Stuart Bathgate: Delays from set scrum disarray are squeezing the life out of the game

Published on Monday 15 March 2010 22:00

THERE may have been a conflict of opinion about who was the better side in Saturday's Calcutta Cup match, but one argument would have met with near-unanimity from both sets of fans – something needs to be done about the scrum.

Not for the first time in this year's RBS Six Nations Championship, the referee struggled to get the two packs coming together for the set piece to his satisfaction. The result was reset after reset.

Although on occasion the clock had been stopped, some of those resets ate away at valuable playing time. More pertinently, all of them gnawed at the patience of spectators, both those at the ground and the millions watching on television.

In the old days, there was a certain laissez-faire spirit about the scrum, with referees allowing the front rows a degree of self-policing. Scrums could wheel right round, or collapse, and within sensible limits the match official would let play go on.

The heightened health-and-safety concerns of our own era would prevent anything similar happening today, and there are sound reasons why referees blow up for a stoppage the instant they see anyone's head hit the turf.

But there surely has to be a middle route between the free-for-all which once went on and the pernickety application of the laws which too often appears to prevail today.

Most resets in Scotland's 15-15 draw with England were decreed by Marius Jonker before the scrum had collapsed and the front rows were running the risk of injury. In some cases, the South African was unhappy with the nature of the engagement: either the hit had occurred at the wrong place, or one side had pushed slightly too early.

On one occasion a penalty was awarded against Scotland's Euan Murray for not binding correctly, and the result was three points for England. In a substantial majority of cases where a reset was ordered, however, neither side was penalised.

England coach Martin Johnson, who estimated that 15 minutes had been devoted to resetting scrums, said he understood why referees had been told by the International Rugby Board (IRB) that they could not simply presume who had committed an offence and give a penalty accordingly: they had to be sure.

In other words, the same burden of proof now applies to scrum offences as it does to tries. Educated guesswork will not do.

This is entirely in keeping with the laws of the game and natural justice, but it risks allowing players too much latitude.

Where once the fear of random punishment would deter transgression, props and hookers now know that if they do something untoward on the referee's blind side they will either get away with it or at worst the scrum will be reset.

The IRB's own reading of the situation is that they have told referees to apply the law strictly, and that yellow cards are there to be used in the case of repeat offenders.

Jonker's reluctance to issue a yellow card should perhaps therefore be seen more as an individual refereeing trait than as the consequence of directions from the top.

What is more, the governing body believes that players and coaches have a responsibility to help make the game more watchable. Referees can only do so much without cooperation.

That is no doubt true, and it would be pleasant if we lived in an ideal sporting world in which no-one cheated. The reality, however, is that players do push the laws to their limits and beyond.

To sum up, there are two main problem areas in the scrum. One is the hit; the other is the far side from the referee. Solve both, and we should have a fairer, faster game.

The hit, where the two packs come together with fearsome force, should now really be called the hit or miss. More often than not, it does not take place cleanly – no surprise given the phenomenal strength which players have these days.

The answer is surely simple. Get rid of the hit, and instead make the packs engage "softly" before allowing them to start pushing. Provided the referee prevents crooked feeds by the scrum-half, the scrum will still be a physical contest rather than a mere restart mechanism.

As for the other side of the scrum from where the referee stations, an answer could be to give a greater role to the assistant referees. They are no longer merely touch judges, and there is no obvious reason why their remit of vigilance should not be extended to the scrum.

Any such changes will only come about after extensive lobbying, but change is definitely needed. Earlier this season the IRB stated that "average match time consumed by the scrum is currently 16 per cent and climbs as high as 25 percent in some cases". That is far too high a figure, and concerted action must be taken to reduce it.