Planet Rugby Forum

Ireland get thrashed and ship 4 tries, whilst scoring none.
Yet about half of the posts on the thread are by Irish supporters bemoaning their scrummaging.

Yes the scrum is important, but so are passing, catching, kicking, tackling, lineouts, rucks, mauls, positional play and dare I say the words scoring tries!

The whole of the northern posting fraternity get themselves into a homo-erotic prison rape fantasy laden frenzy over scrums. If the attitude of the supporters is any indication of the way the coaches and players think, then the 3-1 try count for NZ over England and 4-0 for Aus over Ireland should surprise no one.

Worse than this though is that this obsession seems to dominate northern hemisphere refereeing to the extent that almost every single scrum attracts a penalty regardless of the infringement.
A return to short arm penalties for binding failures, and collapses on the hit is well overdue.

Yes I know the flow of semi-random penalties allows otherwise tedious and unskilled teams to occasionally tip over a more skilful side but this is ultimately self defeating and short term thinking.

It's time for the north to lose the rhoid freak he man obsession and start playing some actual rugby.

The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

You have to be able to pack down in the North due to conditions and the sheer size of teams like England and France. If the aussies played rugby through our winters they'd soon learn.

Gospel wrote:

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

You have to be able to pack down in the North due to conditions and the sheer size of teams like England and France. If the aussies played rugby through our winters they'd soon learn.

I think their record up north is a positive win rate. A perfect example of what I am saying, is that game they played against France a few years back. Got totally humped in the scrum but put 40+ on the frogs.

Gospel wrote:

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

You have to be able to pack down in the North due to conditions and the sheer size of teams like England and France. If the aussies played rugby through our winters they'd soon learn.

French Forwards are Usually lighter ...

At least one of their tries came about as a direct result from the scrum.

If Ireland won at scrum time their chances of winning the game would have improved significantly.

Laurent wrote:

Gospel wrote:

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

You have to be able to pack down in the North due to conditions and the sheer size of teams like England and France. If the aussies played rugby through our winters they'd soon learn.

French Forwards are Usually lighter ...

Than the Aus pack???

merlin the happy pig wrote:Ireland get thrashed and ship 4 tries, whilst scoring none.
Yet about half of the posts on the thread are by Irish supporters bemoaning their scrummaging.

Yes the scrum is important, but so are passing, catching, kicking, tackling, lineouts, rucks, mauls, positional play and dare I say the words scoring tries!

The whole of the northern posting fraternity get themselves into a homo-erotic prison rape fantasy laden frenzy over scrums. If the attitude of the supporters is any indication of the way the coaches and players think, then the 3-1 try count for NZ over England and 4-0 for Aus over Ireland should surprise no one.

Worse than this though is that this obsession seems to dominate northern hemisphere refereeing to the extent that almost every single scrum attracts a penalty regardless of the infringement.
A return to short arm penalties for binding failures, and collapses on the hit is well overdue.

Yes I know the flow of semi-random penalties allows otherwise tedious and unskilled teams to occasionally tip over a more skilful side but this is ultimately self defeating and short term thinking.

It's time for the north to lose the rhoid freak he man obsession and start playing some actual rugby.

Exactly, it is only intended as a re-start to the game for minor rule infringements but has been elevated status largely by gym-junkies as a diversion for their lack of skill & athleticism.

grouch wrote:

merlin the happy pig wrote:Ireland get thrashed and ship 4 tries, whilst scoring none.
Yet about half of the posts on the thread are by Irish supporters bemoaning their scrummaging.

Yes the scrum is important, but so are passing, catching, kicking, tackling, lineouts, rucks, mauls, positional play and dare I say the words scoring tries!

The whole of the northern posting fraternity get themselves into a homo-erotic prison rape fantasy laden frenzy over scrums. If the attitude of the supporters is any indication of the way the coaches and players think, then the 3-1 try count for NZ over England and 4-0 for Aus over Ireland should surprise no one.

Worse than this though is that this obsession seems to dominate northern hemisphere refereeing to the extent that almost every single scrum attracts a penalty regardless of the infringement.
A return to short arm penalties for binding failures, and collapses on the hit is well overdue.

Yes I know the flow of semi-random penalties allows otherwise tedious and unskilled teams to occasionally tip over a more skilful side but this is ultimately self defeating and short term thinking.

