Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Foley wants review of uncontested scrums

  1. #1
    Champion
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    home
    Posts
    1,661
    vCash
    5000000

    Foley wants review of uncontested scrums

    Nick Taylor - The West Australian on April 4, 2016

    Western Force coach Michael Foley has called for a review of game laws after being forced to pack a scrum with an inexperienced second row in Friday night's bruising 32-20 Super Rugby loss to reigning champions Highlanders in Dunedin.

    More here

    https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sp...tested-scrums/

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  2. #2
    Player
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    perth
    Posts
    246
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by wholetruth View Post
    Nick Taylor - The West Australian on April 4, 2016

    Western Force coach Michael Foley has called for a review of game laws after being forced to pack a scrum with an inexperienced second row in Friday night's bruising 32-20 Super Rugby loss to reigning champions Highlanders in Dunedin.

    More here

    https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sp...tested-scrums/
    Mr Foley should be a politician.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  3. #3
    Legend Contributor .X.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    5,355
    vCash
    5028000
    Dry July! Ex-Staff MO-vember Donator TWF Contributor!
    Quote Originally Posted by whodunnit View Post
    Mr Foley should be a politician.
    The last thing we want is have a coach that cares about the welfare of his players. SACK HIM!

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Exile
    Sydney


    “Just a Rugby Fan with a LEGO obsession”

  4. #4
    Senior Player Herbasimplex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Valley Forge
    Posts
    529
    vCash
    5000000
    I think it is an obtuse way of highlighting the fact that the kiwi ref went to uncontested scrums when the highlanders pulled a sneaky and were telling him that they had no one for LHP.

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Non sunt multiplicanda entia sine necessitate

  5. #5
    Immortal GIGS20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockingham
    Posts
    18,461
    vCash
    5028000
    The Bronze Star of Faith
    That's exactly the case, for the record, the Highlanders were allowed to go to uncontested scrums when they had a front row consisting of a Tighthead, a hooker and a tighthead who played loose head last year, but they said he was inexperienced and unsafe.

    The Force weren't allowed to go to uncontested when they had a hooker packing at lock with no other genuine locks in the team.

    I'm not tryin to diminish the importance of the front row in the scrum, but it was a complete wank to force contested scrums on the force when they'd basically ignored the law for the highlanders.

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    C'mon the

  6. #6
    Immortal Contributor The InnFORCEr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    West Leederville
    Posts
    15,785
    vCash
    5018000
    Dry July! Tong Master 141 Club Award TWF Contributor! TWF Competition Winner!
    I would be interested to hear from our residential refs (yes that's you Ecky et al) about what flexibility if any is allowed within the laws hen it comes to the safety and welfare of players.

    Is there a law that states play must stop when streaker enters the ground or is play stopped out of concern for safety and welfare of the players? No doubt this will come into play on Friday and the offender will probably have been wearing a Warriors jumper before disrobing

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?

    Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!

    Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!

  7. #7
    Immortal Contributor jono's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    10,528
    vCash
    5000000
    Dry July! TWF Contributor! MO-vember Donator The Bronze Star of Faith
    Quote Originally Posted by GIGS20 View Post
    That's exactly the case, for the record, the Highlanders were allowed to go to uncontested scrums when they had a front row consisting of a Tighthead, a hooker and a tighthead who played loose head last year, but they said he was inexperienced and unsafe.

    The Force weren't allowed to go to uncontested when they had a hooker packing at lock with no other genuine locks in the team.

    I'm not tryin to diminish the importance of the front row in the scrum, but it was a complete wank to force contested scrums on the force when they'd basically ignored the law for the highlanders.
    yeah it pissed me off watching it as well.

    all anyone wants is consistency from the refs. and he blatantly told the force support staff member to go away when he specifically highlighted it was unsafe to have a hooker in the second row with contested scrums.

    whether it was or not is left to others as i'll obviously never be a forward

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  8. #8
    Immortal Contributor jono's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    10,528
    vCash
    5000000
    Dry July! TWF Contributor! MO-vember Donator The Bronze Star of Faith
    ugh. apologies for the poor grammar above ^ being up since 0200 doesn't allow for proper English

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  9. #9
    Player Scozzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Kinross
    Posts
    201
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by GIGS20 View Post
    That's exactly the case, for the record, the Highlanders were allowed to go to uncontested scrums when they had a front row consisting of a Tighthead, a hooker and a tighthead who played loose head last year, but they said he was inexperienced and unsafe.

