Imported front row options

Jemo

I was just wondering what people think about the recent spate of southern hemisphere front row signings by Leinster and Munster in particular. This is a problem area for Ireland, andwhilst I recognise the fact that we are approaching a world cup year and need cover, there is perhaps too many imports in this area of the pitch. We are unlikely to win major tournaments next sesaon in any case at club level with the hec groups assigned and it would have been an ideal chance to give fringe irish front rowers valuable experience. The likes of Ross, Ryan, McGrath, and Harriswright need to get game time at some stage and this could be a good opportunity wasted.

Leinster will have virtually 2 front rows next year, one irish qualified and one souther hemisperical. Ross, Fogs, Healy... Van de Mwere, Strauss, Stan. whilst munster have brought in two imported props for the new season. If we are going to develop in this area, a rule needs to be brought in to ensure irish participation in the front row, i.e at least one starting front rower must be irish qualified.

I understand that Strauss and munsters new signing can become irish qualified, but at the end of the day we should be trying to promote actual Irish players or those who have lived here for a time before being considered as such an option. The likes of Gleeson and Boss have served us well in the past because they felt a part of Ireland and were not told, come here for a few years, develop and we'll make you an international, its easier than making the s.a or nz team. It hinders the development of our own props and the options we are recieving aren't the best possible players, they are players who are unlikely to become internationals of note in their own county.

Personally, I think in order to achieve results in the long term we need to start promoting Irish talent in this area.

danthefan

It's not ideal but Leinster really had no option but to make another signing.

Aside from that I know Jack McGrath is highly rated within the setup and the 2 props on the U20 side are at Leinster.

You can't just chuck a youngster who isn't ready into a HEC matchday squad (which is what would have to happen if Leinster didn't sign VDM), it does no good for anyone. Can you imagine a 20 year old with no experience had to come in against Toulouse in the SF in May there?

Jemo

true enough, but at some stage we need to stop using the this short term solution. Munsters injury crisis this season showed that the youngsters can hold their own, whilst there are other options in connacht and britain who could have been brought back. Barring injury in which case we could sign temporary cover, I see no problem with having a somewhat inexperienced front rower on a 23 man bench. In order to be able to gina the necessary experience they need to play with some regularity. The Heineken play offs are toward the end of the season, if McGrath for example was involved in all squads up until then, getting decent experience whilst the internationals are away and substituting from time to time then he would be prepared for heineken bench spot come May. Unfortunatley, whilst the internationals are away we could see a front row of stan, strauss, van de mwere playing, which is not good for ireland in the long term. If fringe irish players can't get gametime whilst the internationals are away then when will they? Its simple enough, in Ireland we have too few teams to be stocking up on imports in a particular area, in the south it is much easier to get quality gametime as there are so many quality sides. The british and irsh cup will help us in this respect, but I think we need to meet this problem head on and fix our scrum woes once and for all.

buck65

If I'm not mistaken Munster have replaced one import - Brugnaut with another du Preez. Hardly a spate!
Bizzarely Munster are doing more to develop front row options than any other province at the moment, I say bizarrely because we probably have the poorest scrum of the provinces at the moment but with all the game time and coaching these guys like Ryan, Hurley, Archer are getting and will get next season we may actually have decent front row options in a year or two at international level.

I feel we do need tight head cover in Munster though as Hayes is finished at HCup level and with Buckley the heir apparent and injury prone we will really struggle here in the next season. Dave Ryan has played there but primarily is a loosehead. Marcus will lose his place to du Preez and as he covers one side is not really a bench option except for the 23 man panel in the HCup.

At hooker we (Ireland) are strong with Best, Flannery when fit well backed up by Cronin and Fogarty. I expect Cronin to replace Flannery in Munster in 2 years time and Varley is progressing well too. D Fogarty if he gets his throwing sorted could be an option for Connacht if Cronin returns to Limerick.

Edit - just spotted we signed a young TH called Borlase. Badly needed cover.

Risteard

I agree to an extent but both Munster and Leinster needed to sign props with the extended matchday squads.

For the big matches I expect both Hayes and Buckley to be in the squad with either Horan or Ryan on the bench.

