There is an article on here discussing the Irish concerns about the Bok scrum. No doubt prompted in part by Clarkson’s troubles last week. The article goes on to speculate about whether any country can survive the Bok scrum. Well Australia did reasonably well, surviving intact even after Ox came on. But it was still edge of the seat stuff.
One wonders, is this primarily strength or technique. If all these props were tested in a sled pulling contest, would the Bok props dominate? I doubt they would be much stronger in that absolute sense….so maybe technique. Unfortunately this is also the most inscrutable aspect of rugby, so it’s hard to discern.
But one thing one notices in the better contests, is late dominance by the Bok’s. A second shove or just the cumulative effect of seconds of pressure?
If this goes on the risk of law changes has to be there. The old men in suits will try to find a solution, which would diminish scrums and the game.
There is one thing that could be done without changing the physical scrum….eliminate the card if a team simply can’t execute the scrum. Failure is not a deliberate infraction…..in every other case where a card is given there is an element of choice….a team chooses to pull down the maul, a close example. A penalty is sufficient punishment.
Consider the logic…..a team can’t scrum… so after a few failures the offending prop goes and the team is reduced to 7 man scrums. Hardly a solution….just a punishment and the deficiency is made worse. I can’t think of any other instance in sports where a capability shortfall is actually penalized.
The Boks will still get a stream of penalties, the risk of a handling error turning into three points will still be there, but the game won’t be quite as farcical.
