Just to whip up a bit of discussion.

As a supporter from the dark days, I appreciate what SL has done for our sport but watching the England /Wales match on TV the other day brought home to me just what a joke our scrums are.

I really don't want to go back to the tiresome scrum collapses which resulted in the scrums being set and re-set several times but surely a compromise can be found where there is some competition and interest generated from a scrum.

At the moment you may as well stand the players forming a 'scrum' in a circle, give the ball to the feeding scrum half and tell all no to move until the scrum half has passed the ball.

I for one miss the genuine ball handling prop forwards, and skilful ball winning hookers.

I think it could be introduced to add a bit of flavour without going back to the old bad habits.

Scrums are a bit embarassing thesedays, but I think the safety issues will override any arguments about making them a spectacle - they're now just a way to restart the game with some players taken out of the mix, and I don't think there's any will to change that.

What they could change however is the nannying behaviour of ref's when it comes to forming and feeding the scrum - I don't understand why they issue such detailed instructions and then allow the scrum to be reset if it's not done properly or they don't like the feed. Surely the offending team should be penalised?

It does seem to be the modern way though - the young Kiwi ref in the 4N game this weekend was practically micro-managing every player's position in terms of on-side and clearing the ruck etc. Aside from that stuff being the players responsibility, it's bloody annoying hearing the ref barking out "MOOOOOVE" and "JAMES - BACK!!" all the way through the game.

We will never go back to the days of contested scrums but the one thing I would definitely like to see is that the players with shirts 8 to 13 have to be the one's who form the scrum.

I get fed up seeing delays because teams only have 5 in the scrum and then a centre suddenly appears in the back row. Ganson is the only ref who penalises teams for delaying the game like this.

Its definitely strange to still have in the game a 'charade', a hangover from a different era. It also gives the league-bashers a thing to have a giggle at (albeit minor) - and not entirely without justification. Union scrums are quite ridiculous for a whole other set of reasons, but at least they are contested, however stupid that 'contest' is.

Either do away with our scrums altogether or come up with a new type of restart. Who's got the best idea? Personally, I don't think it should be a contest for the ball (the side that lost the ball shouldn't have a chance of getting possesion back ), but I'm all for something which rearranges the usual position of people on the pitch for the restart.

A line-out, or a bare-knuckle boxing match contested by a volunteer from each team.

Guess how many burgers Hickey can consume in a minute!!!

On holiday at the moment surrounded by southern union players and all they talk about is our scrums. Top and bottom of it is we changed it for speed, our props are in comparison tiny to union props (most cases). We have developed our forwards to be agile. I do miss proper scrums though a it adds to the challenge in the pack as nobody wants to be the weaker player

I like uncontested scrums, they are a good alternative to holding down in the tackle when your team is getting tired. When Wakey are 2 points up against Wigan with 2 minutes to play and the Pies have been pounding our line for 15 minutes solid I want Isaac to find the line.

Scrums are a particular issue for me, on many levels, having played 1,2 and 3 at RU and 8,9 and 10 at league.
It is a case of the Good Old Days and forgetting the mess they were before. It is a summer game now and we want to see people running with the ball, not stuck in a scrum with reforming and penalties for all types of issues.

The decision to move to ‘non-contested’ for me was a good idea, I just think we’ve forgotten the reason why. Making it a Rugby Union scrum again will undo that good work.

1) When a scrum forms (by either side) after a kick the clock is stopped. That’s a good idea. It stops time wasting and ensures that the spectators get to see rugby rather than some blokes stood around on a field – The down side is that we now have anyone rushing in to form the scrum and then we all wait for the real pack to walk over.
Answer: for me is the rule stands but whoever forms the scrum has to stay in. If the clock is stopped and someone swaps places it’s a penalty.

2) The non-contested scrum is designed to restart play but tie all the forwards in to the scrum until play starts. This should encourage quick play of the ball. In actual fact the back row and even the props are already letting go before the ball is in meaning we are now encouraging a back row to play stand off and charge the ball back in again. We might as well just make it a differential penalty where you can’t kick at goal instead of a scrum
Answer: Make the players stay in the scrum. Ref can call the ball out if he wishes but if you let go of the ‘bind’ before the ball is out it should be a penalty. You can play advantage if you like by the ref calling a player off side and telling him not to make the tackle like when we kick downfield.

3) Relevant to both points is the question of whether you can push.
I’m torn on this. Generally, players should be allowed to push when the ball is put in the scrum. It’s what scrums are about. The defence have to choose whether to push or get out to defend. If this encourages big forwards like RU they will soon get found out when the ball is in play. You can make a rule to either time limit the scrum or distance moved or must play the ball if the push is stopped like in RU.

The only problem I see with this is the safety side. You will get more injuries and you will start to get specialist tactics from the like of McGuire and I’d rather not go down that line.
So I think I’d leave it as it is.

Lastly, lets not start poking fun at the RU scrum. Unless you’ve been in one it is an unknown black art (I’m only including front 5 there). I’ve been lifted off my feet and made a guy squeal in pain. (I learned from the guy who lifted me!) I’ve been buried under a collapsed one and been more tired getting out of one than any other act on a rugby field of either code.
I’m glad we don’t have rugby union rules in league, that’s what makes it great to watch, but a rugby union scrum is tough no doubt about it. Try it if you doubt it.

Would like to see the two teams bound together until tackle complete thus making a bit more room for attack.

some interesting points -I like the idea of a bit of pushing, what's wrong with winning a ball against head and feed? last time I saw it though the non feeding side were penalised!
I played a few games of union many years ago mainly as inside centre but was once pushed into propping for one game - bad idea for me!-if you're not of that build (and a centre isn't) it's a position for a trip to A and E!

If you have contested scrums, you get back to pushing, and so you get back to teams competing in it, and so you get the refs having to marshall them, and so you get repeat attempt to form one properly, because teams will always try and sneak an advantage. There is no magic formula where you get clean and quick contested scrums with no referee interference. It's either one big mess or no mess at all. There isn't any "little mess" to be found in contested scrums, and you can't have "just a bit" of pushing.

I would like to see, however, the rule amended so that those who bind to stop the clock are the ones who have to stay in it.

Quality rule change (if it is a rule change).

A very simple rule change that I'd agree with; the situation that currently exists whereby whomever is nearest binds to stop the clock then they all change round, is clearly an unintended consequence of the previous rule change - it could and probably should be easily fixed.

agree.

Leave the scrummaging and "set pieces" to the other code. In some cases in the recent world cup it was taking more than 5 mins for 1 scrum which usually resulted in a penalty to one of the teams for some technical issue which could have really been awarded to either team, which then resulted in someone trying to kick a penalty. It made the games even more dull and boring.

Its a simple way of restarting the game and opening up the field after an error in our game. That is all. Make the props bind onto each other rather than just resting on each other maybe, as some times they are away quicker than the ball and yes, if you form the scrum you stay in it. But other than that, lets keep our game running at the pace we have become accustomed.

I've always thought that then some other poster with more nous than I can't remember who came up with a very good reason why it might be best to leave it as it is. I can't remember what that reason was, like