Scrums were raised as a discussion point on the squads thread. Thought I'd give it a home.

Would you keep the rules applied in 2020 as a permanent change, or change back? Or is there a different solution altogether?

Stay as they are



I just think it really modernises the game and highlights further more obvious differences to rah-rah.
It makes the game faster and more athletic.
The games have been pretty good of late and scorelines have generally been close.

I don't think we could create rules to make the scrum competitive again without resulting in never-ending penalties like in the 80s - unless someone can suggest some?

It's had its day, no need to try and resurrect it.

The latest shot-clock idea last season made it into even more of a farce, a group of 6 players (mainly backs) mingling and barely touching each other for a second or too, then on with the game and a prop at first receiver. It just looked poor and amateurish. An open goal for negative comparisons from the other code.

If we got rid of the scrum we could also rename all the scrum-based positional descriptors, to have more meaning in the context of the modern game. The coaches already use things like middles, and pivot and left/right halves.

6-again rule? not too fussed, keep it or don't. It reduces penalties but increases judgement calls by the refs which could influence the game.

The new rules take away the recent trend of 10 minute impact forwards coming on fresh just before half time which to
me increased the injury risk to tired players.

I think the game has changed too much to instantly bring contested scrums back - much as I'd like to see it as they were part of the game to me .
You had specialist forwards then and 'proper' hookers, many who were useful for little else except hooking!
There are no obvious 'openside; or 'blindside' props who stand out in the modern game for me.
So, we're left with the joke scrums we have had for the past few years or something like the 6 again rule.
Get rid of them and let the game flow, but let's not get rid of any more features of the game such as PTB, or you might as well have a circular pitch and call it Aussie Rules football -God Forbid!!!

What's happening in Australia? We will just follow suit surely?

It has to be said that, as the season has progressed, you dont notice that scrums have disappeared.
It's a shame that some opportunities for set plays have gone but, having a few more differences to our game, compared to union, is a good thing.

My argument for getting rid of scrums other than the fact that they are/were a farce is this.

If RL is ever to get from under Unions shadow the less similarities the better. With no mauls, no line outs and now no scrums then only the truly ignorant could still claim them to be the same sport. I think this differentiation is in many ways more vital than breaking out of our northern stronghold.

The more people who switch on SKY and can clearly see they are watching a different game the better.

That said properly contested scrums would do me just as well.

Like Wrencat, I have to say that I haven't missed the scrums of late so would be quite happy not to bring them back.
One thing that does need to change for me is the ref's call on whether a try has been scored or not. We all know that we got a few dodgy calls towards the back end of the season but fortunately they didn't mean too much due to relegation not being an issue, but what about next season ??
Surely it's time to stop asking the on-field ref to guess and let the video ref make the call ??

Why cant the ref and VR work together, even if this isn't audible to the TV audience.
The offside "try" that we had chalked off a couple of weeks ago was just ridiculous.

The VR is there to ensure that the right decision is reached and not to back up a ref that has got it wrong.

In honesty, Id rather get rid of the VR altogether.

Get rid of scrums. Think that brining them back would take us back in time....
Don't mind the six again, but it has to be better managed by the refs.
There were lots of occasions where it should have been given and wasn't - and vice versa.
Would also like to see a captains challenge brought in for the truly crap decisions that are made.
Agree re the VR - If the onfield can't decide, hand it to him to let him make the[u one[/u decision.......

They should stay because it allows a team to stop the clock which towards the end of a game can be vital. What we have now are teams winding down the shot clock by refusing to play the ball.
The captain’s challenge requires the game to be televised which is fine in the NRL but not for us because going forward we won’t.

I thought that would be obvious.....

Think the Video Ref and Captains Challenge should go hand-in-hand, as obviously you can't have the latter without the former, so, if the game is being televised then the Captain's Challenge would apply too ??
Regarding try-scoring, why not just do as the oonion lot do and ask the Video Ref - "Try or no try ??"

I'd like to see competitive scrums return but that's not happening. Even in the other code they aren't what they were. As others have stated its a real chance for the sport to stand out on its own.

I like 6 again but it still needs some work around consistency but then what doesn't it RL? Near impossible game to officiate

on field decision needs to be scrapped and a one minute time limit put on the video review.

If we do get rid of scrums we should also get rid of the shock clock that goes with it as clubs just resort to kicking out of play for a rest, with the ridiculous spectacle that follows of 26 players all set to resume play but having to wait for the clock to tick down.

Re. 6 again, it is a cop out for refs not wanting to give pens, with teams using it to keep pressure on when defending in opponents 20m areas - they'd rather give 6 again early in the tackle count in the hope of forcing a mistake or poor kick than a pressure-relieving penalty with the break in play, kick to touch and 6 again that follows. It's very subjective and leads to all sorts of calls against the refs being impartial or not...we've all seen instances where it's been inconsistently applied, which ends up being another stick to beat the ref with

I would keep them, it gives us a different scenario in the game, taking the forwards out of the play although we do not often see scrum plays anymore in our game. There will be a stop clock of 30 seconds to restart the game anyway, I would rather see players forming a scrum than just standing at the side of the play the ball with there hands on there hips.

I cant see the NRL taking scrums out of the play, teams create some fantastic plays off scrums, and it would be a massive shame for them to lose that.

No scrums mind as well play touch and pass Aussies have em dosent slow it down at all do like the captain's challenged

No scrums mind as well play touch and pass Aussies have em dosent slow it down at all do like the captain's challenged

We’ve all grown up watching contested scrums at some time and the fisty cuffs that followed, which I must say I enjoyed in a sadist way

but having watched the present day game with the restart rule introduced and no scrums it has grown on me, maybe if the scrums were contested then maybe but the speed of game today the athletic players of today need to get into attack and defence as soon as possible and don’t want to hang around in a huddle . So I’m happy to carry on as we are.

It was but you still thought it necessary to raise the issue as an option you would like to see in SL.

What are you on about?

If we can't bring back the old "contested" scrum why don't we adopt a "miniature" scrum and enforce proper heeled ptbs (as they should be), and allow the player marking to strike for the ball as they used to be allowed to do. This would do away with the time wasting time of the full scrum yet allow a little bit of skilful competition. If not I reluctantly would have to do away with the scrum altogether.
The only reason the contested scrum became obsolete was because referees were not strict enough with offending players, hence all the penalties

What I find strange is that teams must be able to actually contest at the scrum, just no one does it that often, you see the opposition team pushing and winning the ball back on the odd occasion.

Tell you what. If those on here are just interested in speeding the game up more and more why don't we do away with ten players and just have a left wing and a right wing with a "scrum half" in the middle. No scrums, no knock ons, no tackles (they slow the game down), no tactical kicks for touch. That should really bring the crowds in.

They tried something similar years ago, reduced the number of players on the pitch from 30 to 26, how did that work out. I’m sure the 30 players game is bigger than our game, both domestically and globally.

Personally I want to keep scrums.
It is a traditional part of the game. It gives the players a break on an already fast game.
Still keep the shot clock and I'd add that if you want to stop the clock by forming the scrum, the platers in the scrum when clock is stopped must stay in when play starts