What do you reckon to introducing contested scums & line-outs to League?

[S.S.T.I.D]

No way to both. Our game is all about keeping the ball in play, not 4 minute stoppages waiting for a scrum to re-pack 7 times.

Those calling for contested scrums probably don't understand what makes our game so great. The amount of actual time played and the lack of stoppages. Get the ball back in play and lets get going again. I wish teams would do more with the space when they win a scrum though.

Line-outs? I suppose it wouldn't be all that bad an idea if they replaced scrums. Atleast it would add some much needed unpredictability to the battle for possession, because at the moment there is none.

I am tentatively in favour of being able to contest for the ball in the tackle, but can also understand the reasons against.

 

[S.S.T.I.D]

I will say though, line-outs haven't been a part of our game for over 100 years, so I'm not sure if I could rest easy with line-outs in our game.

They are probably the most recognisable aspect of Union. That and 45 metre field-goals when losing 47-3.

 

[***MH***]

One thing I like about the scrums is that it pits the backline against the backline. Getting the forwards out of the way so that we can see at least one good backline movement within a set.

 

[LeagueXIII]

I'm pretty sure QLD's second try in origin 2 was from an old scrum set play.

 

[pk76]

Contested Scrums - I'm all for it.

Its the allowing of halfbacks to feed behind the second-rowers feets that is the main thing they have to change. If the rule is enforced that the half must feed the ball between the props feet - then we're on the right track, it then comes down to the attitude of the players.

Personally, the scrum began to die with Allan Langer and his second row feed. I used to get the sh@# with the refs for allowing it.

 

[Red Bear]

Contested scrums would be good - forwards would have to be in the scrums then.

How bout getting some depth in attack? Everyone is so damn flat footed in the current game. Get the halves and 5/8's working like you used to see (sure i've only seen the footage but it looks f**ken good). striking at the play the ball is good but also being able to tap it on without markers and grab another run

 

[Shaun Hewitt]

Not at all to Line-outs

I would like to see our scrums contested like Union. But if it collapses twice then have a tap to the team that didnt collapse it.

 

[wahoo202]

Im not a big Union fan but i do believe that Rugby League would be a far greater spectacle with contested scrums (not the current farcical scrum situation we have) as well as line-outs (maybe with a stipulation of the team who kicks it out only gets one if they kick a 40/30 or 30/40).

Why? Because there would be alot more contested posession which mixed with League's fast pace and limited tackles would make the game much more interesting to watch.

Now i know most people will quickly dismiss it but think about it; i reckon about 4 out of 5 attacking opportunities in the opposition 20 come from either a knock-on or a penalty. But with more contested possession and opportunities for the attacking team to obtain the ball in the opposition half i believe alot of intrigue would be added to the game.

If you dont agree then can you think of any inventive ideas that woud allow the attacking team to retrieve the ball in the opposition half, i.e. the 40/20 rule which is the best thing to happen to league as far as rule changes is concerned in a long time.

If you want to see contested scrums, line outs and general man fondling, watch Union.