Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 42

Thread: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

      
  1. #11

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    8,759
    Thanks (Received)
    42
    Likes (Received)
    725

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    If a team turn up with 5 are you going to insist they pack with 5 in a scrum leaving no back line defenders?

    That's an extreme point I know. :-)

    UPDATE: Just found this. I guess its buried in the regs somewhere
    http://www.rugbyrefs.com/archive/index.php/t-13586.html

    with a two man differential versus windsor many years ago, but destroying them in the scum anyway (playing without wings) and winning after an hour some interesting injuries occurred meaning they had no ST&E FRs so we went uncontested. Their injured hooker played on the wing despite not being able to play as a hooker was one of them. Now with no pressure in the scrums they just ran around the outside, so we dropped the flankers to cover. then we had injuries ourselves so I (as pack leader) just called a 3 man front row and dispatched the remaining second row to the backline.

    Ref pinged us for not having 5 in the scrum. He mumbled the reason at me whilst looking at the ground. I simply said "its not us that taking the piss out of this game".

    safety - equity (as was back then ) - law. Really?

    didds
    Last edited by didds; 25-07-17 at 16:07.

  2. #12

    Referees in England
    Phil E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Staffordshire and Royal Navy
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    22 Jan 08
    Posts
    14,333
    Thanks (Received)
    97
    Likes (Received)
    890
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    I think the point is that going uncontested and having one man down in the scrum doesn't disadvantage the offending team. They still have a full set of backs. So by saying 8v8 in the scrum the offending team are now 1 man down in the backs.

    If you don't start with a full team just extrapolate it. I would expect referees to be told to use their common sense in non standard situations.

    Follow my Award Winning blog The Rugby Ref


  3. #13

    Referees in Holland


    Soc/Assoc
    NSRS
    Grade
    Newish
    Join Date
    20 Jan 11
    Posts
    1,299
    Thanks (Received)
    16
    Likes (Received)
    75

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    Quote Originally Posted by didds View Post
    If a team turn up with 5 are you going to insist they pack with 5 in a scrum leaving no back line defenders?
    Ah, its been a while since I won a game we started with thirteen men, and almost certainly with pretty much the same front row as played a mid-week cup match against a side in the the top division. We lost that one something like 50-4 despite taking something like ten against the head in the scrums - otherwise it really would have been a cricket score! But that same front five in our 2nd XV in the lowest division could make mincemeat of anybody. For some reason it was easier to get players for home games, probably nothing to do with the almost free and limitless cold frothy liquid available there.

    I had a game a few years ago where I offered some students a ride on their rather long journeys there and back. Only six lads turned up, and the hosts had already been warned and had a lot of new players available at the time (also mostly students, although this was a civilian club).

    Anyway, the point is that I am not starting a game of XVs with fewer than 10 players on either side. If five turn up and the hosts don't want to claim the points, then the same will happen as in a second division match where only 14 turned up to an away game, but they will have to even out the numbers somehow, even if it starts 15 v 10. Law 3.3 applies "at all times" but I don't see a PK sanction for it, unlike 3.2.

    Also although physically a player may in the course of a game become unfit to continue in the front row but able to go out on the wing, if the scrums are to go uncontested for that, he or she is going off, and now somebody else is coming in to take their place.

  4. #14

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    8,759
    Thanks (Received)
    42
    Likes (Received)
    725

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Rushforth View Post
    Also although physically a player may in the course of a game become unfit to continue in the front row but able to go out on the wing, if the scrums are to go uncontested for that, he or she is going off, and now somebody else is coming in to take their place.
    Our ref was somewhat incredulous and said to ask in an apologetic manner he couldn't do anything. He then said to the windsor captain that he (the ref) wasn;t happy with what was going on.

    Then later he pinged us as I described above.

    didds

  5. #15
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 3
    Join Date
    03 Sep 14
    Posts
    3,330
    Thanks (Received)
    29
    Likes (Received)
    507

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Camquin View Post
    I note it is missing a variation for 10s or 7s.

    While there is a variation in law 20 as there i not one here, in a game of 7s you still need 8 men in an uncontested scrum.

    WR are drunk in charge of a rule book.
    They probably expect, on this occasion at least, people to use common sense.

  6. #16
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 3
    Join Date
    03 Sep 14
    Posts
    3,330
    Thanks (Received)
    29
    Likes (Received)
    507

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    Our guidence is that if a player is unfit to scrummage them he leaves the field. So he can't go on the wing.

    Also you can't start a game with 5 so not relevant.

    Finally we re introducing a "community" level where the two sides and the referee can agree variations such as youth. and dispensations in general. All in the name of getting people playing. We await the full details but it will be interesting as it beds in.

  7. #17

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    8,759
    Thanks (Received)
    42
    Likes (Received)
    725

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    Quote Originally Posted by Pegleg View Post
    Our guidence is that if a player is unfit to scrummage them he leaves the field. So he can't go on the wing.

    Also you can't start a game with 5 so not relevant.

    Finally we re introducing a "community" level where the two sides and the referee can agree variations such as youth. and dispensations in general. All in the name of getting people playing. We await the full details but it will be interesting as it beds in.
    That sounds eminently sensible.

    Though of course you will then get the U7 coach who says "lets tackle"... [that doesn't negate Pegleg's post !]

    didds

  8. #18

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    LSRFUR
    Grade
    10
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    13,968
    Thanks (Received)
    89
    Likes (Received)
    1229

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    exploring the scenarios further - if we have a game of 14 v 14, with both teams playing seven in the scrum, and then one team loses a prop, so that we have 14 v 13, we are now saying that BOTH teams have to increase the scrum to eight.

    it's a poorly drafted Law, what they MEANT to say, was that in the event of scrums going uncontested, numbers in the scrum must be MATCHED, so that the numerical advantage is in the backs.

    The spirit of the new Law is that in this scenario scrums should remain at 7v7

    ( It's the same mistake as they made in various regulations about man-off, when they spoke about teams under man-off having to play with 14. Neglecting the scenario where started with 14, and man-off reduced them to 13 )

  9. #19

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    8,759
    Thanks (Received)
    42
    Likes (Received)
    725

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    Bang on CR.

    So we await the RFU/WR/some random 12 year old to update this .

    Meanwhile there WILL be one ref SOMEWHERE that insists in CR's scenario (or my 12 v 13 one!) that the scums increase to 8. We know it. Nobody here obviously.

    didds

  10. #20

    Referees in England
    ctrainor's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Cumbria Referees Society
    Grade
    7
    Join Date
    23 Jun 05
    Posts
    2,206
    Thanks (Received)
    7
    Likes (Received)
    119

    Default Re: New Laws : 8 in a scrum

    Nobody here obviously Didds, are you sure?
    At the moment we have no choice and would expect a lot of complaints if we started making law interpretations up for league matches.
    There are a lot of jobs worths out there who will grass you up to league secretaries for any perceived misdemeanour.
    I've met quite a few over the years
    Ciaran Trainor

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •