Rugby Law FAQ's - The Scrum

By Ian B
June 26 2003

Rugby FAQ's: The Scrum - 1 Is there any minimum number of players that can form a scrum, e.g. could all the back row and locks get binned and a contested scrum take place without any of the backs getting in there? Minimum number to form a scrum is 5 at senior level (U19's have to have a balanced scrum with the same number of players from each side), and a side can elect to drop players out of the scrum IF a player has been binned or sent off from the other side. Similarly, a player from the backs can go up into the scrum to make 8 as long as it's not a front row position. Why do Refs feel they need to preach to the front rows? Props know how to bind, they know how to scrummage, why do refs insist they know what's going on? The briefing is just a matter of ensuring safety. Sadly, if we don't inform the front row how we are going to conduct the engagement ("I'll say crouch and hold, there'll be a pause, then I'll say engage. Please wait for me to say engage before going in"), and there is an accident, we can be held liable. It also means they know how we'd like it to happen - all refs are slightly different. I don't know a referee (worth his salt) who'll tell a premiership front row player how to bind. I certainly don't know any premiership players who'd listen! It also gives them a chance to ask any questions - some refs put their hand in and lift it out on the word "engage", some don't. Ok, but when you put your hand in front of the front row, it does become off putting, front rows like as much advantage as they can get. I note from some games that when the ref moves his hand more often than not one of the props loses advantage as when he hits his opposite number. He packs down wrong and the only way to get out of it is a collapsed scrum. Surely a better idea would be to keep both packs apart to the last minute without no infringement and let them engage on their own terms. Also I have noted that some refs like to lecture props on the art of scrumming If I ever refereed I would let them got on with it as most props are experienced enough and know how to look after themselves, the only time refs need to keep an eye out is when the players are 15 and under. Agreed - I never put my hand in front of a prop's face - it will mean he can't see his "hole" and is a no-no as far as I'm concerned. In effect, the referee is organising the engagement - a sort of "everybody ready? in you go" sort of thing. Of course, if they're not ready, no engagement. In my opinion, I can't see the point of lecturing anyone in the front row anyway: they wouldn't listen - they only want to know how the engagement will work. Most referees would sympathise with your point of view, but our ethic is SAFETY, equity and the law, in that order. The key word you've used talking about experience is MOST, and we have to look after them ALL. As regards the U15 thing, I'd go further than that (and so does the RFU) and say that any minor (U19 / Colts in rugby terms) needs to be looked after especially well, which is why there's a different engagement procedure for those age groups (the props have to touch their opposite number with their free arm before the engagement) which makes it "Crouch and hold, Touch, (pause,) engage" What is the rule regarding loose-head binding? Best answered this way I think, so you know what the law says: Binding by loose-head props. A loose-head prop must bind on the opposing tight-head prop by placing the left arm inside the right arm of the tight-head and gripping the tight-head prop ' s jersey on the back or side. The loose-head prop must not grip the chest, arm, sleeve or collar of the opposition tight-head prop. The loose-head prop must not exert any downward pressure. There is a new law about having full front row cover. It seems that for next season (2003/4) two props will be needed on the bench to avoid uncontested scrums happening. Does that mean the bench increases to 8 or do we drop another position off the bench? I'm not sure I have a definitive answer. I suspect they'll increase the number of replacements or will have to define which front row positions player are "suitably trained and experienced" to play in. Or both, of course. What bothers me is the effect this particular adjustment to law will have on the game below ZP level. Putting the ball into the scrum. What does the law say and how close to 'straight' is the average feed in the Zurich Premiership? Well the law book actually says that "straight" is in the middle of where the shoulders meet (of the opposing front rows), but it also says that acceptable deviation from that line is one ball's length either way, so you make your mind up on that one. Strangely, I was having exactly this conversation with a RFU adviser this morning and he was saying that it's easy for the referee to gain or lose "points" on his assessment for the ball not going in straight. If you ask most front row players, they would tell you that they don't care how straight it is because they don't actually want to strike for the ball. What they want to do is push the opposition off it or spoil their quick and tidy possession. Personally I see it as a re-start, and some captains / front row players will say so before the game, so it makes it less of an issue, but the whole point is that the referee should enable fair competition, so strictly, straight should be exactly that.