I know we are all aware of the ommision of scrums as per the NRL, in the NRL games there are still some scrums, but in the super league there will be NONE !
That in mind the, it's simply a hand over or tap, the game is going to be very fast with little stoppages other than injuries or doctors topping the game ?
Therefore the games will be full on & very little chance of players catching their breath ! If a player tries to rest they will be a weakness, in particular forwards & props after 20 mins !

Quote ="TrinTrin"I know we are all aware of the ommision of scrums as per the NRL, in the NRL games there are still some scrums, but in the super league there will be NONE ! That in mind the, it's simply a hand over or tap, the game is going to be very fast with little stoppages other than injuries or doctors topping the game ? Therefore the games will be full on & very little chance of players catching their breath ! If a player tries to rest they will be a weakness, in particular forwards & props after 20 mins !'" Apparently there will be a brief break with the shot clock on..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/53607897

Quote ="TrinTrin"I know we are all aware of the ommision of scrums as per the NRL, in the NRL games there are still some scrums, but in the super league there will be NONE ! That in mind the, it's simply a hand over or tap, the game is going to be very fast with little stoppages other than injuries or doctors topping the game ? Therefore the games will be full on & very little chance of players catching their breath ! If a player tries to rest they will be a weakness, in particular forwards & props after 20 mins !'" Apparently there will be a brief break with the shot clock on..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/53607897

There have been no scrums for 20 years, they are a farce, getting rid permanently would be a good thing. Don’t get me wrong I like scrums but if you not going to take them even remotely serious then why bother.

Disagree, vasty. If anything I would love to see competitive scrums return to the game. They were an integral part of the game with their own particular skill requirements and hooker was a specialist role. It was only that referees couldn't police the scrums correctly and started to allow "own feet feeding" to creep into the game. Ok, they did tend to slow the game slightly, but a well fought scrum used to be an essential part of the game.

Then you agree with me! That’s my point, scrums are great but only if they are done properly.. what we have now is worse than no scrums at all, hence why I think we might as well get rid. Would be a shame but as the saying goes, if it’s not worth doing properly then it’s not worth doing alt all, that’s how I see it.

On a wider note it all part of the cheapening of RL to suit TV. Sometimes RL can appear to be more like wrestling from the seventies than a real sport. It’s wrong but to a wider audience that’s how it looks. Silly club names, gimmicky rubbish like the shot clock and pointless ego trips like Toronto. Say what you like about RU they have avoided the worst excesses and to a RU fan the fundamentals have stayed the same. Seems to work for them.

You only have to see who packs down in a scrum - wingers, full backs etc to see they are a total joke.
They are nothing more than a tactical set piece and should be done properly or scrapped.

Certainly we agree with the attributes of the old scrum and how important it was to the game, but we disagree in the point that whereas you would wish to see it done away with I would like to see the competitive scrum reinstated and properly controlled by the referee. I certainly agree with all the other points that you mention. You certainly see instances today when a player that should be packing down ( as 1315 says, probably a winger), but instead he just hangs around the scrum looking as though he's part of it.

My memory of contested scrums is one of constant scrum re-sets, collapses and penalties, and that they were messy, scruffy affairs. Perhaps the lack of flankers makes them more susceptible to being messy, because the flanker locks them all together somehow, but I'm not sure I want to see any return to blokes ending up in a heap all the way through the game.

So, if they're not going to be contested, I don't have a huge problem with them going. Because of the speed of the play now, they break up so quickly they are largely irrelevant.

The question to ask is this: does a rugby league scrum add anything to the game? I would say no, other than making it look more like rugby.

the scrumaging over the game does take it's toll and squads with bigger packs generally does deplete the oppositions strength added to a good hooker that can scoop out the ball so yes I would say it did play a role in the game, it doesn't now as they can't even be bothered to even resemble anything like it now and to a newbie would look on and wonder what the hell is going on

Lets ve honest even in RU if you put the ball in you get it out.

This is the ideal opportunity to decide the future of the RL scrum.

We can see what the game looks like without them and possibly re-invent them if/when they are re-introduced to meet the needs of the modern game.

They RFL/SL/NRL need to decide what they want the scrum to achieve.

It used to be a contest for the ball, but those days are long gone. Through the 80s it slowly deteriorated into farce (as some have pointed out) with resets and penalties. They even downgraded the penalty to a differential penalty, so that the punishment wasn't too harsh (no kicks at goal). Hardly ever did you have a clean scrum. The modern SL version is a complete waste of time and looks even worse aesthetically. It gives RU fans something to bash us with (although their scrums may well be starting the same decline).

The first question to ask is do we want it back?

Secondly, if we do, what function do we want the scrum to have?

