WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Numbers at the scrum

Board index Welcome to RLFANS The Virtual Terrace Numbers at the scrum

Re: Numbers at the scrum
Post Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:21 am
Posted by Uncle Rico on Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:21 am
Uncle Rico User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Reputation Points: 2
Rep Position: 17th / 76,458

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:24 am
Posts: 3325
Location: Stuck in 1982
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
Post Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:27 am
Posted by Mr. Zucchini Head on Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:27 am
Mr. Zucchini Head Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 7
Rep Position: 12th / 76,458

Quiz Score: 156

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 10683
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
Post Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:33 am
Posted by Mr. Zucchini Head on Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:33 am
Mr. Zucchini Head Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 7
Rep Position: 12th / 76,458

Quiz Score: 156

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 10683
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
Post Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:50 am
Posted by Cross Hills Cougar on Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:50 am
Cross Hills Cougar Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2014 9:43 pm
Posts: 320
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
Post Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:57 am
Posted by Mr. Zucchini Head on Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:57 am
Mr. Zucchini Head Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 7
Rep Position: 12th / 76,458

Quiz Score: 156

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 10683
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.
Re: Numbers at the scrum
Post Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:14 pm
Posted by Uncle Rico on Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:14 pm
Uncle Rico User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Reputation Points: 2
Rep Position: 17th / 76,458

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:24 am
Posts: 3325
Location: Stuck in 1982
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
Post Sat Sep 09, 2017 4:28 pm
Posted by Mr. Zucchini Head on Sat Sep 09, 2017 4:28 pm
Mr. Zucchini Head Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 7
Rep Position: 12th / 76,458

Quiz Score: 156

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 10683
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
Post Sat Sep 09, 2017 11:21 pm
Posted by nohalfbacks on Sat Sep 09, 2017 11:21 pm
nohalfbacks User avatar
Free-scoring winger
Free-scoring winger

Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:13 pm
Posts: 1059
Location: Wigan
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
Post Sun Sep 10, 2017 3:01 pm
Posted by knockersbumpMKII on Sun Sep 10, 2017 3:01 pm
knockersbumpMKII Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 9
Rep Position: 10th / 76,458

Quiz Score: 432

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 2:41 pm
Posts: 4246
Location: Letchworth Garden City,
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
Post Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:02 am
Posted by Grimmy on Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:02 am
Grimmy User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 14
Rep Position: 5th / 76,458

Quiz Score: 408

Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:05 pm
Posts: 12745
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.
Frank Zappa wrote:
Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot], JEAN CAPDOUZE, PrinterThe, thefaxfanman and 74 guests

Quick Reply

Subject: Message:
   

Return to The Virtual Terrace





POSTSONLINEMEMBERSRECORDYOUR TEAM
4,677,01662276,4584,559SET
LOGIN HERE
or REGISTER for more features!.
Thu 1st Feb 19:45
SUPER LEAGUE
WARRINGTON
v
LEEDS RHINOS
Thu 1st Feb 20:00
SUPER LEAGUE
HULL FC
v
HUDDERSFIELD
Fri 2nd Feb 19:30
SUPER LEAGUE
SALFORD
v
WIGAN WARRIORS
Fri 2nd Feb 19:45
 CHAMPIONSHIP
DEWSBURY RAMS
v
SHEFFIELD
Fri 2nd Feb 19:45
SUPER LEAGUE
ST. HELENS
v
CASTLEFORD
Fri 2nd Feb 20:00
SUPER LEAGUE
HULL KR
v
WAKEFIELD
Sat 3rd Feb 14:00
 CHAMPIONSHIP
TOULOUSE
v
SWINTON LIONS
Sun 4th Feb 15:00
 CHAMPIONSHIP
FEATHERSTONE
v
HALIFAX
Sun 4th Feb 15:00
 CHAMPIONSHIP
LONDON BRONCOS
v
BARROW RAIDERS
Sun 4th Feb 15:00
 CHAMPIONSHIP
LEIGH
v
TORONTO
ALL SCORES PROVIDED BY RLFANS.COM