It's time for the north to lose the rhoid freak he man obsession and start playing some actual rugby.

Exactly, it is only intended as a re-start to the game for minor rule infringements but has been elevated status largely by gym-junkies as a diversion for their lack of skill & athleticism.

Amen Gr/Mthp - I fecking despair at the muscle bound edicts that the RFU elite pathways dictate, and it needn't be that way - just look at the natural skills the Welsh youth development squads embrace and promote! Fecking RFU!

grouch wrote:

merlin the happy pig wrote:Ireland get thrashed and ship 4 tries, whilst scoring none.
Yet about half of the posts on the thread are by Irish supporters bemoaning their scrummaging.

Yes the scrum is important, but so are passing, catching, kicking, tackling, lineouts, rucks, mauls, positional play and dare I say the words scoring tries!

The whole of the northern posting fraternity get themselves into a homo-erotic prison rape fantasy laden frenzy over scrums. If the attitude of the supporters is any indication of the way the coaches and players think, then the 3-1 try count for NZ over England and 4-0 for Aus over Ireland should surprise no one.

Worse than this though is that this obsession seems to dominate northern hemisphere refereeing to the extent that almost every single scrum attracts a penalty regardless of the infringement.
A return to short arm penalties for binding failures, and collapses on the hit is well overdue.

Yes I know the flow of semi-random penalties allows otherwise tedious and unskilled teams to occasionally tip over a more skilful side but this is ultimately self defeating and short term thinking.

It's time for the north to lose the rhoid freak he man obsession and start playing some actual rugby.

Exactly, it is only intended as a re-start to the game for minor rule infringements but has been elevated status largely by gym-junkies as a diversion for their lack of skill & athleticism.

I couldn't believe the size of that Irish reserve hooker! It's no wonder some hookers have lineout woes, as they can barely get their arms over their heads:

Gospel wrote:

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

You have to be able to pack down in the North due to conditions and the sheer size of teams like England and France. If the aussies played rugby through our winters they'd soon learn.

The sheer size of France

They typically have one of the smaller packs going.

Nieghorn wrote:

grouch wrote:

merlin the happy pig wrote:Ireland get thrashed and ship 4 tries, whilst scoring none.
Yet about half of the posts on the thread are by Irish supporters bemoaning their scrummaging.

Yes the scrum is important, but so are passing, catching, kicking, tackling, lineouts, rucks, mauls, positional play and dare I say the words scoring tries!

The whole of the northern posting fraternity get themselves into a homo-erotic prison rape fantasy laden frenzy over scrums. If the attitude of the supporters is any indication of the way the coaches and players think, then the 3-1 try count for NZ over England and 4-0 for Aus over Ireland should surprise no one.

Worse than this though is that this obsession seems to dominate northern hemisphere refereeing to the extent that almost every single scrum attracts a penalty regardless of the infringement.
A return to short arm penalties for binding failures, and collapses on the hit is well overdue.

Yes I know the flow of semi-random penalties allows otherwise tedious and unskilled teams to occasionally tip over a more skilful side but this is ultimately self defeating and short term thinking.

It's time for the north to lose the rhoid freak he man obsession and start playing some actual rugby.

Exactly, it is only intended as a re-start to the game for minor rule infringements but has been elevated status largely by gym-junkies as a diversion for their lack of skill & athleticism.

I couldn't believe the size of that Irish reserve hooker! It's no wonder some hookers have lineout woes, as they can barely get their arms over their heads:

To be fair Youngs is just a centre on a double dose of roids.

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

I think you've got causation and correlation mixed up there. Scrums are the single most important facet of modern rugby. The Ozzies lost the Lions series because of the scrum, and in practically every game this year where they've had a beaten scrum, they've lost.

The fact that they remain in top 4 spots is due to A. Having some good talent in other areas of the field, and B. Getting to play the top 2 teams over and over again, which means that when they do win, they get good rankings points.

Fundamentally, with a kicker like Lealiifano and a strong scrum, Oz would be challenging alongside SA to knock NZ off of top spot.

Magpie26 wrote:

Gospel wrote:

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

You have to be able to pack down in the North due to conditions and the sheer size of teams like England and France. If the aussies played rugby through our winters they'd soon learn.

The sheer size of France

They typically have one of the smaller packs going.

They have 'proper' sized props who are brutally strong and tough as teak; Mas and Domingo for example. Everyone else is fairly massive and their scrum comprises a full eight man shove.

Jeff the Bear wrote:

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

I think you've got causation and correlation mixed up there. Scrums are the single most important facet of modern rugby. The Ozzies lost the Lions series because of the scrum, and in practically every game this year where they've had a beaten scrum, they've lost.

The fact that they remain in top 4 spots is due to A. Having some good talent in other areas of the field, and B. Getting to play the top 2 teams over and over again, which means that when they do win, they get good rankings points.

Fundamentally, with a kicker like Lealiifano and a strong scrum, Oz would be challenging alongside SA to knock NZ off of top spot.

Totally disagree. When was the last time that the side with the best scrum dominated world Rugby. It is a small facet of the game and there is way to much importance put on it. Ask the French. The ABs just need parity at scrum time yet still demolish all before them. The win England got over them last year was due to winning the collision at the breakdown, which is in fact the single most important facet in the modern game.

Jeff the Bear wrote:

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

I think you've got causation and correlation mixed up there. Scrums are the single most important facet of modern rugby. The Ozzies lost the Lions series because of the scrum, and in practically every game this year where they've had a beaten scrum, they've lost.

I love the scrum but I don't agree JTB. The series loss against the Lions was so marginal that you could pick pretty much any element of the game to blame. Goal kicking in the first test comes to mind.

Argentina has been destroying scrums for fun all across the world this year and yet it's their worst year ever. In fact, here's a great example that demonstrates the OP's point - consider Pumas v Wallabies in Argentina this year where the Pumas had repeated 5m scrums with penalty after penalty yet failed to come away with points. Totally dominant Puma scrum packing down four or five times on the line, every shove a thing of beauty - but nothing to show for it.

Here's the thing, even with a strong scrum there is too much that could go wrong, and too much room for referee interpretation, for it to be described as the single most important facet of the game. On the plus side they are clearly getting less random (and more of a spectacle) with the new laws.

merlin the happy pig wrote:Ireland get thrashed and ship 4 tries, whilst scoring none.
Yet about half of the posts on the thread are by Irish supporters bemoaning their scrummaging.

Yes the scrum is important, but so are passing, catching, kicking, tackling, lineouts, rucks, mauls, positional play and dare I say the words scoring tries!

The whole of the northern posting fraternity get themselves into a homo-erotic prison rape fantasy laden frenzy over scrums. If the attitude of the supporters is any indication of the way the coaches and players think, then the 3-1 try count for NZ over England and 4-0 for Aus over Ireland should surprise no one.

Worse than this though is that this obsession seems to dominate northern hemisphere refereeing to the extent that almost every single scrum attracts a penalty regardless of the infringement.
A return to short arm penalties for binding failures, and collapses on the hit is well overdue.

Yes I know the flow of semi-random penalties allows otherwise tedious and unskilled teams to occasionally tip over a more skilful side but this is ultimately self defeating and short term thinking.

It's time for the north to lose the rhoid freak he man obsession and start playing some actual rugby.

How quickly you forget...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZSv4HlyfIo#t=77

Sums up northern rugby.

A lot of teams with dominant scrums waste that possession by kicking away the ball. Most kicks are bombs that are usually returned asking the question: Why the hell didn't you try and run in the first place? (esp. now that there's a huge gap between the back lines ... went back and watched some pre ELV rugby recently and you wonder how teams aren't any better at getting over the gainline at scrum time when they were only the length of the scrum away)

Others have, really, no eye for space or creativity to use that 'dominant pack' possession, usually because the players they have are big bashers who only shine off rehearsed moves. Read those moves and they're just setting the first of a long line of hopeful rucks. Players who are genuine threats with ball in hand exist, but they don't seem to get picked as much for international teams (usually as they're smaller blokes with actual / perceived defensive liabilities ... would love to see some of those players stats compared to see if they miss any more tackles than people assume they do because even supposed defensive stalwarts blow a few)

Jeff the Bear wrote:The Ozzies lost the Lions series because of the scrum.

We lost the series to a better team on the day in the Third Test, although funnily enough we could easily have been two Tests up by then. Did we win the Second Test, and almost the First, because of the scrum?


Most independent observers accept that the adjudication of the scrum in the Third Test was problematic, to put it mildly.


