Continuity
Continuity is the buzz word at World Rugby's Annual Law Review and this year we'll see 6 Law changes that take effect this November,0 just in time for the autumn internationals. Most notably will be the new enforcement of offside at the tackle but only slightly less noticeable will be the three changes at scrum time and I'm happy to admit that we should all be excited about it. The scrum, which seems to be in constant state of adjusting, tweaking and review, sees official changes to what most scrummagers see should be common place and have been super annoying penalties that destroy the genuine competition at scrum time and kills continuity of the game.
Continuity is the buzz word in all six law changes but it's the scrum and tackle/ruck of sideline that seems to dominate every pre-game Q&A session, every Captains conversation during a match and what coaches seem baffled by in post-match interviews when people ask, "what was the penalty for?" The answer is coach doesn't know and neither does the referee. Hopefully you were able to watch the video above with Leicester Tigers Coach, Richard Cockrill describe how referees currently interpret scrums now.
NEW SCRUM LAWS:
LAW 20.5 & 20.5 (d) 5 - Throwing the ball into the scrum - No signal from the referee. Scrum half must throw the ball in straight but is allowed to align their shoulder on the middle line of the scrum, therefore allowing them to stand a shoulder widths toward their team.
RATIONALE: to promote scrum stability, a fair contest for possession of the ball while giving the advantage to the team throwing in.
LAW 20.9 - Handling in the Scrum - exception
The No. 8 shall be allowed to pick up the ball from the second rows feet.
RATIONALE: Promotes continuity
LAW 20 - Striking after throw in
After the ball touches the ground in the tunnel any front row player may use either foot to win possession of the ball. One player from the team that put the ball in must strike for the ball.
RATIONALE: CONTINUITY
And while these changes will indoobididly promote the all important "continuity" whilst keeping the contest for the ball alive AND shouldn't give either attacking or defending team an unfair advantage, they seem to be common place in most well adjusted scrums. How many times have we heard "the ball must go in straight" and then watch professionals drop the ball off in the second row? A lot. A lot of times we've seen that and the lack of consistency creates the need for the defending team to create extra disruption as they were given no opportunity to compete for the ball. So, while the powers that be, promote continuity the real problem stems from who's calling the penalties and why they're calling them.
Don't get me wrong, the changes to the engagement calls, all four of them in the last 7 years, has been a good thing for the game and the safety of players in the front & second rows. According to World Rugby's - Player Welfare Report and the RFU's Professional Player Investigation, the effect of those changes to the engagement sequence produced an 83% drop in injuries to the head, neck and back of front & second rows. So the law changes are good but we wonder what took the law makers so long to do the right thing? Also, the real problem with the penalty count is the inconsistent calls for & against teams that use their scrum, as it should be used, as an attacking weapon. Again, the change is good but without consistent policing at scrum time these changes won't achieve the game flow that desired.
That's the continuity blurb, check out the next installment when we examine another critical issue at scrum time, STABILITY which is of course an integral part of LAW
Don't forget that the Rugby Championship is happening live and on replay on ESPN 3 online.
Also don't forget that you have until August 31st to save 20% off your team order from Samurai Sports Wear from Samurai US - #weartowin
Tight 5 Sevens