Prop is a position where young players can't just be thrown in and hope they work. It's a very technical position where a lot of strength is required that a lot of 21/22 year olds mighn't have. Obviously you get guys like Healy who are freakishly strong anyway and can step up but even he's struggling at times.

It all comes down to the coaching and attitude towards the scrum IMO. The french take it a lot more seriously than we do and the results show, their props vary in sizes from Domingo to Barcella yet the end result is generally the same. Both fantastic props IMO that could push for a world XV.

Foxtrol

I dont think its fair to put so much blame on Leinster just yet. The loss of CJ has come a couple of seasons too soon for the likes of McGrath, Maguire and O'Connell so another prop had to be brought in for cover. As they haven't signed a marquee name they have left the option of letting these younger guys leap frog him if they develop quicker than expected. If Leinster are still signing NIQ props in 2 - 3 years, then its time to bring up the issue.

If anything Munsters signings have been more detrimental as all of Ryan, Hurley, Archer are between 1 and 4 years older than Leinsters oldest prop, in McGrath, and should (barring injury) start pushing for bench/starting places by now. The signing of Du Preez is a vast improvement on Brugnaut and the opposite to what Leinster have done and thus will mean it will be much harder for those behind to get game time. Mushy is nearly pushing 30 and needs to be either given a proper run at starting or else cleared out to make way for the younger guys.

Risteard

Foxtrol wrote: »

I dont think its fair to put so much blame on Leinster just yet. The loss of CJ has come a couple of seasons too soon for the likes of McGrath, Maguire and O'Connell so another prop had to be brought in for cover. As they haven't signed a marquee name they have left the option of letting these younger guys leap frog him if they develop quicker than expected. If Leinster are still signing NIQ props in 2 - 3 years, then its time to bring up the issue.

If anything Munsters signings have been more detrimental as all of Ryan, Hurley, Archer are between 1 and 4 years older than Leinsters oldest prop, in McGrath, and should (barring injury) start pushing for bench/starting places by now. The signing of Du Preez is a vast improvement on Brugnaut and the opposite to what Leinster have done and thus will mean it will be much harder for those behind to get game time. Mushy is nearly pushing 30 and needs to be either given a proper run at starting or else cleared out to make way for the younger guys.

Ryan and Hurley are incredibly injury prone though.

redroar1942

Foxtrol wrote: »

I dont think its fair to put so much blame on Leinster just yet. The loss of CJ has come a couple of seasons too soon for the likes of McGrath, Maguire and O'Connell so another prop had to be brought in for cover. As they haven't signed a marquee name they have left the option of letting these younger guys leap frog him if they develop quicker than expected. If Leinster are still signing NIQ props in 2 - 3 years, then its time to bring up the issue.

If anything Munsters signings have been more detrimental as all of Ryan, Hurley, Archer are between 1 and 4 years older than Leinsters oldest prop, in McGrath, and should (barring injury) start pushing for bench/starting places by now. The signing of Du Preez is a vast improvement on Brugnaut and the opposite to what Leinster have done and thus will mean it will be much harder for those behind to get game time. Mushy is nearly pushing 30 and needs to be either given a proper run at starting or else cleared out to make way for the younger guys.

No no is blaming anyone. It's an important topic that I'd like to contribute to, any chance you could not turn this thread into another Munster/Leinster p1ssing contest?

Foxtrol

redroar1942 wrote: »

No no is blaming anyone. It's an important topic that I'd like to contribute to, any chance you could not turn this thread into another Munster/Leinster p1ssing contest?

Sorry did you read the original post? A good hint of Thornley about it: saying its a Munster and Leinster problem and focusing nearly entirely on Leinster. Thought a bit of balance was in order. You can point out were I'm wrong if you want.

buck65

Where you're wrong is we replaced a NIQ from France with one from S Africa and brought in an Australian journeyman TH as cover to our 2 Irish squad players who will be away for a good proportion of the season.
Leinster and Ulster have on the other hand had to import front row players as they really haven't produced any in the past 2/3 seasons. No doubt this will change in the near future but the majority of Leinster's starting props recently have been NIQ.
Apart from that Munster haven't really imported many front row players since professionalism began. Of course we have been lucky and reliant on Hayes, Horan and Flannery for the past seasons and haven't had to.