The obsession with the scrum is pathetic, and self-defeating, in an age when we need to attract more converts to watch, sponsor, and play the game.

The short summary is that scrums are hugely important to a team's chances of winning, it's just not the be all and end all.

Jeff the Bear wrote:Scrums are the single most important facet of modern rugby.

The breakdown, m'man.

You have hundreds of breakdowns in any given match, and generally less than a dozen scrums. Dominate at the breakdown and you'll go a long way towards winning the game.

Dominate at the scrum and you'll win a couple of extra penalties. There's no comparison.

Tehui wrote:The short summary is that scrums are hugely important to a team's chances of winning, it's just not the be all and end all.

Nup. Scrums can be hugely important, but it depends a helluva lot more on the quality of the adjudication than anything else, in my humble opinion. That is the single biggest variable.

Do you enjoy seeing the fate of your team in the hands of officials who have never been in a scrum in their lives, and do not really understand what the fark is going on?

naki wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:Scrums are the single most important facet of modern rugby.

The breakdown, m'man.

You have hundreds of breakdowns in any given match, and generally less than a dozen scrums. Dominate at the breakdown and you'll go a long way towards winning the game.

Dominate at the scrum and you'll win a couple of extra penalties. There's no comparison.

this, this, this.

towny wrote:

naki wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:Scrums are the single most important facet of modern rugby.

The breakdown, m'man.

You have hundreds of breakdowns in any given match, and generally less than a dozen scrums. Dominate at the breakdown and you'll go a long way towards winning the game.

Dominate at the scrum and you'll win a couple of extra penalties. There's no comparison.

this, this, this.

+1

Typical SH pussies trying to turn it into league. fudge off mungoes

Chuckles1188 wrote:Typical SH pussies trying to turn it into league. fudge off mungoes

Do you actually believe that loig is for pussies? First time I have ever heard that said, I must admit.

merlin the happy pig wrote:Ireland get thrashed and ship 4 tries, whilst scoring none.
Yet about half of the posts on the thread are by Irish supporters bemoaning their scrummaging.

Yes the scrum is important, but so are passing, catching, kicking, tackling, lineouts, rucks, mauls, positional play and dare I say the words scoring tries!

The whole of the northern posting fraternity get themselves into a homo-erotic prison rape fantasy laden frenzy over scrums. If the attitude of the supporters is any indication of the way the coaches and players think, then the 3-1 try count for NZ over England and 4-0 for Aus over Ireland should surprise no one.

Worse than this though is that this obsession seems to dominate northern hemisphere refereeing to the extent that almost every single scrum attracts a penalty regardless of the infringement.
A return to short arm penalties for binding failures, and collapses on the hit is well overdue.

Yes I know the flow of semi-random penalties allows otherwise tedious and unskilled teams to occasionally tip over a more skilful side but this is ultimately self defeating and short term thinking.

It's time for the north to lose the rhoid freak he man obsession and start playing some actual rugby.

This misses a lot. If the forwards get rape din the scrum, then they usually have less energy in the loose in those games there have been a few of them. Each scrum has little impact, but that impact adds up to a winning margin of effort.

wamberal wrote:

Tehui wrote:The short summary is that scrums are hugely important to a team's chances of winning, it's just not the be all and end all.

Nup. Scrums can be hugely important, but it depends a helluva lot more on the quality of the adjudication than anything else, in my humble opinion. That is the single biggest variable.

Do you enjoy seeing the fate of your team in the hands of officials who have never been in a scrum in their lives, and do not really understand what the fark is going on?

So is your stance that scrums are the be all and end all?

wamberal wrote:

Chuckles1188 wrote:Typical SH pussies trying to turn it into league. fudge off mungoes

Do you actually believe that loig is for pussies? First time I have ever heard that said, I must admit.

Typical NH union fan irrational fear of league response.

Tehui wrote:

wamberal wrote:

Tehui wrote:The short summary is that scrums are hugely important to a team's chances of winning, it's just not the be all and end all.

Nup. Scrums can be hugely important, but it depends a helluva lot more on the quality of the adjudication than anything else, in my humble opinion. That is the single biggest variable.

Do you enjoy seeing the fate of your team in the hands of officials who have never been in a scrum in their lives, and do not really understand what the fark is going on?

So is your stance that scrums are the be all and end all?

No. I did not say that, I did say that scrums can be hugely important. I have seen Australian sides lose games primarily because of scrum infringements (real or alleged).

Jeff the Bear wrote:

AYEAYE wrote:The true importance of the scrum in the greater context of the game is reflected in the fact that Australia have managed to hold a top four spot, mostly top three in the rankings, even though their scrum has not been all that good.

I think you've got causation and correlation mixed up there. Scrums are the single most important facet of modern rugby. The Ozzies lost the Lions series because of the scrum, and in practically every game this year where they've had a beaten scrum, they've lost.

The fact that they remain in top 4 spots is due to A. Having some good talent in other areas of the field, and B. Getting to play the top 2 teams over and over again, which means that when they do win, they get good rankings points.

Fundamentally, with a kicker like Lealiifano and a strong scrum, Oz would be challenging alongside SA to knock NZ off of top spot.

To be the best team in world rugby you need more than a good kicker and strong scrum.

Give NZ some credit, the last time we were better than them we had a good players all over the park. They pretty regularly have good players all over the park and hence they're pretty regularly at the top.

Now if a test rugby nation has a good scrum, a good kicker, a well functioning backrow, an ability to consistently execute all basic skills, and another danger man in the backs. Then yes they'll probably be there or thereabouts at the top of the totem.

wamberal wrote:

Tehui wrote:

wamberal wrote:

Tehui wrote:The short summary is that scrums are hugely important to a team's chances of winning, it's just not the be all and end all.

Nup. Scrums can be hugely important, but it depends a helluva lot more on the quality of the adjudication than anything else, in my humble opinion. That is the single biggest variable.

Do you enjoy seeing the fate of your team in the hands of officials who have never been in a scrum in their lives, and do not really understand what the fark is going on?

So is your stance that scrums are the be all and end all?

No. I did not say that, I did say that scrums can be hugely important. I have seen Australian sides lose games primarily because of scrum infringements (real or alleged).

I'll have to look up the definition of the word "nup". Unless it was a typo?

grouch wrote:

merlin the happy pig wrote:Ireland get thrashed and ship 4 tries, whilst scoring none.
Yet about half of the posts on the thread are by Irish supporters bemoaning their scrummaging.

Yes the scrum is important, but so are passing, catching, kicking, tackling, lineouts, rucks, mauls, positional play and dare I say the words scoring tries!

The whole of the northern posting fraternity get themselves into a homo-erotic prison rape fantasy laden frenzy over scrums. If the attitude of the supporters is any indication of the way the coaches and players think, then the 3-1 try count for NZ over England and 4-0 for Aus over Ireland should surprise no one.

Worse than this though is that this obsession seems to dominate northern hemisphere refereeing to the extent that almost every single scrum attracts a penalty regardless of the infringement.
A return to short arm penalties for binding failures, and collapses on the hit is well overdue.

Yes I know the flow of semi-random penalties allows otherwise tedious and unskilled teams to occasionally tip over a more skilful side but this is ultimately self defeating and short term thinking.

It's time for the north to lose the rhoid freak he man obsession and start playing some actual rugby.

Exactly, it is only intended as a re-start to the game for minor rule infringements but has been elevated status largely by gym-junkies as a diversion for their lack of skill & athleticism.

70 years ago the Boks were touring NZ and their forwards had it on ours. They received a cable from the Saffer Rugby head honcho and all it said was "Scrum, scrum, scrum". I think you need to look outside your shores and your recent memory to get a handle on the importance of scrumming.

It cost you a game very recently.

towny wrote:

naki wrote:

Jeff the Bear wrote:Scrums are the single most important facet of modern rugby.

The breakdown, m'man.

You have hundreds of breakdowns in any given match, and generally less than a dozen scrums. Dominate at the breakdown and you'll go a long way towards winning the game.

Dominate at the scrum and you'll win a couple of extra penalties. There's no comparison.

this, this, this.

Points, m'man.

Breakdowns give you the opportunity for possession and territory, a dominant scrum gives you direct access to points, and also access to big gains in territory. A solid/dominant scrum allied to a world class kicker = 6 to 15 points a game, depending on the conditions. It also gives you access to massive pressure relief if in your own half and the ability to start your attacks in the opposition 22.

