Scrum Engagement Management - BLOODY HELL!

[rugbyisfun]

The new guidelines and management of the scrum engagement are driving me to the drink. I finished a bottle of rum by half time last night! What the bloody hell is going on!?!? The ONLY way to run scrums is to call crouch, touch, pause, engage, one after the other, with no pause or deliberate delay and keep it the same EVERY SCRUM. The old toffs who sip guinness in the IRB offices in Ireland and kidding themselves if they think the front can hold all that weight back and be in control for the lengths they are currently being required to.

 

[WB3]

A rhythmic/metronomic engagement sequence means there is no excuse for early engagement/anticipation. Why do referees exaggerate the "pause" instead? It makes engagement a lottery as much as a skill.

Also, if the word "engage" were replaced with a single syllable word (like "hit") there would be even less timing discrepancies - the only referees I have ever had who called a scrum rhythmically always "anticipated" the 4th beat with the first syllable of the word, probably because the natural emphasis is enGAGE.

Pedantic from me? Perhaps, but in the most clumsy part of the game, we want as much clarity as possible.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

This inconsistency has been ranted about before. Can't find the thread reference.

It must really confuse the bejesus out of the fatties.

Paddy O'B and the Bunch of old Farts need to do something about this urgently.

It is ruining the scrum contest.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Need to get an old Sergeant Major Drill Instructor to teach 'em how to do it.

They manage to coordinate instantaneous simultaneous movements from 100's of soldiers on a Parade Ground.

They draw out a "Precautionary" command, and have a short sharp "Executive" command, which is delivered with precise and consistent timing following the end of the drawn out Precautionary.

The command Stand at Ease becomes "Staaaaaaaaaaand aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat" [short sharp pause] "Ease"

Fairly simple really. Consistency in timings at drill practice and on the Parade Ground. Should be the same with calling scrums.

 

[Groucho]

I've heard that NH referees have been instructed to deliberately vary the time delay before engage.

 

[Latts1992]

As a referee and a player in the forwards myself, I genuinely cannot stand referees mucking up the call. It really isnt that hard. First thing Alain Rolland did wrong last night was talk to the players after calling crouch. You never, ever say anything more than the scrum call. The players dont listen for the actual words - they listen for the 4th word to engage. Secondly. The pause is both far too long, and too variable. Speed it up - you only need half a second so that the platform is set and its clear that there is a safe engagement gap (which is made at the touch call). The other issue there seemed to be was that Rolland penalised if the engagement didnt come until after he said engage. The directive, at least at the start of the year, was the allow engagement on the 'e' of engage. It cant be that much of an issue.

Another point - if both scums go a little early and the platform is set, just play on.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

No problems with variations in the length of time taken to call the word "Pause" and how they draw that out. That can vary between officials.

The issue is that the "engage" should be delivered with a consistent gap from the end of "Pause".

 

[en_force_er]

I think the call should two simple instructions.

• 1st instruction is "Prepare". That means the guys crouch and touch as they see fit. If one team dawdles you award a penalty against them.
• 2nd is "Hit". WB3 said this and I like the idea of a one syllable command.

Other changes:

• Less penalising of inconsequential early engagements. If one team hits slightly early you let the scrum settle and if it looks like nobody really got a distinct advantage from it you let it go. Most times early engagements tend to be a slip as much as anything else and when the dust settles it's not worth penalising. Obviously, if it's intentional you should penalise as you see fit.
• There is much more advantage to be gained through pushing before the feed rather then engaging early and teams are doing this. It needs to be specifically watched for.
• Watch the feed and how straight it is like a hawk, this will bring back the tighthead.
• Bring in the closest touchy to ref the non-feeding side of the scrum. This will stop the shenanigans that always go on on the "hidden" side.

What do you guys think?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

How about we get rid of the hit?

Make the game safer. Bind the front rows together. Bring the 2nds, and then #8 in on the Refs call. Police the straight in feed on the scrum centre line like a hawk.

Make the scrum a contest of strength in the push on a stable platform.

Less collapses and time consuming resets.

Give the Hookers a fair contest for the ball. Bring back the tighthead.

 

[qwerty51]

I think some serious changes need to be made to the scrum. A few league mates of mine actually appreciated the last couple of games of rugby, they all said how the scrum was a major turn-off. I don't want it going anywhere near the direction of a league one just something needs to be done to stop the countless resets and time wasted - that includes refs guessing who broke a rule

 

[Lee Grant]

I was going to put this on the game thread but it is probably more apt to put it here.

