Heres’ why refs are still allowing crooked feeds
Back in July, World Rugby announced some law amendments, one of which was supposed to address something that has bugged fans for years, the way that the scrum-half feeds the ball into the scrum.
The amendment said that ‘the scrum-half must throw the ball in straight…’, but if you’ve watched this season’s matches, that’s clearly not happening. In the two rounds of European games I would be hard pushed to think of one example of what I would consider straight: that is the centre of the ball going down the imaginary centre line of the scrum.
Before July, a straight feed was considered to be when any part of the ball touched the imaginary centre line – it maybe didn’t look straight, but once you understood that, things made more sense. However, in a conversation with an experienced Premiership referee, he explained the way that things work now.
The scrum-half can now set himself up with his left shoulder aligned along the centre line, ‘so, by definition, the ball is never actually going to go down the centre of the scrum’.
Another of the new amendments is that someone in the front row of the team putting the ball in has to hook, and in recent weeks we’ve seen teams give away a free kick for not hooking on their putin.
My ref says: “In the Premiership, teams have adapted really well to this, and we’re seeing them hooking, getting the ball back to the No.8, and then getting the ball away. Our focus has changed from a straight feed to seeing a front-row player hook, and as a result we’re getting the ball in play for longer, it’s not getting stuck in the middle of the scrum, and no team can get sufficient dominance to drive over the top of the ball. We’re also not having the situation where there’s so much weight coming through the scrum that a hooker is scared to lift a leg.”
This seems to mean that a scrum-half could throw the ball in at the left heel of the loosehead, he nudges it back, and we’re away – but surely the laws say the scrum should be a fair contest?
“Yes, it does say a fair contest, but the reason we’ve got a scrum is because one team made a mistake. It’s a philosophical point, but maybe we should give a little bit of an advantage to the team that didn’t err? Fundamentally, we’re an entertainment business, and these amendments are getting the ball in play for longer, and we’re seeing more tries, which is what people want. These amendments are still trials and the wording isn’t perfect, but we’re seeing some positive outcomes as a result.
“The defending team has a benefit in that they don’t have to hook, and they’re becoming very good at timing their counter-drive for the moment when the attacking team’s front row player lifts a leg. If they do it right, their advantage is they have eight pairs of feet on the ground. It’s very hard to define ‘straight’ in this context – if the ball ends up in the second row, but there hasn’t been a strike, that’s now classed as not straight. Teams have been very positive about the new approach, and about getting the ball back into play quickly.”
I found it hard to disagree with anything the ref said, but I think he was a bit generous towards World Rugby when he talked about communication.
What the man on the Clapham omnibus would consider to be a straight feed is a thing of the past, and I can’t see that changing, so why do the Laws still say that it should happen?
Self-evidently a fair contest at the scrum isn’t a reality anymore, so why pretend it should be? World Rugby have simply set themselves up for further ridicule from fans. Bring the wording of the scrum Laws into line with reality and we’ll all be better off.
THE WRU are at it again, announcing ridiculous rules on who can and cannot play for Wales.
Rather than getting in the way of professional sportsmen with increasingly short careers making enough money to have a decent retirement, isn’t it time they twigged that playing with world-class players, and being coached by the best, will improve those players and the prospects of the national team, rather than hindering them?