Clarkson best tighthead in the game

According to a very astute rugby follower on here

The poor lad got completely destroyed by Steenkamp and the Bulls scrum

Poor Leinster scrum could not have retreated faster had it been on wheels

Well he certainly destroyed your man Wessels when it counted, in the URC final.

And it seems he did a number yesterday:

Rugby Pass

3. Thomas Clarkson – 8.5

A huge improvement on Slimani’s horror show last week. The scrum actually edged the Bulls on balance, with only one hinging penalty going against him. Scored a thumping try after a smart Deegan pop.

I do not remember - was Clarkson in the Leinster team that played he Stormers?

https://www.unitedrugby.com/

"...huge improvement on Slimani’s horror show last week."

Edged the Bulls scrum bwhaaahaaaa

According to Superbru he dd come on as a replacement and was demolished by a nder 20 player in both scrumming and rolling mauls. Is that what happen to a top class tighthead prop? He scrummed a gainst teenekamp he lost that battle as well.

So who do I believe Billy Bunter who never played but a few games beyond High School or Rugby Pass.

Another case closed…. hahaha!

Go watch the game you fucking idiot

Oh so you admit if I watched the game I’d reach the right conclusion, just as I did when Clarkson destroyed Wessels,

If you watched the game you would see Steenkamp destroy Clarkson with the Bulls scrum marching them backwards for about 3m

Only a fucking loser would comment on a game they have not watched - you are pathetic

You lied about Clarkson vs Wessels and were too rugby ignorant to know that one prop could pre engage before his partner has - that’s because you know so little about the finer details of the game - you get the basics

Clarkson beat Wessels with an early engage in the first scrum and never again - so you lied as per usual

Nobody can meaningfully pre engage Chat searched the net and found nothing. It’s a myth. The facts are simple Clarkson had by far the better of Wessels, every report confirms that.

Chat tells us you can pre engage you liar but someone who has played and been around the game most of his life will know that it’s obvious one prop can pre engage before his partner - the frontrow is not glued together you idiot

Fuck me - this coming from an old fart who thinks his IQ trumps bwaahaaaaa

Bullshit did Clarkson have the better of Wessels other than the first scrum pre engage - you are lying as you always do

Clarkson was owned by Steenkamp on the weekend - only a fucking rugby idiot would even suggest him as the best tighthead in the game - he is a fucking nobody

That’s how rugby stupid you are - IQ my arse

Chat does not say pre engaging works when asked properly….it’s physically impossible for one prop to dominate another before the whole scrum engages.

Bullshit Chat does say pre engaging works - you are lying - I’m happy to provide the evidence as I did before

A prop effecting a pre engage gets an early advantage on his opponent. The engage is massively important. The prop that engages first has an advantage putting his opponent on the back foot. The pre engage is a seconds worth but it counts,

In the rugby scrum, can one prop gain a significant advantage if only he pre engages

ChatGPT said:

No, a single prop cannot gain a significant advantage by pre-engaging on his own—at least not for more than a split-second—because of how the scrum structure and modern refereeing mechanics work.

1. Biomechanics

A prop’s force is transmitted through his hooker and opposite prop:

1. If only one prop “shoots early,” the drive isn’t directed into the opposition but mostly shears his own bind or collapses the channel.
2. The hooker and opposite prop must be locked and synchronised for any meaningful horizontal push; otherwise, the early prop’s power leaks through his own shoulders or destabilises the front row.

2. Refereeing and Law Enforcement

Under World Rugby Law 19 (Scrum):

1. The “engage” sequence—crouch, bind, set—is tightly controlled by the referee.
2. A single prop pre-engaging before “set” is penalised as early engagement (free kick).
3. Even subtle “anticipations” are usually spotted because the referee stands on that side and watches for early shoulder contact.

3. Practical On-Field Outcome

Occasionally, a prop might time his drop fractionally ahead of the call to get body height and hit angle right. The results:

1. Marginal benefit: a better initial position or a small gain in shoulder height.
2. Risks: loss of bind, neck exposure, penalty, or destabilising his own hooker’s strike platform.

4. Team Dynamics

Scrum dominance relies on synchronous timing—the coordinated acceleration of all eight forwards. Even the best scrummaging props (e.g., Tendai Mtawarira, Tadhg Furlong, Frans Malherbe) emphasise collective engagement timing. When one side hits alone, it’s usually a coaching or rhythm error, not a tactic.

Summary:

A prop acting alone can’t sustainably gain leverage; the mechanical and regulatory systems of the scrum make synchronisation far more valuable than anticipation. At best he might gain a fleeting half-beat positional edge; more often he destabilises his own side or concedes a free kick.

I never said a significant advantage. I said a slight advantage but any advantage counts in a scrum

Wessels in that first scrum was hit with a slight pre engage by Clarkson which had him on the back foot and he never recovered from that

A prop like Ox is experienced and technically astute enough to recover from a pre engage but not every time

Now it’s slight…..hahaha….he was hit with nothing except Clarkson overpowering him.

No Moffie I have never used the word ‘significant advantage’ you did so try again

Clarkson overpowering him - that’s a lie - yet again. You resort to lying as you don’t get the subtleties of the game - they are beyond you

A porker back peddling fast

No you fucking idiot - where did I use the word significant advantage you lying prick huh?

You are such easy pickings - fuck me your arguments are so fucking weak

Provide the evidence old man

‘A prop effecting a pre engage gets an early advantage on his opponent. The engage is massively important. The prop that engages first has an advantage putting his opponent on the back foot. The pre engage is a seconds worth but it counts,’….says the small porker.

Putting an opponent on his back foot is certainly significant. But as Chat opines, there is no way for one prop to project any force without destabilizing the scrum. It’s all nonsense. Wessels my have ben caught napping by the whole engagement process, but I doubt that as well, he struggled the whole game.

So old man where did I mention a significant advantage? You pathetic liar, desperately poor at formulating an argument

Its a good thing you ensured we had Kellogs on the table and not pursued a career in law

Fuck me

When you said it puts the opponent on the back foot. Which is where you are.

You are just a weak liar

But prove me wrong - where did I use the words ‘significant advantage’

Good luck old man

Just fucking concede and go to bed - this is too easy

Well let’s use your words then:

If he pre engages could he put an opponent ‘on the back foot’

ChatGPT said:

Excellent and nuanced question — and yes, for an instant, a prop who pre-engages can put his opposite number “on the back foot,” but it’s almost always short-lived, illegal, and self-defeating in the modern game.

Let’s break it down biomechanically and tactically:

1. What “on the back foot” actually means

In scrummaging terms it means the opposing prop’s weight momentarily shifts backward — his hips or heels move behind his shoulders, reducing his ability to resist or drive. That can happen if:

1. You strike contact slightly earlier, with a lower angle,
2. And your opponent isn’t perfectly braced.

So yes — if you anticipate the “set” by even a tenth of a second, you can deliver a micro-shock that appears to rock him back.

2. Why it rarely translates to a lasting advantage

1. Force absorption: The opponent’s bind and his hooker immediately absorb the impact and reset the pressure line.
2. Energy leak: Because your hooker and tight five aren’t yet fully loaded, your hit is mostly dissipated through your own pack, not transmitted forward.
3. Referee management: Modern referees and TMO footage make this extremely risky. One early shove, or even a pre-contact nudge, is a near-automatic free kick.
4. Body position compromise: A premature hit often straightens your back and narrows your hips — you lose the compact power posture needed once the scrum actually settles.

So the “back foot” moment is almost always followed by you being unstable or penalised.

3. What elite props actually do

At the top level, props time the drop and squeeze — not the full hit — micro-seconds before the “set.” They:

1. Sink their hips early to get under the opposition’s chest line,
2. Load tension through the bind,
3. But don’t extend until the ref’s call.