Of course Munster have done the opposite with their backs to what Leinster have done as we had to also.

Chucky the tree

Foxtrol wrote: »

I dont think its fair to put so much blame on Leinster just yet. The loss of CJ has come a couple of seasons too soon for the likes of McGrath, Maguire and O'Connell so another prop had to be brought in for cover. As they haven't signed a marquee name they have left the option of letting these younger guys leap frog him if they develop quicker than expected. If Leinster are still signing NIQ props in 2 - 3 years, then its time to bring up the issue.

If anything Munsters signings have been more detrimental as all of Ryan, Hurley, Archer are between 1 and 4 years older than Leinsters oldest prop, in McGrath, and should (barring injury) start pushing for bench/starting places by now. The signing of Du Preez is a vast improvement on Brugnaut and the opposite to what Leinster have done and thus will mean it will be much harder for those behind to get game time. Mushy is nearly pushing 30 and needs to be either given a proper run at starting or else cleared out to make way for the younger guys.

Considering they signed the second best Irish TH(arguable best) and had him warm the bench for the season I'd have to disagree here.

anonymous_joe

Ireland are the worst scrummaging nation in the top tier of rugby, with the worst props.

We've no choice but to import.

Without a major shift in culture, that will always remain the case.

Foxtrol

buck65 wrote: »

Where you're wrong is we replaced a NIQ from France with one from S Africa and brought in an Australian journeyman TH as cover to our 2 Irish squad players who will be away for a good proportion of the season.

An backup quality French player for a probable starter quality South African. Both make it more difficult for young lads to get into the squad than last season.

Leinster and Ulster have on the other hand had to import front row players as they really haven't produced any in the past 2/3 seasons. No doubt this will change in the near future but the majority of Leinster's starting props recently have been NIQ.

Cian Healy

Apart from that Munster haven't really imported many front row players since professionalism began. Of course we have been lucky and reliant on Hayes, Horan and Flannery for the past seasons and haven't had to.

With Munsters full Irish front row now fading, they are feeling pressure due to the lack of decent Irish props. This same pressure has been felt by other provinces for the last number of years which caused them to sign NIQ front row players, a decision which they were vilified for in some quarters.

Of course Munster have done the opposite with their backs to what Leinster have done as we had to also.

Agreed. I'm saying that now due to an aging squad Munster are now also losing the high ground in the front row too. Its a problem felt and caused by all provinces but Ii didnt feel the OP demonstrated that fairly.

Zzippy

One TH Irish prospect that I haven't heard much mention of on these boards is Jamie Hagan, who is improving well in Connacht, did very well in the second half of the season, and really shored up the scrum when he came on against Leinster and Toulon. Contracted to Connacht for another year, if he continues to improve I wouldn't be surprised to see him move to a bigger club and come into the reckoning for Ireland. If he was still at Leinster he would be behind Stan Wright and not getting any gametime, if he works out long term it will be another example of the benefit of players going to Connacht for a couple of years.

Amazotheamazing

There's different types of signings though.

Wilkinson in Connacht is different to Botha in Ulster. Wilkinson was capped by Ireland after three years, Botha will never be able to play for Ireland.

Now, Borlase might already be Irish qualified via his parents, or he might qualify on residency a la Wilkinson. It's disingenious to compare his signing to that of Botha, for example.

I also don't think it's necessarily a disaster for young players. The way the game has gone, and is continuing to go, means a lot of teams effectively have pools of props of high calibre to call on, Toulouse for example. The days of a front row being unchanged from September to May is gone. I'd say in the future most teams will have 9 or so props to call on. The position is just that important now.

Foxtrol

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Considering they signed the second best Irish TH(arguable best) and had him warm the bench for the season I'd have to disagree here.

Kidney and Cheika must both see major issues with his game. Due to CJ leaving and a primarily LH signing Ross should definitely see more game time next season. It'll definitely be make or break for him.

bugler

We have issues with props, but I don't think the latest signings are the real problem. With an expanded bench to fill for at least some competitions we need more props, and the current structure means it is hard to avoid putting in guys who are just not ready yet.

