messes up the timing between the two teams as they will go against each other at different times after the referee says the word.
My uncle played rugby in the 80s/90s on the front row and told me how sometimes a scrum would collapse and you would be kissing your own ankle, Safety is much better nowadays!
Big push at the moment to speed the game up, but you forget how fast the game was played back in the amateur days.
‘Some scrums over the years’
The biggest differences are obviously: 1. Pack size; as players today are obviously much bigger than 60, even 20 years ago. 2. The Time of Setup; starting in the 2000's/2010's, the setup time taken before each scrum is probably 10-20x what it was in the pre professional era, and 3. The Contest; its prior to the 2000's it seems that as much of a mess as the scrums were, both sides are trying to win the contest, while at the same time at least trying to keep the scrum up and together so as to restart play. As we get further into the professional era, the scrum becomes less a way of restarting play than a battle for attrition, where winning a penalty is the ultimate goal, and collapsing the scrum or preventing play from restarting is seen as a worthwhile venture.
I miss the old jerseys
I remember as a fat kid when I first got chosen to be a prop by the school rugby coach back in 1987. I nearly broke my back being smashed by the much larger props from the Bushveld schools. Absolutely brutal back in those days.
I could watch this over a few pints over and over again--Nicely done. Current Rumours say scrummaging in the near future and will be phased out no longer part of modern rugby. Does anybody hear anything on this topic?
I hope that is wrong, Rugby Union without the scrums is rugby league.
@@dennism5731 Agree, but I'd argue that today's scrums are no longer in the spirit of the game. It seems the entire goal is to draw a penalty rather than to compete for the ball. It's tedious.
Here in North America, commentators refer to any chaotic gathering of players as a scrum, not knowing that a scrum is anything but. It drives me nuts!!!!
Shout out for Des Fitzgerald, playing tight head for Ireland in 91!
It seems to me over the decades the tidier and more disciplined the scrum has become, but the more crooked the put in by the scrum half.
1:50 looks to me absolutely terrifying.
I don't know why we switched from stone to kg for pack weight. No-one knows their weight in kg!
Agree. Same with someone saying they are 1.77m tall. No idea what that means!!
Except everyone under the age of 40 does. And plenty of us older than that do too. You're not the first person to extrapolate from their own experience and insist that it's universal.
Hahahaha. What's a stone? Is it a kind of rock?
Rugby Union worked as an amateur game sadly it doesn’t as a professional one. It’s telling that whereas Jason Robinson can lay claim to being one of England’s greatest ever players just a decade later a similarly skilled player, Christian Wade, was deemed too small and light to play for England despite the fact he was taller and heavier than Robinson.
The same is true of scrums no amount of rule changes will ever make them what they are meant to be and once were: a quick way of restarting the game after a minor infringement.
The players, their skill, strength, speed, weight are far far greater than they used to be. However is it more enjoyable to play and watch now? I loved playing rugby as a school boy, proud of the fact I broke my leg playing arch rivals. However glad I stopped at 18 as it means I am still able to play a team sport twice a week at 60. Even more pleased my sons don’t play: just isn’t worth the physical toll on the body let alone the risk of a serious head or neck injury.
222nd comment. let's scrum! #r_u_next #runext
sacrifice for the algorithm! o7
The real reason why the scrums are shorter in time and distance is because of TV money hidden behind safer rules. Back then the defending team could win a scrum but nowadays it is impossible and the ball is never thrwon in the middle. The truth is that now there are less scrums that have to be repeated and therefore the game is less slow but from a forward perspective scrums used to be more fun
Rubbish - you can see in 2023 clip that's not the case. The scrum-half spins the ball as it gets put in so it rolls back towards their side. Learned that at school in the '90s.
(Fewer scrums, not less). I don't think there is any evidence to support this claim. There is certainly more time spent in scrums, because of the slow build-up and the endless re-sets.
Today's kids looked at 1967 and headed for the fainting couch.
I think they've eliminated that "not in straight" rule long ago.
No, the ball is still supposed to be thrown straight. The scrum half can change his body angle, but not the angle of the throw (wut?) Law 19f. It is never enforced though, and it's pathetic.
no wayne barnes, imagine
In before boomers start saying say they watched rugby when men were real men.
That's just your own prejudice coming through...
@@douglasherron7534 ah yes, the boomer, the most oppressed of populations.
@@Spaxcore Not actually. But you are a victim - obviously.
No boosting in the line-outs, and we hookers had to hook. Different world.
Excellent video. Can I ask the question, now that we are 25 years into the professional era, do the spectators enjoy watching contested scrums? Is it time to revise the scrum? Maybe copy the rugby league scrum, which is nothing more than a quick, uncontested set play? (I know, next they will get rid of line-outs and rucks, reduce the player numbers and bring in limited number uncontested tackles. That would make for a fast-moving game, wouldn't it? Then many of the forwards would have to shed 20 kilos each to keep up.)
Just watch rugby league then. I think the scrum needs to return to what it was in the amateur days or be scrapped entirely. The scrum today is a joke and serves no purpose.
So the lesson is more tedious and likely to make me lose the will to live with every passing year.
Scrums killed rugby for me and now I find it very difficult to watch. The constant delays from setting and re-setting the scrum takes the flow from the game. The ball is rolled in to the teams feet……no chance of a hook against the head so it’s really a waste of time. I do understand the need for safety but there has to be a better way of keeping the game flowing. Also the constant amount of collapsed scrums makes me lose the will to live. Seemingly rugby is the game where the ball is in play for least amount of time.
🇨🇵
So NOT a mechnism for the game to restart at all. Just a mechanism for awarding yet another penalty. Got it.
Did they *want* to get injured in those early days?
The pause before engaging was a particularly stupid idea. You've got a full pack that are inherently off-balance being told to wait. It didn't take much for one pack or the other to engage early. I was glad when they got rid of it.
IT'S SSSSSSSOOOOO SLOOOOOOOWWWWW.
Completely sick of the conferences before every single bloody scrum. Just get your head down and get it done.
Modern coaches have successfully reduced the scrum to an absolute farce. First, by deciding that they could put props in at hooker, and use the additional beef to simply drive the opposition off the ball. When it became clear that drives didn't always get the job done, the scrum-halves were encouraged to feed the ball to their own side, because no-one was hooking. Somehow this "crooked feed", which is still outside the Law of the game, has become acceptable to referees, particularly in the first-class game. We now have this absurd spectacle of a situation where over half of the players on the pitch are involved in a crazy, farcical exhibition of open cheating, where the attacking nine stands in a clearly biased position, and then rolls the ball straight to the Number eight, because not only is no-one hooking, the ref isn't looking! It's pathetic!
Yes, yes, and yes. Scrums are pathetic. There could be ways to make them better, but that might have to mean bringing back some old laws of the game. First, no crooked feeds, and a penalty, not a free kick. Second, go back to four subs and they can be for injury or tactical. That would take care of huge mammoth sized players coming off the bench with 30 minutes left to play at prop.
@@ldfreitas9437 Good suggestions. Also introduce a maximum 5 seconds for the attacking team to get the ball back into play or a free kick goes to the defending team, make the scrum about restarting the game rather than trying to milk a penalty.
Agree with all of you. It's an absolute shambles. Without a scrum it's league, people say, but current scrums are not union either. Also the refs should be on the clock with a set time to restart a new scrum if one fails. Some are absolutely brutal with the pace they reset. You could make a cup of tea in the interval. Looking at you Raynal.
@@ldfreitas9437 I would stop tactical substitutions. Subs only for genuine injury.
@@grantmcinnes1176 Even without the scrum it still wouldn't be League but it would be much better. Either that or return to the old scrum.
The scrum today is an affront to people who pay money to watch. At least stop the clock until the ball goes in ? I still think that a good ole-tug-of war would be a better way to decide who gets the ball 🤪😜. Or maybe just replace them with centre of the field lineouts !
Can someone please tell me why these days do they just roll the ball to their own teams side, dont the rules say it must be rolled into the middle, there’s no point in scrums anymore
RL was right to place less emphasis on contested scrums. It is not particularly entertaining but potentially dangerous.
Personally can't stand scrums. The ref takes forever to get it going and it just slows the game down tremendously. Even worse when they have to keep resetting it.
The worst part is that they let the clock run during the instructions and setup. WHY! The ball isn't in play so the clock should stop until it is. Same as what happens for any other time the ball is dead.
Must be a back talking here. Bet you love watching a brylcream boy taking a minute and a half to take a drink, place the ball on his wee plastic tee, through grass into the air, scratch his clackerbag, give weird looks at the posts, and then miss the kick.
@@dennism5731 I get that reference.
@@dennism5731 this ^
If there is a problem that requires the Ref to manage the scrums a workable solution may be (to restore the 'contest'): both front rows come together and bind followed by their second rowers then flankers (no hit, or set). The mark is still to be respected so early pressure is not going to be successful and all eyes watch the the tunnel where the feed is coming from. The Game can return to straight feeds (over the mark), both hookers have to strike, pressure only after the feed. Furthermore they should become quicker, any variant of the set clock can be used, no player can be tempted to over-extend (lack of early pressure) and getting caught out by not watching the feed should become the principal reason for collapses. Precisely what we want to expose, players coasting, not thinking hard.
The Ref goes back to watching how well they have learned the laws of the game and pounces on the criminals masquerading as Rugby players. Ditto lineouts, one hand signal then the long/short arm, job's done.
These are all very good ideas.
those scrums were dangerous - also really sloppy play back then
The modern day scrum is what is killing rugby. Just get it in and out.
Old scrums got ball back in play. Modern ones bring little other than delays, wasted time and penalties
Scrum need s a rethink in the modern game. So much time wasted, stolen from the fans.
Could have been a good video -- only thing missing were explanations of what and why.
"Deterioration" rather than evolution!
1967.....when rugby players looked like normal people and anybody of any size could play the game.....
Sadly, modern scrums are desperately dysfunctional due to abject mismanagement by World Rugby (WR) As the custodians of the laws of the game, WR is an embarrassing failure. Referees take almost 10 seconds to voice the engage commands - that's way too long - it should be 3 seconds. Crouch and bind should be given together as crouch-bind. They lecture front rows far too much - and for what exactly? Look at the disdainful body language of the players being lectured - they disregard the utterings of referees who in most cases, don't have a clue about playing up front. Refs will far too often whistle for some microscopic shortcoming, then completely ignore scrum feeding so blatantly bent - the ball is rolled to the No8 through the LH's legs. A French word well describes this unacceptable farce ...'ridicule'. This is not a bash at referees, they're just following the instructions given to them by WR. WR needs to be held to account for its unacceptable failure to drastically improve scrum functionality - it's a simple thing - enforce the existing law of the game for the scrum put in to be straight. Then scrum will then be what it should be - a contest for possession, a platform to provide quick ball to attack with - not a means of hoodwinking referees to get iffy penalties
Penalised for not straight? Just imagine!
Probabaly got safer. Definitely got slower with more resets. And BS penalties.
Scrum penalties that are taken as points to the post should be 1 point only. Awarding 3 points for something “technical”, that the referee probably got wrong because he doesn’t know what is going on , is way to much considering , at the moment, they get the same points as out and out foul play.
,z
There was so much less "fannying around" in the past. Such a waste of time nowadays, and the referees clearly haven't got a clue who is infringing. Is it one prop collapsing or his oppo driving down? Is it someone standing up or the other side DRIVING up instead of straight? Is it one prop/flanker trying to wheel it or the other team backing off? And as for the crooked feed ... a hooker last weekend (i forget who) was penalised for not leaving one leg forward so he wouldn't be able to hook ... and yet the ball was fed to the No. 8!!!! Time for some reinvention. If the scrum isn't a safe way to restart the game, just use a free kick like in RL (can't believe i said that!).
So essentially then, they've always been rubbish.
Sucking all excitement and momentum out of the game so a scrum can be called, then collapse, and someone is randomly penalised for a penalty or a free kick.
What is the actual point.
Rooks and mauls. 🤷
Evolution? Or degeneration?
I'm not a big rugby fan, I watch the big internationals involving Scotland but not a great deal else.
The scrum seems like a pointless spectacle to me. Does nothing but slow the game down as far as I can tell.
Can we bring back scrums from the '60s please!.... Like everything todaywoke ism has ruined life... we now have no hurty feelings woke rugby and it will only get worse
I can remember when scrum halves got penalised for feeding at the scrum. Hookers don’t have to do a thing now. It goes in behind them. Pathetic
All fine to add rules for safety but now they’re there you should have to put it in straight. Not doing so makes it uncontested so no point in having it. What’s the point of rules for player safety for something there’s no point in doing anyway. Put it in straight and let the hooker do his job.
56 years on and union's still boring as hell.
and hopefully 2024: Removed from the game
How would you tie up the forwards though? The game would score a lot less with all 15 on the line at all times.
Watch American Football or Rugby League if you want that 🤷♂
Rugby League already exists if that's what you want....
Badminton fan?
You'd be playing rugby league with messier rucks and the lineouts