The old scrum can't be brought back. Its messy, but also the amount of neck injuries that can potentially result from it. There is no way it can be brought back. If you knock the ball on and make a forward pass why should you get the ball back? It doesn't mean I agree with abolishing the scrum all together though because I don't.Funny, when we had proper scrums, kicking for touch was a legitimate weapon, a chance to gain territory and win possession. It kept you involved in the game, knowing that the scrum was not a foregone conclusion. A player that could find touch was much prized, and wingers would try and to avoid the ball going into touch if possible.
Now, like most things, they want everything to be clinical. No messy scrums, no messy play-the-balls. Everything must be predictable, black and white, no shades of grey. And it's boring.
Yes, there is the potential for neck injuries with a scrum. You could also argue there is the potential for neck injuries making a tackle or being tackled. And just because scrums are messy, doesn't mean they don't have a place in the game. Trying to tidy the game up has resulted in it losing a lot of its character.The old scrum can't be brought back. Its messy, but also the amount of neck injuries that can potentially result from it. There is no way it can be brought back. If you knock the ball on and make a forward pass why should you get the ball back? It doesn't mean I agree with abolishing the scrum all together though because I don't.
If we have own goals in soccer, then can we have own tries in footy? Prevent teams from grounding the ball in their in goal and wasting time before the kick restart. You know- speed the game up. Send the clubs an email tonight and start it in tomorrow’s games. V’landys ball.
The 7 tackle set from the 20m is bad enough but to have this rule will be a complete farce. I remember they came up with wacky rules during the U 20s at the end of the season but no one was really interested.
Another factor was refereeing. By the time contested scrums were ending a lot of scrums were just ending in a penalty. They were an absolute cluster. Scrums taking 5 minutes out of a game (slight exaggeration). Referees getting the shits and just randomly calling a penalty to move on with the game.Yes, there is the potential for neck injuries with a scrum. You could also argue there is the potential for neck injuries making a tackle or being tackled. And just because scrums are messy, doesn't mean they don't have a place in the game. Trying to tidy the game up has resulted in it losing a lot of its character.
As to why should you get the ball back when throwing a forward pass or knocking on? Well you shouldn't automatically, but what's wrong with having a chance to regain possession. Maybe it would encourage teams to take more risks, knowing if they have a good hooker who could win the ball.
Another factor was refereeing. By the time contested scrums were ending a lot of scrums were just ending in a penalty. They were an absolute cluster. Scrums taking 5 minutes out of a game (slight exaggeration). Referees getting the shits and just randomly calling a penalty to move on with the game.
Same as striking in the play the ball. Sometimes the marker would be all over the bloke trying to play the ball and get away with it.
I'm a big advocate of getting rid of these grey areas where the referee is making a 50/50 call. They're clearly not handling it so why make it more difficult for them.
So why were contested scrums scrapped?I can't really agree with anything you've said here. Watching a lot of old games, the scrums would be packed and done with quicker than they do today. Sure, some would result in a penalty, but that wasn't the majority.
Striking at the play-the-ball wasn't happening every tackle. You had to pick your time, and run the risk of giving away 6 again by playing at the ball and not being successful. Just as stripping the ball wasn't happening every tackle, yet you could do it, no matter how many players were involved.
The grey areas in the game are what make it interesting in my opinion.
The problem with this rule is it punishes every other play that results in a stoppage in goal and/or the ball going dead. For example a player that gets their fingertips to the ball after a grubber but knocks on is punished with the other team getting a 7 tackle set.The 7th tackle restart from the 20 metre line was brought in because teams were deliberately kicking it dead. To get the defense line set and stop a prime Greg Inglis returning the ball from fallback with open space. It was brought in for good reason.
So why were contested scrums scrapped?
What I meant by grey areas was referees having too much influence on games with their interpretation. There'd be differential penalties given regularly and nobody had any idea why.
Edit... scrums were quicker because back then you just played the game. You tackled a bloke to get him on the ground, then you got off him. You went to the scrum, packed it and got on with it. There wasn't players doing shit or not doing shit, until the referee told them to / not to do shit.
The old scrum can't be brought back. Its messy, but also the amount of neck injuries that can potentially result from it. There is no way it can be brought back. If you knock the ball on and make a forward pass why should you get the ball back? It doesn't mean I agree with abolishing the scrum all together though because I don't.
The problem with this rule is it punishes every other play that results in a stoppage in goal and/or the ball going dead. For example a player that gets their fingertips to the ball after a grubber but knocks on is punished with the other team getting a 7 tackle set.
In regards to this rule we should go down the Rugby Union route IMO. Go back to 6 tackle restarts from the point the ball was kicked to a minimum of the 20m line. So if you kick it dead form 40 out the opposition gets to start their set at the 40m line. This discourages the tactic whilst not overly penalising plays like a grubber that goes dead by a bees dick.