    The Force weren't allowed to go to uncontested when they had a hooker packing at lock with no other genuine locks in the team.

    I'm not tryin to diminish the importance of the front row in the scrum, but it was a complete wank to force contested scrums on the force when they'd basically ignored the law for the highlanders.
    Definitely inconsistent from the ref, but I thought as long as the replacement had propping experience (not specifically LH or TH), then scrums could be contested. It was only when no prop replacements were available that uncontested scrums came into play......or am I behind the times with the laws...?

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  10. #10
    Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Reality
    Posts
    1,443
    vCash
    5000000
    The lifting tackle that saw Tet Falkner land on his head is more of a concern for me. After watching guys get suspended for up to 6 weeks for other lifting tackles where players landed on their backs and sides, to see one where a player lands on his head and the punishment was only a penalty is disappointing.
    On the scrums, while each propping position has its intricacies, its pretty poor that at a professional level guys who have been professionally trained for months and years all of a sudden cannot switch sides of the scrum. It happened at the world cup with the Springboks and now its creeping into super rugby.
    Personally, if i was said prop, i would be embarrassed to call myself a professional if i could not compete at that level in my position.

    4 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  11. #11
    Immortal GIGS20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockingham
    Posts
    18,461
    vCash
    5028000
    The Bronze Star of Faith
    That prop has apparently switched sides AT THIS LEVEL in the last year.... I would think that he probably satisfies any actual safety concern, it was most likely a concern about his competitiveness.

    To be fair, apart from a height issue with cheese playing 8 and a lack of competitiveness from Dog and Mafi, wo have played lock before, it probably wasnt all that bad... But the precedent had been set by the landers being listened to when they suggested it was unsafe even though all the requirements had been met (AFAIK according to the law)

    In reality we were probably better off going uncontested when we did, our scrum was getting hammered anyway, I just thought it inconsistent.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    C'mon the

  12. #12
    Player
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    perth
    Posts
    246
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by GIGS20 View Post
    That prop has apparently switched sides AT THIS LEVEL in the last year.... I would think that he probably satisfies any actual safety concern, it was most likely a concern about his competitiveness.

    To be fair, apart from a height issue with cheese playing 8 and a lack of competitiveness from Dog and Mafi, wo have played lock before, it probably wasnt all that bad... But the precedent had been set by the landers being listened to when they suggested it was unsafe even though all the requirements had been met (AFAIK according to the law)

    In reality we were probably better off going uncontested when we did, our scrum was getting hammered anyway, I just thought it inconsistent.
    Correct the scrum was struggling at that point. So lucky for the force!
    If the force had won would we all be worrying about this?!! I say not!

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  13. #13
    Immortal Contributor shasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mandurah
    Posts
    12,927
    vCash
    5028000
    The Bronze Star of Faith TWF Contributor!
    Quote Originally Posted by GIGS20 View Post
    That prop has apparently switched sides AT THIS LEVEL in the last year.... I would think that he probably satisfies any actual safety concern, it was most likely a concern about his competitiveness.
    According to Nisbo he actually STARTED three matches last season at LHP. So not switching sides at all. Also, if that's the case there should probably be a reprimand for contrary contact or some such.
    Someone needs to start an investigation. Dead set.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    "The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David

  14. #14
    Legend Contributor brokendown gunfighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    wembley
    Posts
    7,481
    vCash
    5022000
    141 Club Award TWF Contributor!
    turn it up!

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  15. #15
    Immortal GIGS20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rockingham
    Posts
    18,461
    vCash
    5028000
    The Bronze Star of Faith
    Unfortunately, I'm not aware of anything in law about uncontested scrums for any positn other than the front row....I don't think there's any actual recourse, the ref was just gullible, that's all.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    C'mon the

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Scrums how scrums end
    By Tonkar in forum Western Force
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-06-11, 21:01
  2. The disgrace of uncontested scrums
    By pieter blackie in forum Western Australian Metro Rugby
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 14-08-08, 13:04
  3. Link talks scrums
    By Burgs in forum NSW Waratahs
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-04-07, 06:36
  4. What's wrong with scrums?
    By Happy in forum International Rugby
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 27-03-07, 10:47
  5. New law to 'depower' scrums
    By Burgs in forum Rugby
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-12-06, 16:12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •