• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Scrum Talk

Status
Not open for further replies.
fatprop

fatprop

George Gregan (70)
Staff member
JJJ said:
Having 2 genuinely good front rows would make a hell of a lot of difference at scrum training. I would think that in previous years there'd only be so much pressure they could put on in opposed training before the weakest link folded.
Click to expand...


apparently the two front rows do mostly live scrum work as well, much less leaning against machines

it all adds up
 
Hugh Jarse

Hugh Jarse

Rocky Elsom (76)
Staff member
How many blokes are you allowed in the Front Row of a scrum?

I must have missed the passing of the Law Variation for the RWC2015 that allows for "any number you like if you are playing against Australia".
CRtduusWwAEduDo.jpg



CRsSCsWW0AAVYiA.jpg


Not to mention the other Variation allowing other than props to bind on opposition players.
CRuRMQQVAAEjW2E.jpg


Memo to self: Do more research and try to keep up to date with all the latest amendments, like the one that says an admission of Guilt does not mean you remain Guilty if you appeal just the length of a sentence.
 
Brumby Runner

Brumby Runner

David Wilson (68)
D-Box

D-Box

Ron Walden (29)
For those interested in the research that led to the scrum laws changing it has just been published here http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/resolve/doi?DOI=10.1111/sms.12592#.VlcKMjnFVvF.twitter

The abstract is as follows:

We investigated the effect of a “PreBind” engagement protocol on the biomechanics of contested Rugby Union scrummaging at different playing levels. “PreBind” requires front-row props to take a bind on opposing players prior to the engagement, and to maintain the bind throughout the scrum duration. Twenty-seven teams from five different playing levels performed live scrums under realistic conditions. Video analysis, pressures sensors, and inertial measurement units measured biomechanical outcomes as teams scrummaged following different engagement protocols: the CTPE (referee calls “crouch-touch-pause-engage”), the CTS (“crouch-touch-set”), and the PreBind(“crouch-bind-set”) variants. PreBind reduced the set-up distance between the packs (−27%) and the speed at which they came into contact by more than 20%. The peak biomechanical stresses acting on front rows during the engagement phase were decreased in PreBind by 14–25% with respect to CTPE and CTS, without reducing the capability to generate force in the subsequent sustained push. No relevant main effects were recorded for playing level due to within-group variability and there were no interaction effects between playing level and engagement protocol. Pre-binding reduced many mechanical quantities that have been indicated as possible factors for chronic and acute injury, and may lead to safer engagement conditions without affecting subsequent performance.
Click to expand...

I had the chance to chat (and go out drinking) with these guys earlier this year and the set up they put together was pretty impressive. They basically had pressure sensors similar to those you walk over at Athlete's Foot over the shoulders of the front rows in live scrummaging, along with cameras above and below. This was done with amateur club boys up to at least one international pack. If people are interested I can get more details of the paper and set up and put them up over the next couple of days.
 
zer0

zer0

Jim Lenehan (48)
Four of the authors (Preatoni, Cazzola, Trewartha and Stokes) are on ResearchGate, which means there's a decent chance to get free articles. Though I can't see this one there (yet).

EDIT: To carry on the theme of rugby studying academics, Ken Quarrie, the NZRU science guy, is also there, and has a few open access papers.
 
D-Box

D-Box

Ron Walden (29)
J

Jamie8

Herbert Moran (7)
Good tight 5 session at Ballymore this morning for various coaches around Brisbane.

Sponsored by ARU as part of a national program but run by Reds. Nick Stiles led the session - mixture of discussion and on-field session was good.

ARU rep made it clear they want to see a real emphasis placed on set piece work, particularly with younger guys so that they are more 'battle' ready when they leave school.
 
blindsider

blindsider

Billy Sheehan (19)
Jamie8 said:
Good tight 5 session at Ballymore this morning for various coaches around Brisbane.

Sponsored by ARU as part of a national program but run by Reds. Nick Stiles led the session - mixture of discussion and on-field session was good.

ARU rep made it clear they want to see a real emphasis placed on set piece work, particularly with younger guys so that they are more 'battle' ready when they leave school.
Click to expand...

Yeh it's good! I'm part of that with the NSW/Sydney section. I learnt a heap and it's a program with so many good initiatives.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Gagger

Gagger

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
Staff member
fatprop said:
Yeah nah, Robinson's scrummaging has been a good as any, (just not as good as it was when there was the hit)

2ladmvt.gif

but his work rate hasn't been enough around his scrummaging work

Alexander probably should have stayed at LH, he had the ability to hold his own there and had an immense work rate. Since moving the TH, his work rate isn't there and he doesn't scrum well enough for test match rugby
Click to expand...


Where'd you find that gif? Looking everywhere for a bigger version
 
T

TOCC

Guest
Ironically Robinson should have been penalised for that scrum, placing his hand down on the ground and then pushing off.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
JJJ

JJJ

Vay Wilson (31)
I think every scrum I ever saw Robinson really dominate featured the same hand on the ground. I guess back then refs were just delighted that the scrum actually stayed up, regardless of how.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top