The scrum was a bit of a shambles for Oz

Roland's pausing of the scrum countdown has been criticised but a lot of NH refs are having the same problem including Rolland himself earlier in the month in the Connacht v Ulster game.

I have a theory that the long pause is supposed to emulate swimming. Swimmers have to stay still on the blocks else they are disqualified; so let's have a long pause so the packs can't guess at when the engage call comes – and if some of the engage calls come early and some late during the game, all the better to stop the guessing.

But I digress - you couldn't fault Rolland for the calls against Oz for early engages in the 1st half. It was the same for both teams and we were worse. You couldn't fault his escalating our infractions to penalty events either; nor his warning before the first scrum of the 2nd half when he threatened Oz with a card.

What happened? Both sides went early in the first 7 (?) scrums after oranges and then NZ went early alone. Oz took a bigger gamble than NZ because they risked the card, and the Kiwis should have been smart and let us be premature so they could play against 14 men. It's no wonder that packs go early when they get away with it as the Wallabies did when they threw the dice.

I could be like the Ancient Mariner once again and with a glittering eye bemoan the modern power hit and the resulting practice of not wanting to lose it, which leads to referees guessing and scrums collapsing when the forces are not met symmetrically. But let's not go there for the 20th time and discuss the solutions.

Things were better when young Franks went off and Afoa came on but Oz will have to lift their scrum performance. The Welsh will get into the referee's ear before the game and one couldn't blame them.

 

[topo]

Agree with Lee. I watched the game with a prop currrently playing the game at a high level. I was carrying on about the refs call and his comment was "You just have to adjust to that, it's the same for both sides". He was more concerned about Alexander's height and his inability to bend his knees more so that his opposite didn't get under him and Fatcat's habit of "throwing his hips" at the engage which frequently made him unstable soon after. I think both our props have a lot of work to do to get back to their best. Neither have had a lot of footy recently and props seem to do best when they are packing lots of scrums in games. Hopefully they will stay fit and get better as the tour goes on.

And Franks is frighteningly good.

 

[Bowside]

Should be: Crouch, Touch, Pause, then "Hit" or "Pack".

 

[en_force_er]

Should be: Crouch, Touch, Pause, then "Hit" or "Pack".

Do you really need to say pause, couldn't you just actually pause?

 

[WB3]

Do you really need to say pause, couldn't you just actually pause?

Going back to my idea of rhythmic calling, it makes sense to say pause as the time of the pause is defined and deliberate, but to draw it out indefinitely or just leave a silence doesn't make a lot of sense.

Anyway, short of getting rid of the power hit (never going to happen - a lot of the game is marketed around the power hit and when done correctly it is an awesome contest), I maintain that having a clear, rhythmic cadence to the call (crouch, touch, pause, HIT) makes the most sense to get rid of a lot of the early engagement problems.

 

[naza]

Do you really need to say pause, couldn't you just actually pause?

They don't fucking need to say anything, the whole excercise is bullshit. Nobody tells the hooker to throw into the lineout and the lock when to jump. It just fucking happens. And the scrum would be 10 times better off without wankers with whistles.

 

[Lee Grant]

He was more concerned about Alexander's height and his inability to bend his knees more so that his opposite didn't get under him and Fatcat's habit of "throwing his hips" at the engage which frequently made him unstable soon after.

Yeah they need more work and if Alexander doesn't bend his knees he will tend to hinge down from the waist. This often happens also if they engage too far apart.

I don't think that Fat Car scrummaged too well (by his standards) in the S14 this year, to be honest. If he doesn't get the hit he tends to slip his hips out so the pressure is skewed inwards. This happens also when the LHP can't take the pressure if they don't go down or stand up. It makes his hooker a target for the THP in doing so and corrupts the whole scrum.

Demordy of London Irish did this a few times in a recent game and he was rightly hammered. Cat was a bit lucky.

Noriega will be busy this week.

 

[Bowside]

Do you really need to say pause, couldn't you just actually pause?

I thought long and hard about this before posting.

I think if you dont say pause you get a situation where they bind on touch and just hope the ref calls 'hit' quickly. Now that begs the question whether or not you need to say touch in the first place, but the way the scrum is being reffed at the moment I can not see them getting rid of the touch call. Therefore if your looking for a quick easy ammendment to the rules I would go for a short sharp word to replace engage.

 

[Brumby Jack]

Along with Groucho I've also heard the NH refs have been instructed to slow it down and there's a consideration to change to a numbers sequence instead of the current sequence

 

[#1 Tah]

It doesnt make sense that the use a 2 syllable word for the hit. I rekkon touch, pause, SCRUM would be better. The reffing was quite the shithouse and the bens will only get better with more game time.