IRB looks to stamp out uncontested scrums

Riskymove

Interesting....following on from Quins debacle I presume




Uncontested scrums should be a rarer sight in rugby in the coming season after the International Rugby Board (IRB) today sanctioned the inclusion of an extra man on the bench.

The amendment to Law 3 allows for 23 players, rather than 22, in matchday squad, with three frontrow replacements to be included so as to reduce the number of times injuries negate a crucial part of the game.

The rule change can be adopted by any domestic union. The ERC and the Magners League can also implement the change if the respective unions involved agree.

“The alteration allows National Unions with jurisdiction over matches in their territory the option of allowing up to eight named replacements in a match day squad. This will also operate for cross-border club or provincial competitions with the agreement of the respective Unions involved,” said an IRB statement this afternoon.

“At this stage the amendments to Law 3 are for domestic implementation only by respective unions, but the IRB will monitor the implementation of the amended Law within competitions. The implementation will not apply to international matches.”

If implemented, three specialist frontrows, two props and a hooker, must be included among the eight replacements.

If all suitable replacements are unable to continue and another injury occurs, the injured player may not be replaced, so as to avoid giving an advantage to the team going to uncontested scrums.

The English RFU has already announced its decision to implement the change, while it appears likely other unions will follow suit, given the fact the amendment came about “following requests by several member unions to address the issue”.

De Deraco

Hopefully its brought in for J4 rugby.....

Eoin

If I recall correctly; during the first Lions test, John Smit went off when the 'Boks seemed to have the game in hand, but his replacement got injured so Smit could come back on when the Lions seemed to be staging a comeback.

Not that different from the Quinns blood sub thing, only less subterfuge is needed.

De Deraco wrote:

Hopefully its brought in for J4 rugby.....

Those rules have nothing to do with about an injured player coming off though, so I don't think this would make any difference. I'm in two minds about the scrummaging rules at junior level, but that's for a different thread.

Kalashnikov_Kid

De Deraco wrote: »

Hopefully its brought in for J4 rugby.....

That'll be bad news for some *cough* UCD :pac:

remus808

This is good for Leinster with their current surplus of props..

Stev_o

karmabass wrote: »

This is good for Leinster with their current surplus of props..

They were guilty of it too this season.

remus808

Stev_o wrote: »

They were guilty of it too this season.

I know but with CJ fit and Mike Ross joining the fray things will be much different this year! Best set of props any club can boast IMO

Stev_o

karmabass wrote: »

I know but with CJ fit and Mike Ross joining the fray things will be much different this year! Best set of props any club can boast IMO

True it ll be interesting to see though what the rules are set for this 2nd bench spot then, im guessing that's it is emergency only ie you can't use him as a regular sub only in the event that a prop is unfit to continue.

Amabokke

I think the uncontested scrums were always a ridiculous rule. With the sheer pressure, injuries and amount of scrums extra props are always needed. Some of them can't even play for the full 80 minutes anymore.

Eoin

I don't think it's a ridiculous rule, but it's one that's too easy to take advantage of. The front row is an incredibly specialised area, and I would hate the idea of someone being thrown into contested scrummaging at any level if they're not experienced enough.

Stev_o wrote:

True it ll be interesting to see though what the rules are set for this 2nd bench spot then, im guessing that's it is emergency only ie you can't use him as a regular sub only in the event that a prop is unfit to continue.

It won't matter either way. This isn't like the blood capsule incident where you can prove one way or the other if a front row is fit to play.

theKramer

eoin wrote: »

It won't matter either way. This isn't like the blood capsule incident where you can prove one way or the other if a front row is fit to play.

But they have accounted for that by stating that if the teams have to go uncontested even after both props are put on, then the team that causes the uncontested scrums has to go down to 14 players, which should stop any team deliberately seeking to go uncontested.

Eoin

theKramer wrote: »

But they have accounted for that by stating that if the teams have to go uncontested even after both props are put on, then the team that causes the uncontested scrums has to go down to 14 players, which should stop any team deliberately seeking to go uncontested.

I was responding to the post about if you can only bring on the extra sub in an emergency or as a tactical sub.

theKramer

Sorry dude

Some interesting info on the trial of this in France last year.

Taken from Planet-rugby:
"The solution needed to tackle the circumstances that lead to uncontested scrums, while ensuring that the unique shape and character of the scrum is retained. A process of thorough consultation and evaluation was undertaken, while a practical assessment in France demonstrated the merits of the alterations."

The model proved extremely successful in the French trials. An IRB sanctioned trial in 2007/08 saw the number of uncontested scrums dramatically reduced to just two in 994 matches in the top three divisions in 2007/08, compared to 145 matches finishing with uncontested scrums during the 2006/07 season.

FridaysWell

Hmm pretty interesting. Wonder if it will be brought in at underage level. Anyone know?

taidghbaby

me thinks that if it gets to the stage of uncontested scrums then you shouldn't be able to replace the last prop who goes off injured!

leeroybrown

Stev_o wrote: »

True it ll be interesting to see though what the rules are set for this 2nd bench spot then, im guessing that's it is emergency only ie you can't use him as a regular sub only in the event that a prop is unfit to continue.

You can read the amendment on the IRB site. There doesn't appear to be any stipulation about the circumstances that they can come on in. It only states that if adopted (and when there are 22 or 23 players in the squad) there must be six specialist front rows in the squad and one player on the bench with experience to cover each of the three front row positions.

taidghbaby wrote: »

me thinks that if it gets to the stage of uncontested scrums then you shouldn't be able to replace the last prop who goes off injured!

That's what they've proposed, along with a requirement to have a second specialist prop on the bench.

There's another upside to this too. If teams are forced to have a two props on the bench it's likely to give young players a better chance to get experience and improve. There'll be a much better chance of them being on the bench when there's a chance for them to get game time. Some sides mightn't like it but developing some props should be good for the game at all levels.

It appears to have worked out well in France where they used to have problems with uncontested scrums so it makes sense to adopt it elsewhere.

Eoin

FridaysWell wrote: »

Hmm pretty interesting. Wonder if it will be brought in at underage level. Anyone know?

Is this where you can only drive so many yards, and there is no turnover if the scrum turns 180 and so on? I don't see how they are related, as those rules have nothing to do with the amount of front rows on the bench.

FridaysWell

eoin wrote: »

Is this where you can only drive so many yards, and there is no turnover if the scrum turns 180 and so on? I don't see how they are related, as those rules have nothing to do with the amount of front rows on the bench.

????

i meant having 8 substitutes and 3 front row replacements

Eoin

FridaysWell wrote: »

????

Oh right - I thought that underage rugby has different scrummaging rules, like J2 and below does.