Daily Maverick
Dailymaverick logo

South Africa

South Africa, Sport, World, DM168

Scrum under attack — new law will reshape rugby, and not in a good way

Scrum under attack — new law will reshape rugby, and not in a good way
Referee: Nigel Owens. (Photo: Steve Haag / Gallo Images)
Craig Ray
By Craig Ray
19 May 2024
Facebook
10
The rare sight of a scrum being called from a mark will be outlawed from 1 July in one of several law changes World Rugby will be introducing.

World Rugby’s recent announcement of three law changes, including no more scrums from free kicks, has created some strong debate about whether the changes are aimed specifically at the Springboks’ power game.

It’s unlikely that the change to the free-kick law is aimed at the Boks directly, but it will have an impact on their options in a game – and not for the better.

Two other changes, which deal with the offside law following kicks in general play and no more “crocodile rolls” to clear players at rucks, are sensible and do not attack the fabric of the game. They all come into effect on 1 July.

The real worry about the outlawing of scrumming from free kicks is: what is World Rugby’s reasoning for it?

The governing body says it wants to grow the game with a new audience. The official line, drenched in corporate word salad, was: “to seek to increase rugby’s accessibility and relevance among a broader, younger fanbase by embracing on-field innovation and reimagined presentation of the sport with compelling storytelling.”

No evidence of a study about whether reducing the number of scrums in a game will attract a “broader and younger” fanbase was presented to accompany the decision.

Perhaps World Rugby should work harder at finding ways to speed up and clean up the engagement sequence for scrums to speed the game up. Scrums are not the problem.

Pillar


The French word for a prop forward is le pilier, which literally translated means the “pillar”.

The scrum is a fundamental pillar of rugby union – an act which differentiates it from any other sport in the world. It is also the foundation of what makes rugby a game for all body shapes.

If scrums were removed from the sport the likes of Ox Nché and Frans Malherbe would never play at the highest level. The forwards would evolve into a homogenous group of large, athletic, loose forward-type players.

That would suit South Africa too, since this country has an abundance of brilliant back-row for­­­­wards from primary school through to the Springboks. But that would be a different sport.

While some argue that the number of scrums taken from free kicks is small anyway, it misses the point. It’s just one more attack on the bedrock of the game.

Most times evolution doesn’t start with a huge change, but rather a gradual chipping away at something.

“Rugby union is a game for all shapes and sizes, so it’s important the scrum remains a weapon for teams who are good at it,” former referee Nigel Owens wrote in his Wales­Online column.

“I feel they [World Rugby] are just depowering the scrum at the moment. You don’t see any more 5m scrums because of the goal-line drop-out and then you could have this as well.

Read more in Daily Maverick: No more scrums from a mark for Boks after World Rugby changes free kick law

“The scrum could be a nonentity in the game and then you’d just be sitting down to watch Rugby League.”

Exeter Chiefs coach Rob Baxter, widely considered to be one of the most innovative minds in the game, was also angered by the changes when they were initially proposed earlier this year.

“We need to stop changing the laws,” Baxter told The Guardian. “We’re trying to grow the game and there’s no sport in the world that tries to grow by con­fusing new supporters every 12 months.

scrum Owens Referee Nigel Owens. (Photo: Steve Haag / Gallo Images)



“The game was fine three or four years ago, and we didn’t need to change it then – 90% of the law changes are to redo things that have been created by other law changes. It’s madness.

“You grow the game by introducing new players and people to it, but we’re confusing new people every year by changing laws and ­interpretations,” he said.

“We’re pre­venting ourselves from allowing a good product to happen. If they decide to make law changes [in May – which they did] then they have to decide to put a moratorium on not changing them any more. Let’s settle down and get on with it.”

Springboks silent


Springbok coach Rassie Erasmus has been silent on the news since it was announced and it is unlikely the South African Rugby Union will make any public utterances either.

But the Springboks, with their power game and team composition consisting of nearly two full packs of world-class forwards, will feel the scrumming change more than others.

The new laws appear to view scrums as a hindrance, rather than an integral part of what makes rugby union unique.

At the Stade de France last October, Springbok fullback Damian Willemse famously called for a scrum from a mark during the Rugby World Cup quarterfinal against France.

A mark is essentially a free kick and nothing in the laws stopped the Boks from opting for a scrum, even though no one could think of another example of it being done.

Despite losing territory, the Boks backed their scrum to hurt Les Bleus. And it did, as they won a penalty from the set piece.

That incident was hailed as revolutionary by some but decried as being against the spirit of the game by others. It’s impossible to imagine why doing something which had never been tried in more than 100 years was deemed unfair.

That will never happen again under the revised laws.

Unintended consequences


If we take this change to its natural conclusion, it might come with some unintended consequences.

Never mind a scrum from a mark, which as we know has only been done once; this change means that any time there is a free kick, a team cannot opt for a scrum.

Imagine a scenario where two teams are scrumming and the referee penalises the attacking team’s scrumhalf for a skew feed or an early engagement, or some other technical infringement. The referee awards a free kick.

Under the new laws, the team awarded the free kick cannot ask for another scrum, even though the infringement happened at a scrum.

What about a situation where a team with a weaker scrum manipulates a free kick, even against itself? The team with the stronger scrum will no longer have the option to call for another scrum. This seems unfair, because scrums are vital to rugby.

In this scramble to encourage “ball-in-hand rugby” to make the sport more palatable to a younger audience, a cornerstone of the game is being undermined.

Ironically, there is a school of thought that believes scrums do lead to more space on the field, and therefore more incentive to keep the ball in hand, because they concentrate 18 players (including the scrumhalves) in a small area. That opens up space in a larger area.

Under the new law, tap-and-go penalties, kicking for touch or launching an up-and-­under are the only available options from a free kick.

These trial laws came under discussion at the “Shape of the Game” conference in February. And they certainly have lived up to the name, as the game is being reshaped – and not for the better. DM

This story first appeared in our weekly Daily Maverick 168 newspaper, which is available countrywide for R35.

Categories:

Tags: