SCOTLAND ON SUNDAY REPORTS
IAIN MORRISON

THE set scrum means different things to different people. To some, it is the epitome of teamwork made solid; the modern equivalent of the ancient Spartan fighting phalanx, where every man depends upon his neighbour doing his job.

To others, the scrum is a place to warm up, catch your breath or simply a means of restarting a game of rugby. But the whole nature of the scrum, and therefore the game itself, is coming under increased scrutiny.
Click to learn more...

When Glasgow beat Munster at Hughenden last year the Warriors were forced to field apprentice prop Stuart Corsar after an injury to Euan Murray. The youngster is an excellent prospect but a match against the eventual Heineken Cup winners came a little too early for him. Munster were awarded one penalty try after a five metres scrum collapsed near the Glasgow line and Corsar was injured in the process.

With two props injured the scrums were uncontested and Glasgow went on to record a famous win. The question now being asked is should one side benefit, as Glasgow obviously did, simply because they have used all their front row substitutes?

The French are already one year into an experiment that has solved the problem. Last season, any French team in the Top 14 that brought about uncontested scrums after being unable to field a competent front row were penalised by having to play with 14 men. It is no coincidence that there were no uncontested scrums in last year's Top 14.

Our own Celtic League stipulates that any team must have ten registered front row players on its books, but has no plans to put in place any penalties. However, England's plan to emulate the French system has been thwarted.

Premier Rugby Ltd in England requested the RFU to sanction the same laws as the French, claiming that it constituted a "regulation" rather than a "law" change and therefore did not require the IRB approval. Naturally enough the IRB disagreed and any change will have to wait until next season, after the moratorium on changes has been lifted.

The French law change, because it was made without recourse to the game's governing body, is not strictly legal and may have to be repealed. Alternatively, the French may thumb their noses at the IRB. Watch this space.

The debate is unlikely to end at penalties for unopposed scrums because the whole issue of the set scrum is dividing the game. On one side are the traditionalists who see it as an integral part of the 15-man game. Do away with the contested scrum and you are left with something that increasingly looks like Super League. St Helens for the Heineken Cup.

"The issue of whether scrums should be de-powered is an emotive one, not least because it would take us a step nearer to rugby league," says Martyn Thomas, chairman of the RFU management board who is overseeing a review of how the game copes with serious injury. "But there is another school of thought which says that as scrums are only a means of restarting a game, why should risks be taken? It is interesting that France has de-powered scrums at the amateur level."

Just as Scotland has de-powered them below the Premier Leagues, he could have added.

Lined up against the traditionalists are a raft of administrators and medical experts concerned at the number of serious spinal injuries to front row players. England are leading the way with team doctor Simon Kemp heading a group, under Thomas' control, which is looking into how changes in the laws of the game can help reduce the risk to players. A recent study over the course of five years highlighted the plight of 23 victims of serious spinal injuries, seven of which had been caused in the scrum.

Only last week it was reported that this group would recommend that the RFU lobby the IRB into moving towards uncontested scrums throughout the game, up to and including international level. Thomas has said that a final decision is not expected from Twickenham until close to Christmas.

The motives are two fold. Firstly, and most obviously, it is the wishes of everyone involved in the game to see fewer players ending up in wheelchairs but the RFU may have another agenda. After Under-21 player Matt Hampson was injured at a training session, the Union's insurance paid out over £1.1 million to the player. The lifetime care costs are reckoned to be in the region of £6-8m and there may be a worry at Twickenham that sooner or later someone will be suing them for the difference.

The fight will be ugly, as most fights are when both sides believe right is on their side. Nothing is expected in the near term but the wind is surely blowing the way of the reformers. The ground is slowly being prepared step by step, inch by inch, to take the contest out of the scrum. It remains to be seen whether what remains will be a better or worse game but, if it happens, it will certainly be different to the one we have now.

This article was posted on 3-Sep-2006, 07:03 by Hugh Barrow.