There have been some big errors made, in no particular order:

1. Allowing Ulster and Leinster to sign Intl Saffer THs. The bright side is Ulster have seen a big benefit from Botha's signing, and hopefully he will have improved the youngsters (and not so young) up there. CJ was a waste of a space and money and didn't add anything to Leinster. The PAG allowing this was based of the faulty assumption that Munster had two International THs, when they didn't.

2. Forcing Ross on Leinster. Cheika obviously didn't want him. He should have been left in the GP where he was prized for what he is: an immobile scrummager.

3. Hagan going to Connacht. Related to points 1 & 2. Hagan is far from a bad scrummager, and could have been understudy to Wright at TH at Leinster. Should be going to NZ anyway, IMO.

4. Assuming, despite any concrete evidence, that Buckley was worth an IRFU contract.

5. Flogging Hayes. This dates back to EOS, and continues under Kidney. You can't have two international THs at the same province. Especially if you don't rotate adequately. Playing Hayes against Scotland in the 6N and again against NZ this weekend is a bad joke.

There are deeper reasons going through the coaching and underage set up, mainly relating to how we view the scrum and how it is coached (or not). The basic message is this: You need Irish players playing at prop. In a really problem position, like TH now, we need Irish guys playing there. Hagan should be playing there at Leinster, and hopefully will next season, Ross should be playing there at Quins (ignoring the fact Kidney won't pick him), Fitzpatrick or Andress should be playing there at Ulster.

Hitching the wagon for so many years to Hayes and latterly Buckley has not been a good move, the former being well past it and the latter having proved nothing at HC/International level. So next season, whoever has been signed, we need Irish THs playing. I think we're looking well at LH. Court and Healy are fine props and I think Dave Ryan will come good too.

buck65

If anything it has highlighted an area where the IRFU and the provinces took their eye off the ball. Ireland have been lucky with the likes of Horan, Corrigan, Hayes, Clohessy over the past few years. Their longevity has actually been detrimental to the game here and now we are in a position where we have the worst scrum of all the top 8 countries a year before a World Cup.
We have been big upping ourselves for the past year since winning the Grand Slam against very poor opposition apart from France who took the year to experiment. We actually peaked in 2009 and I expect us to be a pale shadow of that side next year when the likes of O Driscoll, D'arcy, O Connell, Wallace, Hayes , O Gara, Horan, Flannery will be in the winter of their careers and Ireland as predictable as ever.
I'm just glad we won something worth a damn with those players as they haven't done much since then in green.

Quin_Dub

The reason Ireland have such a weak pool of Front Row players is down to a policy decision taken by the IRFU about 7/8 years ago..

Following a court action in Wales where a player who was paralysed in a collapsed scrum sued The Welsh union (and the ref , clubs etc) as he was not "front row trained" the insurers went to all the 4 unions that they provided Insurance coverage for - Wales, England, Scotland and Ireland and demanded that changes be introduced to the laws regarding scrummaging to reduce the risk exposure at under-age and Jnr levels... The other 3 unions told them to get stuffed and accepted higher premiums/excesses etc etc.. the IRFU agreed to the changes!!

So..Since then at all under-age levels (except U20 bizarrely) and all Junior levels up to and including J2 (3rd team) the scrum may not move more than 1 metre in any direction - Effectively a single step.

The impact is 2 fold , Props now no longer attack the scrum as the option of driving the opposition off the ball no longer exists so they simply lean in and take the strain.. The secondary impact is that coaches no longer really coach the scrum as they don't need to.

This also impacts the scrummaging of 2nd rows too!!

Also, when selecting players, they no longer pick the stereo-typical prop type to play in the front row...they pick a stocky back-rower that's a bit too slow for the back-row but still a good ball carrier...So the genetic props aren't playing in Schools/Youths teams anymore and have been lost to the game..

As these guys come out of the underage systems , they are playing against guys with a similar background at AIL level , but when we move up to Magners/HEC/International we are badly exposed.

Cian Healy is a classic example... A fine footballer and hugely strong.. But the 1st time he had to actually scrummage full bore in his entire life was the 1st Magners game he played....Too late!!

If you look back to the time before this law change , Ireland had a series of fine scrummagers - Clohessy , Wallace , Paco Fitz , Des Fitz , Paul McCarthy etc etc... But we haven't produced a single "scrummaging" prop in the last 10 years..

