Scrum in the Heineken Cup Final

Tim Robbins

Right, I hope mods don't mind me doing this. This thread is just to talk about the Scrum in the final. What's your take on it and what happened? Include some youtubes or videos if you want.

Here's my take on it.

Tonga’uiha was lining his head directly opposite Ross in a number of the scrums in the first half. This meant Ross couldn't scrummage straight on the engage and it was very easy for Tonga'uiha to bore in.

I thought Tonga'uiha and Hartley went for Ross. I think second half, Leinster did something similar; Healy looked like he was boring in.

Poite just pinged whichever scrum was going back. In this regard he was very consistent and in fairness overall he had a good game.

So what do you all think?

bleg

Poite is a crap ref who's disinterested in the scrum.

Sundy

I think your more or less right. Northampton made no effort to scrummage straight or to bind legally. In the second half leinster game them some of their own medicine.

It kind of annoys me the way he doesnt blow for flankers being unbound.

PhatPiggins

bleg wrote: »

Poite is a crap ref who's disinterested in the scrum.

Rubbish, he's the best ref of a scrum hands down.

Ian_K

Poite gave the best display of rugby refereeing i think ive ever seen yesterday, faultless imo

Stev_o

How many re sets was there in the final?

Whats the average amount of resets in a normal game?

I thought our time wasn't wasted at scrum time like it usually is and it was great to see a contest for it.

Chances are both sides did everything illegal in the book but tbh how can you ref 16 players all doing something equally illegal? Just let it happen and let the players sort it out themselves tbh.

Sundy

PhatPiggins wrote: »

Rubbish, he's the best ref of a scrum hands down.

You mean he is the best ref as in he doesnt ref the scrum at all really. He ignores most of the laws at scum times ie. binding is optional.

Stev_o

Sundy wrote: »

You mean he is the best ref as in he doesnt ref the scrum at all really. He ignores most of the laws at scum times ie. binding is optional.

As opposed as to have 20 resets and scrums not being a contest because one of the infractions will be pinged straight away?

I know which one ill take.

PhatPiggins

Sundy wrote: »

You mean he is the best ref as in he doesnt ref the scrum at all really. He ignores most of the laws at scum times ie. binding is optional.

Feel free to attach a few links were he didn't allow the scrum to develope as a contest, didn't ref both teams exactly the same and gave the wrong team a penalty.

The scrum laws are largely unapplicable in their entirity. Poite uses common sense to make the best out of a largely an unrefable(word!) situation.

Ever see a ref try and apply the rules to the letter? It an absolute farce. The opposite being a ref who'll change his interpretation at every scrum and won't make the big calls a la George Clancey on Friday.

Hats off to Monsieur Poite he's the Pierluigi Collina of rugby

Conas

Poite is very good referee, just because he isn't a home town ref like Nigel "Munster" Owens doesn't mean he's crap. He had a very good game yesterday.

It's hard to know what happened in the scrum to be honest, it was an unreal turn around in the second half I'll say that. Northampton were at something illegal in the scrum, there's no doubt about it. I think an unsung hero yesterday was Greg Feek to be honest.

Tim Robbins

Conas wrote: »

I think an unsung hero yesterday was Greg Feek to be honest.

+1
They obviously decided to change scrum tactics at half time and it took a bit more than Sexton telling everyone about Liverpool.

Personally, I think there are only two ways you can tell when the loosey (or the tight head) is boring in.

1. When his bind is all over the place. Very hard to bore in when you have a long bind.

2. If the ref actually sticks his head over the top of the scrum. Much easier for taller refs to do this.

I remember when Hayse played in the '07 world cup and he was boring in but you couldn't tell until they showed the overhead camera angle.

Basically you can see the head angles very quickly when looking from above.

Cpt_Blackbeard

Tonga'uiha destroyed the Leinster scrum in the first half. Greg Feek sorted things out in the second.

wonton

Ian_K wrote: »

Poite gave the best display of rugby refereeing i think ive ever seen yesterday, faultless imo

Didnt he miss two heaslip blocks and i think horgan getting held back, all of which led to trys?

phog

PhatPiggins wrote: »

Rubbish, he's the best ref of a scrum hands down.

Anyone that watched the game on televison would know that Leo wouldn't agree with post quoted above, it was my first time ever hearing a captain use the "f" word while speaking directly to a ref.

rockman15

wonton wrote: »

Didnt he miss two heaslip blocks and i think horgan getting held back, all of which led to trys?

Yeah he did!

Whats worse is the binding of flankers and their interference with props. Several times I found Dowson interferring with Healy I think it was. Its more the responsiblity of the linesmen though as the ref cant see both sides of the scrum at the same time.

I agree on the boring part on the Tongahuia and Ross side of the scrum. You could see once Tongahuia had bored to a certain angle he would slip his binding, drop the shoulder under Ross and push him up illegally.

What actually flabergasted me is Poite's command of the english language. I would have thought the ERC would have made him attend or referee in an english speaking country for several months. Its difficult to communicate with players at the bottom of a ruck at the best of times but when doing so in broken english what hope have the players and the referee got. Even when talking with the captains yesterday I found it difficult to gather what he was on about at points. Add in the adrenaline and noise of the stadium and its not really fair, especially in a final.

Maybe an Erasmus programe for referees is a good thing!

PhatPiggins

phog wrote: »

Anyone that watched the game on televison would know that Leo wouldn't agree with post quoted above, it was my first time ever hearing a captain use the "f" word while speaking directly to a ref.

After having the entire Northampton pack pretty much just run over his back he was hardly going to say 'thank you for making the correct decision'

Sundy

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

Tonga'uiha destroyed the Leinster scrum in the first half. Greg Feek sorted things out in the second.

I think you will find the forwards sorted out the scrum, Feek can help them but hes not on the pitch.


Look at this picture, you can just make out the ridiculous angle the saints lose head is scrumming at.


and a different scrum:


Its rubbish refereeing to allow that to go on. Sorry but some laws are there to make it an even contest. Allowing a prop to bore is not an even contest.

Piliger

Conas wrote: »

Poite is very good referee, just because he isn't a home town ref like Nigel "Munster" Owens doesn't mean he's crap. He had a very good game yesterday.

I agree. The thing about rugby is that it a game of interpretative rules and very very complex and fast moving physical impact.

It is impossible and naive to measure a ref against some kind of 'perfection'. No ref can see everything. No ref can detect every technical infringement of the rules. Players have to learn to cope with this as part of the game. It's a man's game, not like football.

Did he miss thing ? of course ! That weird knock on advantage near the end was bizarre. NH knocked on as they drove froward, the refs hand went out, and then it went down again and he allowed NH to continue. But overall I thought he had an excellent game.

It's hard to know what happened in the scrum to be honest, it was an unreal turn around in the second half I'll say that. Northampton were at something illegal in the scrum, there's no doubt about it. I think an unsung hero yesterday was Greg Feek to be honest.

No one knows 'exactly' the cause of scrummaging issues. With 8 enormous muscle bound heaps of beef shoving straight at each other I think it is impossible to isolate one single element for blame or praise. Each front rower has two giants shoving them forward like a freight train and sometimes cannot control their own movements. Having said that I do think top refs should spend more time at specialist scrummaging sessions coached by top front rowers, to try to constantly improve their ability to detect illegal scrummaging.

Cpt_Blackbeard

Sundy wrote: »

I think you will find the forwards sorted out the scrum, Feek can help them but hes not on the pitch.

Look at this picture, you can just make out the ridiculous angle the saints lose head is scrumming at.

Its rubbish refereeing to allow that to go on. Sorry but some laws are there to make it an even contest. Allowing a prop to bore is not an even contest.

Its no coincidence that Leinster only began to compete in the scrums after halftime. Feek obviously told them what was happening which facilitated them to sort it out. Without a scrum coach like Feek, the Leinster 8 would have continued to be driven down the park at scrum time and Ross would have gone to the bin.

In my book, all the ref has to do is ensure that the frontrows don't go down then its up to the forwards themselves to sort out any issues they are having at scrum time. Of course the ref will spot a prop dropping their bind etc. but the frontrow should be able to stop the opposition boring in or resort to similar tactics themselves. If they have to, they can bring the refs attention to any illegal play by the opposition

Quint2010

If both teams were illegal at scrum time how can the referee be any good if he isnt penalising both team. Leinster took the view at HT that Poite simply wasnt reffing the scrum and acted according on the second half. But to say he is a good ref at scrum time is non sense.

Sundy

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

Its no coincidence that Leinster only began to compete in the scrums after halftime. Feek obviously told them what was happening which facilitated them to sort it out. Without a scrum coach like Feek, the Leinster 8 would have continued to be driven down the park at scrum time and Ross would have gone to the bin.

In my book, all the ref has to do is ensure that the frontrows don't go down then its up to the forwards themselves to sort out any issues they are having at scrum time. Of course the ref will spot a prop dropping their bind etc. but the frontrow should be able to stop the opposition boring in or resort to similar tactics themselves. If they have to, they can bring the refs attention to any illegal play by the opposition

So do you think its ok that in picture 1 that Mujati is binding on Healys arm? Poite is looking right at it and still doesnt see it, very poor refereeing to be honest. Leinster should have had a penalty straight off there instead of the penalty going to Saints as it did on this occasion.

CouchSmart

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

In my book, all the ref has to do is ensure that the frontrows don't go down then its up to the forwards themselves to sort out any issues they are having at scrum time.

Your book is wrong.

Feek simply compiled a video for the lads to watch at half time of the various ways NH were bending the rules and told them to sort it out - source: post match interview.

There was one scrum in particular where Soane got so low, shoulders well below his hips but unlike most props he just absorbed to the impact and then recoiled brilliantly - like a compressed spring being released. Soane's first half play, while not quite legal, was perhaps the best srummaging performance from a loose head I've ever seen.

Tim Robbins

Paul Rees from The Guardian blames Ross for boring in.

Paul Rees wrote:

Northampton knew that with Romain Poite refereeing they would, unlike Stade Français in the previous night's Amlin Challenge Cup final, be allowed to attack at the scrum. The Frenchman has no time for props who do not scrummage straight, as Leinster's Mike Ross found out in the first half. He struggled to cope with the forward and upward movement of Soane Tonga'uiha and bored in to relieve the pressure. After the interval he was far straighter. "We just tweaked things a bit, not much," said Ross. The tweaking was done by the Leinster scrum coach, Greg Feek, who stressed the need to keep the Saints front row down. Northampton's 22 points came after scrums, one of them against the head, but their hooker, Dylan Hartley, took a bang on the head scoring a try just before half-time; he was subdued after the break. Symbolically, Leinster took the lead for the first time from a penalty that they won by forcing the Northampton front row to pop out of a scrum.

The reason why I don't agree with this is as I said in my OP the position of the heads before the engagement sequence. NH Loose Head is directly opposite Leinster TH. That means the Leinster TH can't keep his neck straight.

What does anyone else think?

Cpt_Blackbeard

CouchSmart wrote: »

There was one scrum in particular where Soane got so low, shoulders well below his hips but unlike most props he just absorbed to the impact and then recoiled brilliantly - like a compressed spring being released. Soane's first half play, while not quite legal, was perhaps the best srummaging performance from a loose head I've ever seen.

Thats what amazed me about the NH scrum in the first half. They weren't winning all the hits but Tonga'uiha's power is amazing to watch.

Cpt_Blackbeard

Sundy wrote: »

So do you think its ok that in picture 1 that Mujati is binding on Healys arm? Poite is looking right at it and still doesnt see it, very poor refereeing to be honest. Leinster should have had a penalty straight off there instead of the penalty going to Saints as it did on this occasion.

Mujati is binding around the armpit which is a bit of a grey area. Although his binding in the picture is probably illegal, it is generally allowed. Mujati deserves credit for playing the ref's interpretation of binding on the arm.

SOB also looks to have lost his bind in that picture and is positioned very weirdly.

Clareman

I thought that Leinster did a great job of analysing the NH scrum and picked it apart for the second half, what struck me was the first few scrums in the second half Leinster didn't put any shove on, they just held their ground and set a solid platform, later on they held and then had a secondary push. Hartley also seemed to be badly hurt at the end of the second half.

Northampton's back row had a great influence on the scrum as well, they we more like second rows than back rows, not only by disrupting Healy & Ross' binds but also pushing their own props, in the second half Ross and Healy were binding a lot lower and weren't being disrupted. The angle that the front row engaged was higher in the second half also, they seemed intent on stopping NH coming up.

I would rate Leinster's second half scrum performance the best pack performance by an Irish team in the professional era, but I think the scrum performance is overshadowing the rest of the performance, the backrow really came into the game in the second half, Jennings made a huge difference and their line out was faultless.

CouchSmart

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Paul Rees from The Guardian blames Ross for boring in.

The reason why I don't agree with this is as I said in my OP the position of the heads before the engagement sequence. NH Loose Head is directly opposite Leinster TH. That means the Leinster TH can't keep his neck straight.

What does anyone else think?

I could be wrong but my instinct was both NH props were boring so all the pressure was on Strauss who was carrying an injury. It's something Healy will have to improve on as he should have at very least been able to keep Mujati straight, although he did get a good shove on him once or twice in the first half, the power from the other side negated it.

Another point on the boring in; I find that you can tell who is the culprit if you look at their hips, the victims upper body gets angled while their legs remain parallel to the line and the perpetrator's whole body changes angle i.e. their ass points out of the scrum.

Sundy

Cpt_Blackbeard wrote: »

Mujati is binding around the armpit which is a bit of a grey area. Although his binding in the picture is probably illegal, it is generally allowed. Mujati deserves credit for playing the ref's interpretation of binding on the arm.

SOB also looks to have lost his bind in that picture and is positioned very weirdly.

Im talking about Mujati, the saints tighthead, not sure how you can see the bind on the other side of the scrum. Point is Mujati is bound on Healys arm to give himself a bit more leverage over healy and Poite is looking right at it but ignores it. Really doesnt come across to me as a ref who knows scrumming.

PhatPiggins

Sundy wrote: »

I think you will find the forwards sorted out the scrum, Feek can help them but hes not on the pitch.


Look at this picture, you can just make out the ridiculous angle the saints lose head is scrumming at.


and a different scrum:


Its rubbish refereeing to allow that to go on. Sorry but some laws are there to make it an even contest. Allowing a prop to bore is not an even contest.

What's Sean O Brien doing in both those pics?

phog

Sundy wrote: »

I think you will find the forwards sorted out the scrum, Feek can help them but hes not on the pitch.


Look at this picture, you can just make out the ridiculous angle the saints lose head is scrumming at.


and a different scrum:


Its rubbish refereeing to allow that to go on. Sorry but some laws are there to make it an even contest. Allowing a prop to bore is not an even contest.

There's two other penalties in the top picture that the ref could have penalised Leinster for - Reddan spent most of the first half pushing Dickson at scrum time and SOB is clearly not bound.

Dr.Evil

I'm sorry but Heaslip's second block, was that when O'Driscoll picked up from a ruck? Because Heaslip had driven someone out of that ruck and O'Driscoll picked the ball and ran, while Heaslip was still pushing from the ruck.

d'Oracle

PhatPiggins wrote: »

What's Sean O Brien doing in both those pics?

He is bound in the scrum. His prop is going sideways so naturally he is going to wing out like that.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Paul Rees from The Guardian blames Ross for boring in.

What does anyone else think?

I think Paul Rees doesn't "get" boring in.
I also Think Healy did some boring of his own in the second half.

yimrsg

Binding on the wrong part of an opponents jersey or boring in sideways occurs before a flanker loses his bind. It's a bit much to expect for the referee to look at 4 flanker's binds, 6 front rower's body angles and 2 scrum halves jostling each other on the far side of 16 men. I'd imagine he's concentrating on the collision.

The fact that the referee missed all these goings on is perhaps a poor reflection of his understanding and application of the rules at scrum time. Some referee's seem to consistently ping teams for scrum transgressions wheras others take no heed.

I'm no ref but I can tell the difference in binding to the arm or the waist of an opponents jersey from watching it on tv.

It was simple enough I thought.

Northhampton bent the rules, Poite ignored. It worked, so they continued.
Second half, Leinster decided that they were gonna try it too, Poite ignored, so they continued.

Since Poite was consistent in his ignorance of the boring in throughout the game, then neither team has any complaints to be made. Rugby is about adapting to the conditions, including the referee's interpretation.

ambid

Interesting piece by Brian Moore on the scrum in the Telegraph today. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/8529266/Brian-Moore-one-masterful-Leinster-scrum-in-Heineken-Cup-final-broke-Northampton-Saintss-spirit.html

He talks about Ross' illegal binding on the arm. Is that a valid point? (directed to you scrum nerds out there!)

irishbucsfan

After watching it back I have to say Poite was exceptional. Ross simply couldn't handle Tonga'uiha. Tonga'uiha began all the scrums straight but his power was far far too much for Ross. It was after Tonga'uiha had beaten Ross that he started to angle inwards, which was due to his dominance.

Its fairly clear that Ross was concentrating on keeping Tonga'uiha's body angle low and I don't think he anticipated just how powerful his upper body was, because even when he had Tonga'uiha's head below his hips the NH loosehead managed to use pure power to angle up and beat him.

The first half scrummaging display from Northampton was one of the most destructive I've ever seen, better than Toulouse in the SF last year.

I'm not sure what Leinster did in the second half, I think they might have changed tact and put less emphasis on keeping NH low. Not sure about it, would love to hear what Feek has to say. He is a Leinster legend now. He is to Leinster in 2011 what Kurt McQuilkin was to us in 2009. And hopefully, if we're really really lucky, he'll be to Ireland in November what no other coach has ever been to us.

Fair play to Romain Poite. I think it was one of the commentator's who said at the end of the match that Poite was the only man on the pitch who performed excellently for 80 minutes.

Stev_o

ambid wrote: »

Interesting piece by Brian Moore on the scrum in the Telegraph today. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/8529266/Brian-Moore-one-masterful-Leinster-scrum-in-Heineken-Cup-final-broke-Northampton-Saintss-spirit.html

He talks about Ross' illegal binding on the arm. Is that a valid point? (directed to you scrum nerds out there!)

Having dabbled in the front row playing sevens i use to always bind on the arm if the ref wasn't on my side. I remember playing a practice match and i was scrummaging against one of the lads who probably had 2/3 stones on me and a hell of lot more strength then me. But because i was able to bind on his arm i was able to control his body angle. Thus i could either pull his arm down and get his body to lean to the right and then power forward while he's off balance or i could push upwards to get him to lean inside towards his hooker and pop up.

Or i could be a complete dick and pull him down and hope i got the penalty

What time did the first scrum take place in the second half?

Jemo

From my experiences playing prop, getting a bind around the opposition props arm is a huge advantage. You can drive their arm inward which puts pressure on their outside shoulder to dip and unbalance their drive meaning you have much more control and you can fiddle with their position somewhat if they are regaining parity. Whenever the referee wasn't on my side I often moved my bind to this way as I was a small prop and needed every advantage.

Similarly enough, what Hartley is likely doing is getting his head a little under Strauss's chin and twisting it up meaning that the second row will be driving their own man up, loosening his bind on the props and thus leading to him popping out the top. This is all exacerbated when his props are already struggling and his bind is being stretched. If the hooker loses the bind the scrum is as good as over.

As for Ross and Tongahuia, that I think was a case of monstrous power and only minimal amounts of boring which occurs in every scrum. Ross quite simply had too much to do with Hartley messing with Strauss and Mujati controlling Healy's movements. Feek has said he was pushing early hoping to gain dominance but Tongahuia was riding it and coming back stronger. Think about it in an arm wrestling scenario, if you put your full force into the beginning and fail to drive the oppositions arm back enough then when your burst ebbs they can repel you with a huge injection of sudden intensity and you will likely be in a far worse position than the opposition originally was. In the second half, Ross withheld his drive after the hit and waited for the power to come and had the reserves to hold Tongahuia long enough to clear the ball away.

Daragh86

It's as simple as the ref was dreadful in relation to the scrum, Nor loosey was boring in every scrum up until after the ref called Cullen over for a chat towards the end of the first half, last scrum of the first half the ref came round to Ross' side (first time in the match he did this) and suprise suprise Saints loosey scrummaged straight and continued to do so in the second half. Once their loosey scrummaged straight Ross didn't have a problem.

Refs should be hung for scrum preformances like his last Sat, could have easily lost the game for Leinster through obvious illegal scrummaging.

Auvers

Deleted User wrote: »

Rugby is about adapting to the conditions, including the referee's interpretation.

/ thread

Piliger

I recently downloaded the laws of the game in a nicely produced PDF with graphics from the IRB web site:

(c) 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.

(d) Binding by tight head props. A tight head prop must bind on the opposing loose head prop by placing the right arm outside the left upper arm of the opposing loose head prop. The tight head prop must grip the loose head prop’s jersey with the right hand only on the back or side. The tight head prop must not grip the chest, arm, sleeve or collar of the opposition loose head prop. The tight head prop must not exert any downward pressure.

LostPassword

Jemo wrote: »

As for Ross and Tongahuia, that I think was a case of monstrous power and only minimal amounts of boring which occurs in every scrum. Ross quite simply had too much to do with Hartley messing with Strauss and Mujati controlling Healy's movements. Feek has said he was pushing early hoping to gain dominance but Tongahuia was riding it and coming back stronger. Think about it in an arm wrestling scenario, if you put your full force into the beginning and fail to drive the oppositions arm back enough then when your burst ebbs they can repel you with a huge injection of sudden intensity and you will likely be in a far worse position than the opposition originally was. In the second half, Ross withheld his drive after the hit and waited for the power to come and had the reserves to hold Tongahuia long enough to clear the ball away.

I think that this is about the most accurate summary from my viewpoint (ex-hooker). In the second half, the big difference was the overall timing of the power on the Leinster side - I think that Schmidt alluded to this in his post match interview. In the first half, Ross was trying to attack Tongahuia before the power came through from behind. In the second half, he waited a second or so after the hit and stabilised until the power came through from the second row before really starting to drive. I also felt that Leinster jumped the gun on every engage in the second half (which was a smart thing to do as there had been no free kicks for that infraction in the first half which is a bit unusual nowadays).

But, having said all that, even if you have played in the front row for years, it's often hard to figure out exactly what happened in any given scrum, even if you're in the middle of it - never mind watching on tv.