Scrums.

[Kramer]

Peter V'landy has said that the scrums need fixing and he is looking at not allowing backs to pack into scrums while forwards are in the backline, the idea is to open up the game.

[zac]

Peter V'landy has said that the scrums need fixing and he is looking at not allowing backs to pack into scrums while forwards are in the backline, the idea is to open up the game.

haha, cos the game has slowed down so much since the 6 again rule?
but impossible to police - you could name your backs in the forwards.

[ROC181]

And what’s with pushing in the scrums? Parra did it last week and if not wrong they did it last year. Why aren’t we doing it when we need to if that is still an option?

[The Marshall]

haha, cos the game has slowed down so much since the 6 again rule?
but impossible to police - you could name your backs in the forwards.

Agree, it’s an absurd suggestion.

[King Salvo]

they want to get rid of scrums and just have handovers instead- wont be long before its 11 vs 11 - I Remember Warren Ryan was an advocate for a 11 vs 11 game

[Mad_Rabid_Rooster]

Ridiculous suggestion.

They have gone from the Super League in its resumed season. I understand why, but I hope they are back next year, and it is not the start of a slippery slope where yet another tradition of the game goes by the wayside.

[Paddo Colt 61]

Anyone who watched games from the past on late night teev would have some idea of how tedious and unentertaining they were. The amount of gamesmanship that went on meant that they were often set multiple times frequently ending with a penalty or a brawl. More than anything else, however, was the opportunity that they afforded bad behaviour in other areas exemplified by the infamous case of Dick Wilson, the Balmain hooker, who was outed along with his connections to bookies. Making scrums forgone conclusions was the way to obviate the sort of behaviour that would bring the game into disrepute but even so I wonder at the closeness of the League to the betting industry.

[Flipper Hands]

Anyone who watched games from the past on late night teev would have some idea of how tedious and unentertaining they were. The amount of gamesmanship that went on meant that they were often set multiple times frequently ending with a penalty or a brawl. More than anything else, however, was the opportunity that they afforded bad behaviour in other areas exemplified by the infamous case of Dick Wilson, the Balmain hooker, who was outed along with his connections to bookies. Making scrums forgone conclusions was the way to obviate the sort of behaviour that would bring the game into disrepute but even so I wonder at the closeness of the League to the betting industry.

Rant mode on. I think you triggered me PC61

I can't see any meaningful way of forcing "forwards" to pack in a scrum unless the scrums are contested.

As an old prop (blind side specialist, plenty of gamesmanship from me), it pains me that scrums went the way of the dodo. The intricacies of the scrum were one of my favourite parts of playing the game. I watched more than my fair share of games with proper scrums, and loved every minute of it. You could see the dominance a great pack working together could exert on the game through wins against the head, forcing the opposition to collapse, or be pushed off the mark, and so on. The extermination of scrums had a huge impact on RL. Other than the obvious removal of scrum specialists, it resulted in the game being restructured into the the modern "thirds" model.

So I certainly think scrums were entertaining.

As to bad behaviour. We've seen fighting virtually outlawed already. Betting is a scourge though, and you could easily target a first receiver or dummy half of a team and get the same influence in the modern game.

In fact absent a contestable scrum (where the forward positions come from) we should change the name of positions to make it easier for fans to understand the game.
1. Fullback
2. Left wing
3. Left centre
4. Right Centre
5. Right wing
6. Left half
7. Right half
8. Middle forward
9. Dummy half
10 Middle forward
11. Left edge forward
12. Right edge forward
13. Middle forward

Not to say this is where they play during the entire game, but you get the idea. Saying someone is a "ball playing lock" in this day is ridiculous, he's a middle forward who happens to have a pass in him.

[The Lip]

Victor is a ball playing lock - he is a lot of other things as well but his ball playing is as strong as any of the the ball playing locks of yesteryear or will be after another full season. He is the exception though. Murray gets called a ball playing lock but I haven’t seen enough evidence of that so far. He runs a great hole and line and can pass but ball playing - not yet anyway.

[Flipper Hands]

Victor is a ball playing lock - he is a lot of other things as well but his ball playing is as strong as any of the the ball playing locks of yesteryear or will be after another full season. He is the exception though. Murray gets called a ball playing lock but I haven’t seen enough evidence of that so far. He runs a great hole and line and can pass but ball playing - not yet anyway.

Not having a shot here.

What exactly does he "lock"? It's meaningless in today's game. There is no doubt he (and all modern 13's) plays in the middle for the majority of the game.

As for the "ball playing" part, that just describes a skill. Would be like calling Taka' an "offloading prop" cause he can offload.

See what I mean?

[Paddo Colt 61]

Old Props and Rakes would lament the contested scrum demise Flipper but they'd be the only ones (except for those who can't cope with any sort of change in their lives whatsoever - like News Ltd readers). Fortunately those charged with growing the sport appreciate that a fast game is a good game and we've left the die hard spirit to Rugby with its Conservative social roots that perceive any change to the "Game Played in Heaven" as being the thin edge of the wedge - too much change of any kind and people might start to want to change things like tax privileges that the rich enjoy. The result is that Rugby is withering and of interest only to those who relish the minutiae of scrums and mauls and who know the rules thereof, or think that they know.

[Thirteen]

Victor is a ball playing lock - he is a lot of other things as well but his ball playing is as strong as any of the the ball playing locks of yesteryear or will be after another full season. He is the exception though. Murray gets called a ball playing lock but I haven’t seen enough evidence of that so far. He runs a great hole and line and can pass but ball playing - not yet anyway.

Murray the little girl can wipe Victor’s arse. Let’s not compare the 1970s Datsun to the Lamborghini.

[Flipper Hands]

Old Props and Rakes would lament the contested scrum demise Flipper but they'd be the only ones (except for those who can't cope with any sort of change in their lives whatsoever - like News Ltd readers). Fortunately those charged with growing the sport appreciate that a fast game is a good game and we've left the die hard spirit to Rugby with its Conservative social roots that perceive any change to the "Game Played in Heaven" as being the thin edge of the wedge - too much change of any kind and people might start to want to change things like tax privileges that the rich enjoy. The result is that Rugby is withering and of interest only to those who relish the minutiae of scrums and mauls and who know the rules thereof, or think that they know.

PC61,

Yeah, impermanence is a part of the world. I can appreciate that. I do miss the subtlety of contested scrums though. Regardless, its a moot point, they ain't coming back.

The current situation has been laughable for decades. If they aren't a f'n contest, get rid of them altogether.

[Paddo Colt 61]

I don't see how the present form of scrums can be ditched as they still allow the attack to proceed (especially in the red zone) unhampered by the extra defence which is tied up in the scrummage. They are also a nod to the game's heritage as are the playing position titles. Your suggestion that they be renamed is a good 'un and would certainly make things clearer to new audiences.

On the matter of ball playing Lock Forwards, that skill is still highly valued but, as ever, it's rare. Of the old school. I think that Johnny Raper was the ball playing, cover defending master but the game was different and I do see Victor as a terrific ball player, the cover defending having joined scrums in the game's evolution to the Sliding Defence. Greg Bandiera was a classy old school Lock for the Chooks back in the Seventies pre Coote.

[Flipper Hands]

I don't see how the present form of scrums can be ditched as they still allow the attack to proceed (especially in the red zone) unhampered by the extra defence which is tied up in the scrummage.

I don't see it as an issue. Fresh set to the attacking team, with the same feel as the old "quick tap". That would give the momentum to the attacking team.

On the matter of ball playing Lock Forwards, that skill is still highly valued but, as ever, it's rare. Of the old school. I think that Johnny Raper was the ball playing, cover defending master but the game was different and I do see Victor as a terrific ball player, the cover defending having joined scrums in the game's evolution to the Sliding Defence. Greg Bandiera was a classy old school Lock for the Chooks back in the Seventies pre Coote.

Bradley Clyde is the best lock I have seen, Raper was before my time. I do acknowledge he is the best ever. though
I vaguely remember Greg Bandiera...