[Uncle Rico]

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:21 am  

Mr. Zucchini Head wrote:

Fair enough.

Pretty sure it was every scrum though, not just the one or two you mentioned.

In fact someone with a more intimate knowledge of the rules than me might be able to correct me, but I don't think it's even optional. I think you have to take one out of the scrum if you're a man down. Or maybe I've just made that up, but there's something at the back of my mind anyway.

Quite an ironic post given your criticism of No36

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:27 am  

Uncle Rico wrote:

Quite an ironic post given your criticism of No36

Not really. My criticism was about their rant about the state of the game and the referees based on something they had got wrong, not their knowledge of the rules. If they had come on and asked why Hull only had 5 in the scrum then I would have just answered politely.

Anyway, you didn't answer my query?

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:33 am  

Cross Hills Cougar wrote:

The laws relating to scrums refer to the maximum number of 'backs' (ie the number of players that are NOT in the scrum) that are allowed when there is a scrum. The maximum number of backs is 7. So if you only have 12 men on the field for example you only need 5 in the scrum leaving the said max of 7 backs.

I think that may be where I am getting confused. I am thinking you need to have 7 backs, but from looking at the rules I see you can have less if you want to, although no team ever would.

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:50 am  

Mr. Zucchini Head wrote:

... you need to have 7 backs, but from looking at the rules I see you can have less if you want to, although no team ever would.

If it's your put in near their line, why not put 8 or even 10 in the scrum and push them back 10 or 15 yards and score?

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:57 am  

Cross Hills Cougar wrote:

If it's your put in near their line, why not put 8 or even 10 in the scrum and push them back 10 or 15 yards and score?

Because you can only ever have a max of 6 in a scrum. I mean that if a team is down a man they would never opt to put 6 in the scrum and leave the back line short.

[Uncle Rico]

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:14 pm  

Mr. Zucchini Head wrote:

Not really. My criticism was about their rant about the state of the game and the referees based on something they had got wrong, not their knowledge of the rules. If they had come on and asked why Hull only had 5 in the scrum then I would have just answered politely.

Anyway, you didn't answer my query?

Because I like you didn't know the rules until looking them up as confirmed by your discussion with Cross Hills Cougar...you know the 'ironic' bit.

This is compounded by the statement that you would have answered them politely if the poster hadn't had a rant....did you miss their apology not that one was needed? Anyway answered them how exactly as you appear to be getting to grips with the rule yourself post telling off?

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Sat Sep 09, 2017 4:28 pm  

Uncle Rico wrote:

Because I like you didn't know the rules until looking them up as confirmed by your discussion with Cross Hills Cougar...you know the 'ironic' bit.

This is compounded by the statement that you would have answered them politely if the poster hadn't had a rant....did you miss their apology not that one was needed? Anyway answered them how exactly as you appear to be getting to grips with the rule yourself post telling off?

I acknowledged their apology. I would have answered that you don't need 6 men in the scrum if you are down a man, whether or not it is optional doesn't really matter does it. I might not have been 100% on the rule, but I aren't the one criticising the referees over something I don't understand. Which was kind of the point of my post.

I'm just sick of people criticising anything and everything they can about the sport, so someone coming on having a rant about "what have our scrums come to" when they are the only ones to have made a mistake just provoked a response from me. But they admitted they were wrong so that's fine.

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Sat Sep 09, 2017 11:21 pm  

Depleted pack 3. The 3-2-1 formation is compulsory if six forwards pack down. If injuries deplete the team, the back three forwards may be withdrawn to give 3-2-0, 3-1-0 or 3-0-0 formations (subject to there being no more than seven backs – see para 3 above). There should always be at least three forwards packing down.
So the rule talks about injuries depleting the team and not sendings off. The seven backs aspect of the rule prevents teams depleting the scrum in normal circumstances. It makes sense to deplete the scrum when players are sent off but that is not what the rule says.

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Sun Sep 10, 2017 3:01 pm  

I thought the rule was you have to pack down a full 6, the penalty of having a man sent off is losing one in open field, incl at scrums. The only reason not to as alluded to above is for injury. If as a team of 12 you pack down to get the clock stopped, you can't do that with only 5 players.
Possibly just overlooked as was much else by the officials.

Re: Numbers at the scrum : Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:02 am  

knockersbumpMKII wrote:

I thought the rule was you have to pack down a full 6, the penalty of having a man sent off is losing one in open field, incl at scrums. The only reason not to as alluded to above is for injury. If as a team of 12 you pack down to get the clock stopped, you can't do that with only 5 players.
Possibly just overlooked as was much else by the officials.

Wrong. They have the choice whether to have one less at the scrum or the line. Teams often have the full scrum in attack to allow the loose forward pick-up and counter the push, but a depleted scrum in defence so the back line isn't short.