If you want to know why the NH has such a hardon for scrums, it's because Wales has won its last two 6 Nations off of the back of it essentially. With a solid front 5, allied to Halfpenny's kicking, we stay in games we shouldn't, and win games comfortably when parity in all other areas.

We lose to the SH teams because there is still a massive disparity in other facets of the game....but all other things being equal, a dominant scrum can have a disproportionately large effect on a games outcome, an effect so large that it is far greater than any other single facet can bring to bear on a given game.

So what you're saying Jeff is that the scrum is no longer a restart but a means to win penalties in the ref lottery?

I guess that's the point of this thread. The scrum has become more important than it needs to be because it's such a poorly managed set piece with a high rate of failure and is poorly understood by referees

I think the scrum comes after both breakdown and lineout in terms immediate effect on the pitch, but I think it can also be seen as an indicator of how together a pack is, how in sync, and how hardworking they are. It's a straight up competition between the packs, that's not seen in the rest of the game.

That's not to say that a losing scrum is always going to be thinking "oh crap", for instance, even though England were losing to Arg in the scrums, I suspect they took a lot of heart in the fact that they gave very few pens, and weren't marched back at a rate of knots. But it depends on where you think you should be. England losing to Arg is what you'd expect, so to hold them well is a good thing. Ireland would have hoped to beat the Aussies, but were (haven't seen the game) beaten, that is going to be a large psychological blow to Ireland and boost to the Aussies.

The scrum is a mental aspect of the game, with the two packs in direct competition, doing well is relative as to what you expect, and the mental boost or drain that comes with that will have an effect in the rest of the game.

deadduck wrote:So what you're saying Jeff is that the scrum is no longer a restart but a means to win penalties in the ref lottery?

I guess that's the point of this thread. The scrum has become more important than it needs to be because it's such a poorly managed set piece with a high rate of failure and is poorly understood by referees

Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with the OP. I think it is a farce that it is as important as it is. I always cite the fact that quality tightheads get paid/cost as much as quality flyhalfs or wings in the open market. If you were to change the laws so that you only got freekicks for scrum infringements, their value would plummet instantly.

With regards to the reffing and the new laws, it does seem to have made a difference at domestic levels, but to my eye, we are still getting the same bollocks at scrum time in international games as we did prior to the law changes. Refs still guessing, the better props still trying to get one over on their opposition and the ref. Taking soft hits, driving across, wheeling the scrum, collapsing on engagement...all these things haven't stopped, and more importantly, refs still don't seem to be getting more decisions right.

eldanielfire wrote:

merlin the happy pig wrote:Ireland get thrashed and ship 4 tries, whilst scoring none.
Yet about half of the posts on the thread are by Irish supporters bemoaning their scrummaging.

Yes the scrum is important, but so are passing, catching, kicking, tackling, lineouts, rucks, mauls, positional play and dare I say the words scoring tries!

The whole of the northern posting fraternity get themselves into a homo-erotic prison rape fantasy laden frenzy over scrums. If the attitude of the supporters is any indication of the way the coaches and players think, then the 3-1 try count for NZ over England and 4-0 for Aus over Ireland should surprise no one.

Worse than this though is that this obsession seems to dominate northern hemisphere refereeing to the extent that almost every single scrum attracts a penalty regardless of the infringement.
A return to short arm penalties for binding failures, and collapses on the hit is well overdue.

Yes I know the flow of semi-random penalties allows otherwise tedious and unskilled teams to occasionally tip over a more skilful side but this is ultimately self defeating and short term thinking.

It's time for the north to lose the rhoid freak he man obsession and start playing some actual rugby.

This misses a lot. If the forwards get rape din the scrum, then they usually have less energy in the loose in those games there have been a few of them. Each scrum has little impact, but that impact adds up to a winning margin of effort.

It's psychological as well. The winning scrum feel like titans, the scrum getting a beating feel like girlymen. Even for the backs, it puts a dent in watching your pack get manhandled.

I wonder why, when coaches and players are asked in pre match interviews, what their plans are. There is always a reference to the breakdown and quick ball. I don't think I have ever heard a coach say we are going to scrum them to victory.

Also, the 3 teams that are consistently in the top three can very seldom boast to have the best scrums. It is an important aspect of the game but nowhere near as important as the breakdown. Lose the scrum war and you can still win the game(Tonga v France RWC) but you can't lose the break down battle and win, simples.