FORUMS > The Virtual Terrace > Trapping the Ball in the Scrum |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4232 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Fat Boy "Feeding the ball directly between a prop's feet or into the second row at a scrum is against the rules and, by definition, cheating. Every team does it but it is NEVER penalised.
So is cheating only cheating when it is penalised?
What are your thoughts?'"
The rules weren't changed, but "Feeding" as an offence was done away with a long time, by virtue of guidance given on "interpretation" of the scrum rules, hence it is no longer penalised.
No such guidance on binding at a scrum has been given.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 11658 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Sep 2007 | 17 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2018 | Aug 2018 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: dboy "The rules weren't changed, but "Feeding" as an offence was done away with a long time, by virtue of guidance given on "interpretation" of the scrum rules, hence it is no longer penalised.
No such guidance on binding at a scrum has been given.'"
Guidance or none, feeding the scrum is braking the rules, i.e. cheating, you can't move the goal posts to suit your agenda.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 8148 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| The change in the rules was making it that the loose forward could not trap the ball.
Holding the ball in the scrum was in the rules prior 1895 AKAIK.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 4232 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Fat Boy "Guidance or none, feeding the scrum is braking the rules, i.e. cheating, you can't move the goal posts to suit your agenda.'"
I haven't. I agree with you.
The interpretations are in place as a result of the coaches advisory meetings! It's the clubs that drive these things.
Fed up of seeing players place the ball on the ground, then use it to lever themselves from the floor. It's a penalty, but when do you ever see it given?
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 2681 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2011 | 14 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jul 2017 | Jul 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Bit of a cheap penalty I think. Although if it stops the HB from being offside in EVERY scrum then I am for teams doing this.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 21032 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| I must be really old.
Pushing at the scrum or delaying the ball coming out are not new things. They've been around forever. It's just that the rule changes/adjustments around the scrum meant it was better to take advantage of the quick ball from the scrum. If the ball can be put "behind the props leg" then the ball is in and out in a flash. No point pushing as those players need to be defending.
Teams tend to follow each other in style and it looks like it is just the done thing.
They are not taking advantage of the rule, they are taking advantage of the other team following such a regimented plan that they are not playing what is happening on the field, they are just doing what they were told in training blindly.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 1169 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jun 2017 | Dec 2015 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: frankbooth64 "If the opposition can be kept 'honest' (i.e. bound-in in the forwards and onside in the backs), we may see more expansive play from the scrum. It would give the scrum a 'modern purpose'. (I'm not one of those who wishes to return to the mess we used to have with so-called 'competitive' scrums and which rugby union are now finding a royal pain in the backside).'"
I think there's little chance of us going down the union road, because the focus and importance of the scrum are so different. In RL there is always going to be the emphasis on breaking as quickly as possible , whereas in RU there is a huge focus on the initial 'hit' and drive as a way of one pack or the other asserting dominance over the other. In RL we tend to assert dominance in open play with the big hits.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1923 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2019 | Jan 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Nothus "What are people's thoughts on this tactic?
The last couple of times I've seen Wigan play, they have won at least two penalties during the match by deliberately trapping the ball when feeding a scrum in their own 20 yard area. The opposition break early and Wigan get the differential penalty.
Last night in particular, this tactic helped them salvage something from the game, as it was exactly this type of penalty that put them in the position to score the try at the death.
So what do people think? Are Wigan being clever here? Should we blame the opposition for a lack of concentration? Or is there a slight hint of a lack of sportsmanship about doing something like this?'"
Doesn't it just expose the fact that players aren't waiting for the ball to come out before breaking/advancing?
Quote: Nothus "All Wigan have done is take advantage of the opposition trying to cheat, by not binding properly and breaking early to form a defensive pattern.'"
Exactly this. If it was the other way round there'd probably be a thread bemoaning Wigan breaking early at the scrum.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 6297 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2007 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| The other side to this is that the defending team will now break less quickly, giving the attacking team more chance of scoring from a scrum where the ball isn't trapped. It returns scrums to the reason they were retained, to provide another attacking option, and gives the greater advantage to the team that hasn't offended to create the scrum.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 5846 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2006 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2024 | Jul 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Have Wigan broken 'The spirit of the scrum'?
|
|
|
|
|
|