Unfortunately, I can't ever see it being a contest for possession in the old-fashioned sense. The cleaned-up / sped-up modern game would not tolerate it.

It is suggested that it gives variety to restarting the game after an error and takes the forwards out of the game for one play, giving the backs even more room to make a break. As has also been pointed out, even this has been removed as coaches increasingly want forwards as first receiver from a scrum, meaning the defending side also has to match up. This also means there is a focus on breaking away from the scrum as soon as possible, making the scrums a pointless facade.

One idea I had was to not allow any of the starting 7 backs to join the scrum at any time, but this may be difficult to police and wouldn't probably change the nature of the modern scrum for the players to break away as soon as the ball is released by the scrum-half (who sometimes just passes it to the 'loose-forward' (more often the hooker packing down there))

Otherwise, you could change the rules to try and make sure the scrum is packed down well and the trend of using backs is reversed.

Some ideas for discussion:
[list[*The offending team would not be allowed to strike for the ball, but they would be allowed to push in the scrum once the ball is put in. This could be indicated by the referee. [/*:m
[*No-one is allowed to break from the scrum until the ball leaves the scrum by being picked up by the scrum-half or loose-forward (again, perhaps indicated by the referee). [/*:m
[*The ball can be kept in the scrum to add uncertainty. [/*:m
[*On put-in, the ball has to enter the tunnel and touch the ground within the scrum before it reaches the second-row. This leaves the situation where the attacking 'hooker' can put his feet forward in the scrum and the scrum-half can land the ball behind his feet. Obviously, this would have been 'feeding' in the old rules, but it serves to swing the balance of possession to the non-offending side.[/*:m[/list:u

The potential for pushing should ensure both sides use their forwards in the pack and bind properly. The uncertainty of timing of the ball release should prevent early break-up of the scrum.

Isn't that the problem with it though, policing all of that. It'll just lead to delays and messing around, when really it is just a mechanism to restart the game.

Also, the greater concern about player safety might make them not compatible with the modern game. Scrums, in reality, went as soon as they stopped enforcing the feeding rule. That is the crux of the problem. Enforce the feeding rule and it becomes a contest again. But a messy, time-wasting contest.

Well put, you have only to watch the debacle at the scrums in union and the countless times they have to pack down again usually resulting in a penalty anyway, if your having uncontested scrums then what's the point, as against wasting time with the contested scrums with all the infringements that go with it.

Unsure on this one, if it’s contested then yes but can’t see any point if it’s just to put the ball in and stand up again. When I started watching and was hopefully understanding the game down at BV early to mid 70s I couldn’t wait for a scrum because 9 times out of 10 there was the left and rights to follow, best part of the game

I suppose you could liken the whole scrum issue to that of "playing the ball". I recently watched an old London Broncos v Canberra from 1997 and the referee, Connolly, actually penalised the players for not using the heel whilst playing the ball, yet in yesterday's Catalan/Saints game you hardly saw the heel make contact with the ball, particularly from Cats, yet the referee, Ben Thaler, let it go throughout the game. I suppose not quite the same as the scrum issue, but you either have, and enforce, the rule or not.

Yes after waiting half hour.

Yep...was watching the Sydney Roosters game the other night and Ryan Hall actually fed one of the scrums

Probably to keep him out of the way cos he’s been terrible for them.

Yep...have to agree BLM, and with Toronto now off-loading players, then who knows where he will end up next season....Hunslet ??




To me he is in the same boat as Kallum Watkins and should have hung his boots up 2 years ago !!

Haha not so sure that was the case for Hall 2 years ago.
But saying that if you were given a hefty pay cheque each week for simply putting the ball into a scrum would you have turned it down!!?

Soz, vasty! Misunderstood you. Based on what you have just explained I can only agree with you 100%. I always used to watch the contested scrums with interest and anticipation because in the days of specialist hookers there was nothing better than seeing a heel against the feeding scrum half.and hooker, and the ball whipped out to the (usually) scrum half.
I used to think it would be better if the referee fed the scrum to eliminate the biased feed, but I suspect there would have been calls of "Cheat" or similar from the crowd.

Back in the day a good hooker was only as good as his good blind side prop.

Haha...this got me thinking about the old terms used, 'blind side prop' 'field side, or open side prop', ''ball playing forward'.
One specialist open side prop I remember, I think Peter Fox brought him in ,was Les Tonks. Les must have been 17-18 stone and today would probably have struggled to be a water carrier, but in the scrum he excelled. How the game has changed!
I'd have contested scrums back tomorrow - to see forwards with some skills, instead of being the battering rams they are now.

A classic example was flash Flanagan at KR, his no 10 was Frank Fox Frank who a lot would say, exactly but he was in that team for a good reason and it wasn't his ball playing skills either, flash always praised him for helping his career.