This produces the illusion of an early hit without incurring the sanction — a timing advantage rather than an illegal pre-engagement.

4. Summary

In short:

A lone pre-engagement can momentarily unbalance an opponent, but it can’t hold him there — and the trade-off (penalty risk, loss of structure) makes it a tactical dead end at professional level.

Wow you are pathetic and very desperate

But above all you are a liar

You have been owned yet again

No you denied that putting a player on the back foot and getting an early advantage was similar to getting a significant advantage….so I simply asked Chat the question again using your exact words and got the same answer. Squirm if you must

There is a big difference between significant advantage and putting a prop on the back foot with an early engage you fucking idiot

Squirm for what exactly - more like pissing myself at how stupid you are and how pathetically weak all your arguments are

Have you always just been a yes man?

So I used your exact words the second time and Chat said again it was nonsense….I’d recommend you read again What elite props actually do’. Chat kindly guiding you away from your nutter ideas,

Oh boy

1. In practice, one prop can “pre-engage” slightly before their partner, especially at lower levels or in certain tactical scenarios.
2. This can happen because the props are binding and leaning, and timing isn’t always perfectly simultaneous.
3. World Rugby law still technically requires a synchronized engagement on the “set” call, but in the real world, slight variations happen without automatically being penalized.

Important nuance:

1. The referee may only penalize if the early engagement affects safety (collapse, wheel, front row instability).
2. Experienced front rows often time their engagement to get a slight advantage in angle or drive, but it’s a fine line.

So yes—legally, simultaneous engagement is required, but in practice one prop can start pushing a fraction of a second before the other.

3. Key Points on Pre-Engagement

1. Microseconds matter: Props don’t literally launch early like in a race; it’s more about body angle, weight shift, and bind tension.
2. Safety first: Any overt pre-engagement that risks collapse, neck, or shoulder injury will be penalized.
3. Experienced front rows do it constantly—it’s part of the battle for leverage and dominance.

In short, pre-engagement in practice is about subtle positioning and loading, not blatant “rushing the set.” The best props use it to gain a mechanical advantage without drawing a penalty.

Nonsense my arse - you have been owned yet again

Scrum1 1 Steenekamp tries desperately to scrum in,,,,,Clarkson stays straight as an arrow

9.49 Bulls scrum collapses under Leinster pressure…penalty

13.50 Scrum collapses simultaneously after the ball is out

25.30 Rock solid Leinster scrum

30.00 Clarkson powers through the Bools defense for a try

33.20 Clarkson called for hinging…..Steenekamp way over extended. Could have gone either way, I saw no rearward movement.

39.10 The first dominant Bools scrum with the whole Leinster pack shoved backwards

52.30 Clarkson dominates Steenekamp, not called the first time….second time ref calls No 1 lost your bind as Steenekamp elbow hits the deck again,

‘And 56.33 Steenekamp is subbed…..Clarkson is subbed at minute 58. It was a fairly even contest at scrum time with 2 penalties each. There was one dominant Bools scrum.

So you were seeing weight shift, bind tension and body angle on your TV screen….hilarious. As Chat says even if it happens there is no advantage and there is no way you saw a bind pressure tactic

A liar and next time include your question so we can see the bias you have introduced

In the meantime here is the truth from rugby pass

1. Jan-Hendrik Wessels – 5

Carried with his usual vigour and wasn’t bullied physically, but struggled to assert dominance at the set-piece, with Tom Clarkson more than matching him in the scrum.

And here’s Chat’s clarification on pre engagement:

?? 1. True pre-engagement = illegal hit

This is the scenario I described earlier. One prop extends before “set” and makes real forward contact first.

1. The rest of his pack isn’t connected yet, so his force dissipates through his own body.
2. The opposition absorbs and resets almost instantly.
3. The referee sees the shoulder movement ? free kick.
4. His posture opens up (hips high, chest forward), reducing later stability.

That does create a fleeting “back-foot” feel for the opponent, but it’s self-defeating and usually punished.

?? Outcome: no lasting advantage, high risk.

?? 2. Pre-load / pre-tension = legal micro-timing edge

This is what the short three-line quote describes.

Here, props are not moving early — they’re loading early:

1. Tightening their bind,
2. Dropping their hips half a beat sooner,
3. Transferring weight slightly forward so that when “set” comes, their legs are already coiled.

No forward movement, no early contact — just readiness.

That’s why microseconds matter: the first fraction of a second after “set” decides who wins the height and pressure battle.

?? Outcome: real, lasting leverage; legal; exactly what “experienced front rows do constantly.”

…….

Which presents you with a bit of a conundrum. If you claim you saw 2….firstly I don’t believe you and secondly it’s perfectly legal. But if you claim you saw 1 Chat’s view is it is absorbed instantly and actually weakens the offenders scrum ie can’t be the reason Wessels was dominated and penalized.

That seems to be dispositive.

Keep digging...

Essentially Wessels is a Hooker not a prop. That is why Clarkson got the upper hand in the scrum battle.

The Coaches should stick with wessels at Hooker.

Yep Draad that hole is very deep

Thing is if you knew anything about rugby you would know that one prop can pre engage before his partner does - it’s common knowledge - part of the game

Something good old Moffie is totally unaware of

Okay Draad I have just presented Chat’s conclusion that illegal tactics which Porker claims Clarkson used, don’t benefit the team and tactics that do are legal and very subtle

Read that sentence two or three times so it sinks in and now tell me why I’m digging. But you entered the arena it wasn’t your fight, so don’t run away as you usually do with your tail between your legs. Justify your statement.

Keep digging Moffie - you should not have to read about a pre engage

Rugby people know it exists and it’s pretty fucking obvious that the prop that gets a slightly earlier hit has an advantage

Helloooooooo

Keep digging old man

He doesn’t get an advantage unless he is legal…..that is the Chat conclusion having surveyed the entire internet on the subject.

Oh what utter shit - of course any prop gets an advantage with a pre engage as you get in the initial hit

It’s obvious it’s beneficial

Chat is about as reliable as a fish out of water

Fuck me according the Chat - PSDT has effected the odd turnover, which he clearly has never done

No you don’t because one players anchored by his front row partners can generate successful force….Chat is is very lucid on this:

1. Biomechanics

A prop’s force is transmitted through his hooker and opposite prop:

1. If only one prop “shoots early,” the drive isn’t directed into the opposition but mostly shears his own bind or collapses the channel.
2. The hooker and opposite prop must be locked and synchronised for any meaningful horizontal push; otherwise, the early prop’s power leaks through his own shoulders or destabilises the front row.

Basically what I told you initially but I suppose when you see bio mechanics your eyes glaze over. I’m beginning to think you are even more stupid than Mike.

And the Steenekamp scrum dominance was a myth…there was one dominant Bulls scrum….but overall the Bulls were penalized twice as was Leinster while Clarkson was on the park.

Mozart

You are not stupid - you are totally ignorant when it comes to rugby - in other words you only spread shit on site,

Mozart

You are not stupid - you are totally ignorant when it comes to rugby - in other words you only spread shit on site,

So what rugby did you ever play Clever….did you even make the Riversdale High School team?

You are a fucking joke and what this evidences is how little you know about rugby

Fuck me it’s obvious to most rugby followers how important the engage is. So if you can work an advantage that counts in your favour

A pre engage is one of those advantages you idiot

Go learn the game you stupid old fart

The engage is important if done simultaneously by all players….stop twisting the words again. An engage by one prop ahead of his teammates simply unbalances the scrum.

Pre engage as Chat discovered has to do with body position and bind….not one stupid bugger pushing forward by himself while attached to two other buggers.

You are thicker than Clever Mike and lying through your teeth on string after string because you have lost every argument

No you idiot the pre engage is seconds worth and it counts

Go learn the game

You were talking about micro seconds…..now suddenly there is pre engagement for seconds. The literature which is what Chat summarizes for us is clear….there is no benefit to one prop pushing forward a micro second before his teammates it simply unbalances the front row and misdirects any force. All you are providing is bs like ‘rugby followers’ know. But they are not documented.

BS alert.

I’ve never timed a pre engage old man - get a fucking grip

Chat confirms a pre engage is an advantage - hardly need Chat to confirm that - it’s bloody obvious

More to the point - you literally don’t know the basics of the game - that is very apparent old man

Thankfully you have a fucking high IQ apparently - bwaahaaaa

Here, props are not moving early — they’re loading early:

1. Tightening their bind,
2. Dropping their hips half a beat sooner,
3. Transferring weight slightly forward so that when “set” comes, their legs are already coiled.

No forward movement, no early contact — just readiness.

That’s why microseconds matter: the first fraction of a second after “set” decides who wins the height and pressure battle.

?? Outcome: real, lasting leverage; legal; exactly what “experienced front rows do constantly.”

Oh boy poor old man

Engaging early in a scrum — that is, making contact fractionally before the official “set” call or before your opposite number does — can offer a very real physical and tactical advantage, even though it’s technically illegal under modern laws. Here’s the clear advantage explained:

??

1. Establishing Dominant Body Position First

By engaging early, a prop can:

1. Lock into a stronger position before the opposition is fully braced.
2. Win the height battle — getting the head and shoulders under the opposition’s chest line, which gives upward driving leverage.
3. Anchor the bind more securely, preventing being lifted or twisted on the hit.

Essentially, whoever sets first can “own” the space and dictate the angle of contact.

??

2. Generating Early Momentum (“the hit”)

In traditional scrummaging, the “hit” — the explosive impact on engagement — sets the tone.

If you pre-engage, even by a split second:

1. You generate forward momentum first, transferring force into the opposition before they’re ready.
2. The early engagement can disrupt their timing, making them lose stability or go up/down.

That early surge often wins the referee’s perception of dominance, especially if it looks like the other side is retreating.

?????

3. Controlling the Bind and Shoulder Connection

Early engagement allows a prop to:

1. Sink the bind deeper onto the opponent’s jersey before the other side can resist.
2. Control the shoulder and chest contact point, effectively deciding where the scrum “hinges.”
3. This control often lets you steer or wheel more easily once the ball is fed.

??

Why It’s Penalised

Because it does create an advantage — and because it can lead to collapses or unsafe angles — early engagement is illegal under modern protocols. Referees expect simultaneous contact on the “set” command to protect both front rows.

None of which refers to one prop jumping the gun and pulling out of line…it refers t the whole front row engaging before the opponents.

Oh boy….try again

Wake the fuck up old man - we have already evidenced that one prop can pre engage before his partner - hellooooooooo

He can with no effect….as confirmed by Chat. That’s what you were arguing Clarkson did to Wessels. Nobody is saying that the first team to engage as a unit can’t get an advantage provided they aren’t illegal and penalized. One player engaging before his mates exerts no force because he is anchored by the others and only destabilizes his own front row.

Logical and confirmed in Chat's extensive search of rugby reporting.

I think Wessels should be utilized as a hooker. There are better props around than him in the country, And the Sprigboks are retruning to the Bulls from the Springbok team. and other youngsters coming through.

Bullshit Moffie despite me providing Chat evidence that by one prop pre engaging he gets an advantage, it’s fucking obvious that the advantage of a pre engage by the entire frontrow is the same as one prop pre engaging before his partner

Fuck me are you this stupid. The advantage comes from the early hit on your opponent whether as a whole or as an individual

You hit your opponent early with the engage then all of this applies you idiot

By engaging early, a prop can:

1. Lock into a stronger position before the opposition is fully braced.
2. Win the height battle — getting the head and shoulders under the opposition’s chest line, which gives upward driving leverage.
3. Anchor the bind more securely, preventing being lifted or twisted on the hit.

