Insight needed from Technical Coach

[The Who]

TC, as the expert on strategies these days, can you tell me why teams no longer try to attack from a scrum?
Why do they put backrowers in the backs when attacking or defending from scrums?
Last night I saw Jamie Lyon pack into the second row. He broke quickly to defend, but why have him in the forwards in the first place?
I know I played in the dim dark past but a scrum was the best opportunity to try some moves, to get the ball to the winger or for the fullback to chime in.
I think Melbourne and possible the Tigers may be the only teams that do something different other than allowing their first receiver - often a prop - to die with the ball from a scrum win.

Also, why is a 'run' classified as a hit-up?

Naturally, anybody with answers is encouraged to enter the debate. I just know that TC is the acknowledged doyen.

 

[jbb/james]

My guess is that is isolating small men with big men, also the inside ball is a big part of the game these days and speed men breaking from a scrum from the backrow offer excellent opportunities to turn the ball inside from 2 wide, if the opposing backrow is lazy

 

[MK Eagle]

IN the red zone the bigger more mobile backrowers are used to punch foward & not be dominated like a smaller player to start the set off on the front foot - winning the play the ball.
In the opposition half this play is designed for the bigger man to bend the line - playing through it & offering an offload to the quicker back.
Also a quick play the ball, after this charge has taken 2-3 tacklers out of the line creates opps for the entire set never recovering a solid defensive line.
Still a fan of early ball in this situation because a scrum is 1 of the only 1 on 1 opportunities for the backs to exploit footwork & speed. Early ball to say a Gasnier or Renouf back in the day was almost unstoppable.

 

[mozgrame]

Speed men breaking from a scrum in defence is also a good idea. Lyon breaking from backrow to tackle or even put pressure on the oppositions half cuts the time the opposition have to execute their plays. The result, rushed play by the opposition which can yield knock ons, or in the least, keep them pinned. It's a great tactic when the scrum is within the opposition 20m zone in attack or defence.

 

[DYEagle]

I just know that TC is the acknowledged doyen.

LOL

 

[Mals]

Didn't Matai score off a scrum move against the Warriors in round one?

 

[Jatz Crackers]

It is all designed to for Rose to stand outside of the scrum, thus allowing 2-3 of our outside backs to hide behind him, thus creating the element of surprise. Noone will see our attack coming.

 

[rmd]

The best scrum try I've ever seen was when Brett Stewart packed in at lock and as the scrum broke, he picked up the ball and ran straight through the middle of it to score.

In those days they didn't have video refs but had they had them it wouldn't have been allowed because the Eagles front row created the gap by holding the opponents apart to create the hole.

They tried it once more again that season and were penalised as the refs were then a wake up to it.

It was absolutely brilliant at the time.

 

[rmd]

[align=left
]To answer the original question seriously, I think backrowers in the backline is just a trend because they are, in most cases, much quicker than they were in bygone eras and the scrums are less contested than they were so most coaches have adapted to it.

However, the ball is always quicker than the man and there is a way to counteract it, as we did against the Warriors in the GF early on last year in the early stages of the first half by throwing it wide very quickly.

You'll probably note that at most scrums the defensive line is 'cramped' (not as wide as the attacking line) and players like DCE, Benji Marshall, Shaun Johnson and the like can exploit it, like DCE did last night when he bounced off a backrower who went for the 'big hit' and created a try. I can't remember if it was off a scrum or not, but that's an example.

Benji is probably the best at it because he's extremely deceptive and while the backrowers are quick today they are still not as agile as a backline player (in most cases due to their bulk).

The thought seems to be that by putting the backrowers in the back line at scrum time, who are typically bigger, they'll intimidate the attackers and potentially slow the play the ball down in the tackle, allowing the general defensive line to set.

At the moment it's a trend that most, if not all coaches are using and once one coach, or several work out a way to counteract it effectively, it will change again.

In the 'old' days, scrums were competitive (real push and shove) whereby, apart from the lock, the others couldn't really cover wide in defence but now they basically just stand there, the half puts the ball behind the props' feet and the entire back row of the defensive side can break very quickly to cover.

Basically it's a case if they're doing it, we'll do it.

I'm not sure which coach first tried it but the Brett Stewart try is the first time I can remember it happening.

Some teams, including the Sea Eagles, tried to counteract it by holding the ball in at the lock's feet to achieve a penalty, thereby putting doubt in the back row breaking early and it worked for a while. You still see some teams trying it but it's not as effective because the refs have become far more lenient and as long as both arms are technically attached to the scrum (even if they are standing upright), they are considered bound.

Rest assured it will change when the 'great' coaches figure out how to get around it.

It's just like all the 'not so good' innovations Melbourne brought in like the wrestle, grapple tackle etc. It's just about slowing down the play the ball because if you can get a quick play the ball, you put the other side on the back foot and you're balance is always better when you're leaning forward.[/align]

 

[PONTIAN SEA EAGLE]

Maybe tc has been recruited by the dogs???.

 

[MadMarcus]

Maybe tc has been recruited by the dogs???.

TC was the one who sat outside Des' house until he signed. You think Des is on big bucks...

 

[Rex]

With no fullback scrum-time, why not occasionally reef the ball up the other end of the field? With speed merchants you're in with a chance of getting the ball. And if it fails, the consolation prize is easy metres and the opposition pinned near their line.

 

[stoodamire]

Yeah i always thought that was a good tactic...too risky i guess.

 

[Rex]

Unless you telegraph it, the opposition will have at most 10 metres start, and by the time they pick it up, the tacklers are well on top of them. On the plus side, the attack is already running in that direction rather than having to turn and chase.

 

[MK Eagle]

Much as I hate to confess it Illawarra has exploited this play well with the speedy Morris the scorer.
On dangerous kicks I am a Massive fan of those hard DCE cross field grubbers between 15 & 30 metres out & every time executed well catches the fullback & wingers out of position. Matai was the beneficiary against Penrith & have seen Snake score a couple off it also.

 

[Dan]

Much as I hate to confess it Illawarra has exploited this play well with the speedy Morris the scorer.
On dangerous kicks I am a Massive fan of those hard DCE cross field grubbers between 15 & 30 metres out & every time executed well catches the fullback & wingers out of position. Matai was the beneficiary against Penrith & have seen Snake score a couple off it also.

Nothing better than kicking into space. Within 30 metres of the try line, if you can kick the ball low and into space, it would have a fairly high success rate.

The Penrith tactic to me was just horrible. They just kept hoisting the ball in the air and hoping for the best, that just isn't good footy to me and it isn't good to watch.

 

[1947]

Maybe tc has been recruited by the dogs???.

Probably poached

 

[The Who]

Many sensible replies to my original question. Thanks.
I also agree that the kick from the scrum should be adopted more often.
One more qusetion:
Why don;t teams try the short kickoff to regather more often? They only use it when desperate for possession, and it works more times than not.
I'm sure it has to do with being defensive and field position, but to me the long kick-off is very predictable and not always the best option.
Thoughts?

 

[mozgrame]

I'd like to see more kickoffs drilled hard along the ground and directed to the sideline. With the height of the tees they use, it would be dead easy to position the ball so you are pretty much grubbering it straight into touch and getting it back. As long as it goes over their 40m line that is.

 

[Dan]

Short kickoff i am not a massive fan of
The aim of the first set should be in defense, to try to keep the opposition inside their half, and have them kick from between 40 and 50 metres. If you don't get it back, the other team is in attack straight away, worse still if you don't send it deep enough, the other team is straight on attack.

I'd like to see more kickoffs drilled hard along the ground and directed to the sideline. With the height of the tees they use, it would be dead easy to position the ball so you are pretty much grubbering it straight into touch and getting it back. As long as it goes over their 40m line that is.

Yeah I agree this is worth a try, but difficult. If you kick it right though, you should be able to get it to sit up just in time to bounce over the players head. It seems worth trying to drill it out at about the 20 metre line