Unfortunately there isn't a quick fix for this.. Obviously the 1st thing that MUST happen is that they restore scrummaging at all levels , but that will take probably 5yrs+ to wash through to the system to give us a new generation of scrummagers.

In the mean-time there are few things we can do to shore us up..

• Find some SH players via Granny rule.
• Import some good U21 players and "naturalise" them under 3yr rule.
• Take the current irish U18/U20 players and fund them to go to NZ or SA for a few years (College Scholarships??) to learn their trade there..

Bottom line some major efforts required by IRFU to correct the short-sighted decision they made years ago....

Jemo

Foxtrol wrote: »

Sorry did you read the original post? A good hint of Thornley about it: saying its a Munster and Leinster problem and focusing nearly entirely on Leinster. Thought a bit of balance was in order. You can point out were I'm wrong if you want.

I'm a Leinster season ticket holder for many years, that is why I focused on Leinster as it is where I have the most knowledge. I 'm not blaming anyone, I'm just highlighting the fact that to my eyes its a problem.I do not want a munster leinster debate, imports blocking indigenous development is a problem which exists to a certain extent in all the provinces.

Foxtrol

Jemo wrote: »

I'm a Leinster season ticket holder for many years, that is why I focused on Leinster as it is where I have the most knowledge. I 'm not blaming anyone, I'm just highlighting the fact that to my eyes its a problem.I do not want a munster leinster debate, imports blocking indigenous development is a problem which exists to a certain extent in all the provinces.

Again we saw from the furore from the Thornley article from what happens when you focus examples on one province. Apologies as I probably jumped the gun a bit but your post sounded like the near party line from a large number of Munster fans against Ulster and Leinsters NIQ front row signings in the past (see the Leinster thread after the latest prop signing for an example).

Have to say thats an excellent post by Quin_Dub. The NIQ issue is going to become an issue for all provinces now that the longstanding members of the Irish front row are feeling the effects of age.

anonymous_joe

bugler wrote: »

1. Allowing Ulster and Leinster to sign Intl Saffer THs. The bright side is Ulster have seen a big benefit from Botha's signing, and hopefully he will have improved the youngsters (and not so young) up there. CJ was a waste of a space and money and didn't add anything to Leinster. The PAG allowing this was based of the faulty assumption that Munster had two International THs, when they didn't.

Just a note on this;

CJ Van der Linde and BJ Botha are so much better than Hayes and Buckley that it's embarrassing. Given that those two are our best props according to the coaches, that's fairly damning. Either way, allowing two of our sides the chance to compete in the scrums is not a mistake. It's not all about the national side.

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The reason Ireland have such a weak pool of Front Row players is down to a policy decision taken by the IRFU about 7/8 years ago..

Following a court action in Wales where a player who was paralysed in a collapsed scrum sued The Welsh union (and the ref , clubs etc) as he was not "front row trained" the insurers went to all the 4 unions that they provided Insurance coverage for - Wales, England, Scotland and Ireland and demanded that changes be introduced to the laws regarding scrummaging to reduce the risk exposure at under-age and Jnr levels... The other 3 unions told them to get stuffed and accepted higher premiums/excesses etc etc.. the IRFU agreed to the changes!!

So..Since then at all under-age levels (except U20 bizarrely) and all Junior levels up to and including J2 (3rd team) the scrum may not move more than 1 metre in any direction - Effectively a single step.

The impact is 2 fold , Props now no longer attack the scrum as the option of driving the opposition off the ball no longer exists so they simply lean in and take the strain.. The secondary impact is that coaches no longer really coach the scrum as they don't need to.

This also impacts the scrummaging of 2nd rows too!!

Also, when selecting players, they no longer pick the stereo-typical prop type to play in the front row...they pick a stocky back-rower that's a bit too slow for the back-row but still a good ball carrier...So the genetic props aren't playing in Schools/Youths teams anymore and have been lost to the game..

As these guys come out of the underage systems , they are playing against guys with a similar background at AIL level , but when we move up to Magners/HEC/International we are badly exposed.

Cian Healy is a classic example... A fine footballer and hugely strong.. But the 1st time he had to actually scrummage full bore in his entire life was the 1st Magners game he played....Too late!!

If you look back to the time before this law change , Ireland had a series of fine scrummagers - Clohessy , Wallace , Paco Fitz , Des Fitz , Paul McCarthy etc etc... But we haven't produced a single "scrummaging" prop in the last 10 years..

Unfortunately there isn't a quick fix for this.. Obviously the 1st thing that MUST happen is that they restore scrummaging at all levels , but that will take probably 5yrs+ to wash through to the system to give us a new generation of scrummagers.

In the mean-time there are few things we can do to shore us up..

• Find some SH players via Granny rule.
• Import some good U21 players and "naturalise" them under 3yr rule.
• Take the current irish U18/U20 players and fund them to go to NZ or SA for a few years (College Scholarships??) to learn their trade there..

Bottom line some major efforts required by IRFU to correct the short-sighted decision they made years ago....

Great post, but I've studied a couple of cases like that, (Vowles one or whatever is one iirc) and the issue is one of life > rugby. Few would argue over that.

It's a simple fact that scrummaging is dangerous, and in this part of the world, people will always err on the side of caution.

Also, if memory serves, most years in South Africa, a handful of poor kids will die in scrummaging accidents. Is that worth it?

The major problem with reduced contest scrums is that the opposite isn't really workable. I was at a game one of my friends was meant to be playing in recently-ish, though he got injured and couldn't play. One team had a really good prop (schools player) the other side had no proper props at all. (Not that high a standard game, not very serious either. The prop was a ringer.) Obviously the side with the actual props was dominating in teh scrums. Against lads who can't really scrummage, it's just too dangerous. In schools rugby, etc, there's just not enough of a guarentee of an equal competition for them to allow more contest sadly.

Quin_Dub

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Great post, but I've studied a couple of cases like that, (Vowles one or whatever is one iirc) and the issue is one of life > rugby. Few would argue over that.

It's a simple fact that scrummaging is dangerous, and in this part of the world, people will always err on the side of caution.

Also, if memory serves, most years in South Africa, a handful of poor kids will die in scrummaging accidents. Is that worth it?

The major problem with reduced contest scrums is that the opposite isn't really workable. I was at a game one of my friends was meant to be playing in recently-ish, though he got injured and couldn't play. One team had a really good prop (schools player) the other side had no proper props at all. (Not that high a standard game, not very serious either. The prop was a ringer.) Obviously the side with the actual props was dominating in teh scrums. Against lads who can't really scrummage, it's just too dangerous. In schools rugby, etc, there's just not enough of a guarentee of an equal competition for them to allow more contest sadly.

Absolutely agree with regard to Player safety - However if the other countries can manage it , surely we can?

It would require some changes to the player registration process to ensure that players are listed as "front-row trained" and also that referees are given appropriate training so they manage the interaction properly.

Having a players listed as "front row ready" provides the legal protection that the insurers were looking for and also puts the onus back on the individual (where it should be)in terms of where they play..

There also needs to be a serious investment in Scrum coaching to ensure that the coaches know how to coach the scrum as a whole and propping specifically...

The loss of people like Roly Meates from the IRFU coaching structures has been huge... His "Front row schools" that he held in Donnybrook every season when I was growing up were legendary!!!

We need to get him back and encourage as many former props as possible to get involved in coaching!!

Chucky the tree

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Great post, but I've studied a couple of cases like that, (Vowles one or whatever is one iirc) and the issue is one of life > rugby. Few would argue over that.

It's a simple fact that scrummaging is dangerous, and in this part of the world, people will always err on the side of caution.

Also, if memory serves, most years in South Africa, a handful of poor kids will die in scrummaging accidents. Is that worth it?

The major problem with reduced contest scrums is that the opposite isn't really workable. I was at a game one of my friends was meant to be playing in recently-ish, though he got injured and couldn't play. One team had a really good prop (schools player) the other side had no proper props at all. (Not that high a standard game, not very serious either. The prop was a ringer.) Obviously the side with the actual props was dominating in teh scrums. Against lads who can't really scrummage, it's just too dangerous. In schools rugby, etc, there's just not enough of a guarentee of an equal competition for them to allow more contest sadly.

Surely it's more dangerous now then ever before. If Irish props are going into ML games where scrummaging is fully legal and Irish props have never done this before then that seems like a far more dangerous situation then just allowing kids to scrummage properly from a young age once fully trained.

Sangre

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Also, if memory serves, most years in South Africa, a handful of poor kids will die in scrummaging accidents. Is that worth it?

I don't think so. A death in rugby will make the news/rugby news sites. The only recent cases I recall is a young Argentinian and a young Welsh guy. Open to correction.

Quin_Dub

Statistically speaking the majority of Spinal injuries that do occur in Rugby don't happen in the Scrummage , they happen at the tackle/breakdown area due to the fact that players are moving faster and are more likely to be at awkward angles etc etc..

Injuries do of course happen in the scrum but the mitigation is best achieve not by turning it into a sham but by ensuring that all involved are well trained and prepared for the job in hand.

If we had full on scrummaging , properly managed from U13/U14 level , players would develop steadily both physically and from a technical standpoint so that when they get to Adult rugby they have all of the necessary tools to be effective scrummagers and to truly enjoy one of the unique elements of our game...

For those of us that played in the front-row...there is nothing like the buzz of driving the opposition pack over the line for a try from a 5yd scrum...Everybody should get to enjoy that!!

anonymous_joe

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Absolutely agree with regard to Player safety - However if the other countries can manage it , surely we can?

It would require some changes to the player registration process to ensure that players are listed as "front-row trained" and also that referees are given appropriate training so they manage the interaction properly.

Having a players listed as "front row ready" provides the legal protection that the insurers were looking for and also puts the onus back on the individual (where it should be)in terms of where they play..

There also needs to be a serious investment in Scrum coaching to ensure that the coaches know how to coach the scrum as a whole and propping specifically...

The loss of people like Roly Meates from the IRFU coaching structures has been huge... His "Front row schools" that he held in Donnybrook every season when I was growing up were legendary!!!

We need to get him back and encourage as many former props as possible to get involved in coaching!!

Ireland probably produces the least potential props though, perhaps Scotland aside. We just don't have the same number of fatties as some of the Latin or Polynesian countries (or countries with access to both), and there's very little glamour attached to the scrummaging here. Look at France where the crowd goes absolutely ballistic for good scrummaging - that's never going ot be equalled here.

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Surely it's more dangerous now then ever before. If Irish props are going into ML games where scrummaging is fully legal and Irish props have never done this before then that seems like a far more dangerous situation then just allowing kids to scrummage properly from a young age once fully trained.

Probably is. Then again, how many Irish props are there? Six? Seven?

That's being a bit silly of me, but the thing is, AIL 1, maybe 2 and 3 (I'd have doubts about the general standards there, know a few lads playing or who have played that standard) there wouldn't be a huge amount of good props really.

Sangre wrote: »

I don't think so. A death in rugby will make the news/rugby news sites. The only recent cases I recall is a young Argentinian and a young Welsh guy. Open to correction.

I may well be wrong. More than open to correction here.

Quin_Dub

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Ireland probably produces the least potential props though, perhaps Scotland aside. We just don't have the same number of fatties as some of the Latin or Polynesian countries (or countries with access to both), and there's very little glamour attached to the scrummaging here. Look at France where the crowd goes absolutely ballistic for good scrummaging - that's never going ot be equalled here.

Possibly..But then again - Given the growth in the crowds to games in the last 5/6 yrs , there is an entire generation of Irish Rugby watchers that have never had the opportunity to cheer a really powerful, dominant scrum...

If we build it....Will they cheer?? I think so...

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Probably is. Then again, how many Irish props are there? Six? Seven?

That's being a bit silly of me, but the thing is, AIL 1, maybe 2 and 3 (I'd have doubts about the general standards there, know a few lads playing or who have played that standard) there wouldn't be a huge amount of good props really.

This is kind of my point... The majority of the guys playing AIL these days have developed under the current laws , hence that aren't strong scrummagers because they never had to be.. The approach to the scrum has been altered at club level here to a point where it is merely a method of restarting the game , it is not seen as an attacking weapon in the way that the French, Saffers or Kiwis see it..

A dominant scrum will win you matches - Period.. It gives the opposition poor ball , ties in their backrow and puts the half-backs on the back foot. It also gives your back-row the defensive advantage as you can give them a lead by bringing the scrum up on the open side putting them a yard or two closer to the out-half..

All these are tools not available to Ireland and to a lesser extent the Provincial teams due to the issues we've all discussed...

Either we take the necessary steps to address the underlying issues or we will terminally slide backwards in the rankings at International and Club level...

anonymous_joe

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Possibly..But then again - Given the growth in the crowds to games in the last 5/6 yrs , there is an entire generation of Irish Rugby watchers that have never had the opportunity to cheer a really powerful, dominant scrum...

If we build it....Will they cheer?? I think so...

Never to the same degree as in other countries. It matters so much more there.

This is kind of my point... The majority of the guys playing AIL these days have developed under the current laws , hence that aren't strong scrummagers because they never had to be.. The approach to the scrum has been altered at club level here to a point where it is merely a method of restarting the game , it is not seen as an attacking weapon in the way that the French, Saffers or Kiwis see it..

A dominant scrum will win you matches - Period.. It gives the opposition poor ball , ties in their backrow and puts the half-backs on the back foot. It also gives your back-row the defensive advantage as you can give them a lead by bringing the scrum up on the open side putting them a yard or two closer to the out-half..

All these are tools not available to Ireland and to a lesser extent the Provincial teams due to the issues we've all discussed...

Either we take the necessary steps to address the underlying issues or we will terminally slide backwards in the rankings at International and Club level...

My problem is that there are only two set pieces, scrums and line outs. We've surrendered one of the two already.

Ciaran-Irl

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The reason Ireland have such a weak pool of Front Row players is down to a policy decision taken by the IRFU about 7/8 years ago..

Following a court action in Wales where a player who was paralysed in a collapsed scrum sued The Welsh union (and the ref , clubs etc) as he was not "front row trained" the insurers went to all the 4 unions that they provided Insurance coverage for - Wales, England, Scotland and Ireland and demanded that changes be introduced to the laws regarding scrummaging to reduce the risk exposure at under-age and Jnr levels... The other 3 unions told them to get stuffed and accepted higher premiums/excesses etc etc.. the IRFU agreed to the changes!!

So..Since then at all under-age levels (except U20 bizarrely) and all Junior levels up to and including J2 (3rd team) the scrum may not move more than 1 metre in any direction - Effectively a single step.

The impact is 2 fold , Props now no longer attack the scrum as the option of driving the opposition off the ball no longer exists so they simply lean in and take the strain.. The secondary impact is that coaches no longer really coach the scrum as they don't need to.

This also impacts the scrummaging of 2nd rows too!!

Also, when selecting players, they no longer pick the stereo-typical prop type to play in the front row...they pick a stocky back-rower that's a bit too slow for the back-row but still a good ball carrier...So the genetic props aren't playing in Schools/Youths teams anymore and have been lost to the game..

As these guys come out of the underage systems , they are playing against guys with a similar background at AIL level , but when we move up to Magners/HEC/International we are badly exposed.

Cian Healy is a classic example... A fine footballer and hugely strong.. But the 1st time he had to actually scrummage full bore in his entire life was the 1st Magners game he played....Too late!!

If you look back to the time before this law change , Ireland had a series of fine scrummagers - Clohessy , Wallace , Paco Fitz , Des Fitz , Paul McCarthy etc etc... But we haven't produced a single "scrummaging" prop in the last 10 years..

Unfortunately there isn't a quick fix for this.. Obviously the 1st thing that MUST happen is that they restore scrummaging at all levels , but that will take probably 5yrs+ to wash through to the system to give us a new generation of scrummagers.

In the mean-time there are few things we can do to shore us up..

• Find some SH players via Granny rule.
• Import some good U21 players and "naturalise" them under 3yr rule.
• Take the current irish U18/U20 players and fund them to go to NZ or SA for a few years (College Scholarships??) to learn their trade there..

Bottom line some major efforts required by IRFU to correct the short-sighted decision they made years ago....

Great post, as others have said.

Having said that, it doesn't stack up well against the way that the under 20s props (Stewart Maguire and Jack O'Connell) have consistently bested the English & French scrums and this year's world championships.