Essentially, whoever sets first can “own” the space and dictate the angle of contact.

??

2. Generating Early Momentum (“the hit”)

In traditional scrummaging, the “hit” — the explosive impact on engagement — sets the tone.

If you pre-engage, even by a split second:

1. You generate forward momentum first, transferring force into the opposition before they’re ready.
2. The early engagement can disrupt their timing, making them lose stability or go up/down.

That early surge often wins the referee’s perception of dominance, especially if it looks like the other side is retreating.

?????

3. Controlling the Bind and Shoulder Connection

Early engagement allows a prop to:

1. Sink the bind deeper onto the opponent’s jersey before the other side can resist.
2. Control the shoulder and chest contact point, effectively deciding where the scrum “hinges.”
3. This control often lets you steer or wheel more easily once the ball is fed.

You keep confusing getting in position first with illegal motion. Here’s Chats summary:

Putting it together

So you’re right to call out the apparent contradiction — it’s really a terminology boundary.

1. When I said “rarely translates,” I was referring to illegal early hits.
2. When your three-line quote said “microseconds matter,” it referred to legal pre-loading.

The key difference is motion vs tension:

Early motion breaks the scrum; early tension wins 5it.

…….

Remember this, Chat’s key directive….the difference is motion vs tension. You thought you saw motion by just Clarkson…..even if true it would simply destabilize the scrum.

No old man I’m not getting confused about anything - the pre engage is all about a slightly earlier hit on your opponent giving you the advantage

Like I keep telling you, the fact that you don’t know this basic rugby fact speaks volumes for your grasp of the game

An effective pre engage has to involve the whole front row…not one prop. That simply destabilizes that props own scrum….when will you learn?

And I just looked at that first scrum again….Wessels engages at exactly the same moment Clarkson does and after the scrum is briefly stable gets blown off the ball. So I asked Chat to scan the reports, her is the outcome, including all questions asked:

So did Clarkson use illegal pre engage tactics in the URC final

ChatGPT said:

I’m not aware of credible evidence that Clarkson (or any player by that name) used illegal pre-engage tactics in the URC final.

If you like, I can dig through match reports, referee reports, and analysis from that specific final and see whether any commentary or adjudication suggested a pre-engagement infraction. Would you like me to search that?

You said:

Yes please do

ChatGPT said:

Thought for 50s

Short answer: there’s no credible evidence that Thomas Clarkson used an illegal pre-engage in the URC final.

What we can verify from match coverage and analysis is that:

1. Clarkson won the first scrum penalty and generally had the upper hand on Jan-Hendrik Wessels. None of the reports describing that penalty (or later scrums) say it was for a pre-engage; they just credit Clarkson for winning the hit/position. RugbyPass+1
2. Post-match analysis notes Leinster won the scrum-penalty count 3–1 from the Clarkson-Wessels battle, again with no allegation of early engagement. RugbyPass
3. Standard reports of the final (Leinster 32–7 Bulls) likewise make no mention of pre-engage infractions by Clarkson. Planet Rugby+2The Irish Times+2

There is fan/forum chatter claiming “pre-engage,” but that’s not the same as a referee call or reputable analysis. On the public record, Clarkson’s edge in that game was legal timing and technique, not an illegal early hit.

…. .

I guess we know where that uninformed forum chatter started. Another complete fabrication

Oh Moffie given it’s you we know your take on that first scrum is utter horse shit

Clarkson pre engages and that’s a fact

It’s not a fact, it’s a bare faced lie, never even suggested by anybody except you and totally not observable even in slow motion. Pathetic…,lying to win rugby arguments.

No you are the fucking liar. I’ve watched that first scrum a few times and Clarkson pre engages - I picked that up the first time I saw the game and said as much

Nothing has changed old man