Poll: Will the new scrum laws make a difference?

eng scrum
Following on from yesterday’s article debating the new scrum laws set to be put in place for the first time this weekend at the Rugby Championship, we want to get your thoughts on whether they will make a difference or not. Will they lead to fewer collapsed scrums, and less time spent at the set-piece? Or will things remain as they are, as has largely been the case with other law changes over the past few years? Vote in the poll below, and leave your thoughts in the comments section.

[poll id=”264″]

Photo by: Patrick Khachfe / Onside Images

6 thoughts on “Poll: Will the new scrum laws make a difference?

  1. I was tempted to vote yes. But in reality it’s the enforcement of the “old” (existing) laws that will improve the scrums. Not that binding before engaging is bad, it isn’t, but it would have very little effect if packs were not prevented from driving before the ball is in.

    The IRB have created a fantastic veil for their flagrant reckless disregard of their own laws over the last ten years by re-affirming the old laws at the same time as bringing in a new engagement sequence. They are intentionally diverting peoples attention away from their own incompetence.

    But… as long as they apply the existing laws, I will be happy.

  2. The put-in is key for me,in that what is the definition /interpretation of ‘straight’.For me its the centre of the ball when held by it points going down the mid-line of the tunnel.I fear that as in the past some will say as long as part of the ball is along the mid-line of the tunnel then that’s fine .Also suspect a bit of ‘head to heads’ and arm-wrestling on the ‘crouch’ and ‘bind’ phases which will need to be policed.Finally when the referee says ‘yes 9’,is that a command(in which case put it in immediately..again definition/interpretation )or an indication,which will then allow for a signal between 9 and 2 .

  3. We’ll see at the weekend I guess. The new pre-bind should reduce the emphasis of the hit and will mean that the contest to actually grab a shirt will be reduced. It should hopefully make the referee’s joba little easier at scrum time where previously he has been having to call straight engagement/straight drive/binding in the correct spot/on time engagement/binding on arm/deliberate collapse and all the other difficult things. Now he should be watching for slipped binding, deliberate collapse and straight ball and hopefully things will improve

  4. Lots of positive noises coming from those who watched the Currie Cup at the weekend, saying dominant scrums were rewarded for legal scrummaging, and even that they enjoyed watching them! Fewer collapsed as well, apparently, which can only be a good thing – from a safety and spectacle perspective.

  5. Well, in my opinion it most certanly will change the scrum… Question is: Will they be GOOD changes??

  6. Agreed with regard to last week’s Currie Cup games. The ball is being fed in a bit straighter, you’re seeing the ball being hooked back, there’s far less collapsing, and the scrum seems a lot more technical at this point. It was interesting to watch — maybe because it’s the new thing, but it was also a lot cleaner.

    One thing I noticed was how some props tried to let go of the bind and get a better position under their opponent, but kept their hand in place so it didn’t look like they were letting go. Depending on where the ref was, sometimes this was caught, and sometimes the prop got away with it. The idea seemed to be making it look like they were still binding when they weren’t.

    Little things like that make the second ref for scrums argument more persuasive — a second ref with scrummaging experience who knows what he’s looking at. But that may just mean more penalties blown and more time wasted at the scrum, so who knows.

Comments are closed.