RUGBY SCRUMS

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 149, 19 March 1936, Page 10

RUGBY SCRUMS

Formations Discussed WELLINGTON’S VIEWS I —~ Free Hand For Delegates The delegates at the annual meeting of the Wellington Rugby Union last: night devoted some hours in discussing what rides tiie game should be played under during the coming season. It was decided to oppose any move to revert to tiie kiek-into-touch rule, but the union’s delegates were given a free hand in deciding what serum formation should be.played. Witli regard, to the proposed imaginary line through the serum, this was left in abeyance, as tiie International Rugby Board is expected to frame a ride on the matter. Mr. J. Prendeville said the union should consider the questions of amendments to the rules, such as scrum foxination, kick into touch and the imaginary line through tiie scrum in view ot the setting up of the Dominions’ rules committee in England. He said that at tiie conference with the International Rugby Board it had been announced that overseas union could obtain dispensations if they applied for them. Wellington, in the past, he said, had always opposed the kiek-into-touch rule. The Home unions held that there was no necessity for altering the laws, of the game. There had been so much kicking into touch in the Oxford-Cam-bridge match last year that the authorities at Home thought some change was required, but the international matches between New Zealand aud Scotland, Wales and England had been such hut open games that the New Zealand delegates were asked why they wished to alter the rules. Mr. E. Little said, like Mr. Prendeville he had always been strongly opposed to the kiek-into-touch amendment. The alterations which had been made in the laws of the game in New Zealand had been done to counteract fhe League game. The English team which had toured the Dominion in IJ3 hadl placed attractive football. He was opposed to this continua^choppin B w chawing of the rules. Let us get a set of rules and stick to them,’ he stud. He moved that the union’s sleleS5 Iele S^ te instructed to oppose the reintroduction of he kiek-into-touch ruleThe motion was carried. Tiie Imaginary Line. Mr. Prendeville said the next rule which might lead up to a request for a dispensation was-the imaginary line through the serum. If this imaginary line was brought into operation the wing-forward would be ruled out. He had always considered that the -■ - formation, a wiug-torwanL was the ideal one. He thought that in ’view of the‘ South African visit next Jelv New Zealand should decide what scrum formation should be adopted. In reply to Mr. J. N. Millard Mr. S S. Dean said he had seen xery littlv difference in the scrum formation m Britain and NeW Zealand. The B itish forwards got down' promptly and pushed as soon as they got down lhe trouble was that New Zealand players had lost the art of scrummaging. They bad had to learn lessons in 1928. Bntish forwards packed low, pushed hard and kept on pushing. New Zealanders had to get back to scrummaging as they knew it years ago. Mr. Millard held that, teams should be allowed to play any formation they desired, and the best team would come out on top. in 1921 New Zealand had better forwards than it had to-day, but the South Africans showed us how to scrummage. They should not allow anyone to say what sort of scrum foimation should be used. The rules were there, and they could be played to. Mr. W. Hornig, who was manager of the New Zealand team which visited South Africa in 1928, said New Zealand forwards in recent years had not been pushers, and they would have to get back to solid shoving. Mr. A. De Clifton said that under the present system in New Zealand the locks fought against each other, with the result that no one knew where the tall had gone. He was opposed to the imaginary line through the scrum. As long as a man had both feet behind the ball he should be allowed to follow it through. The first thing to do was to brighten up the game. New Zealand would nveer master three men in the front row of the scrum, as such scrums were lop-sided. Mr. Dean asked, if they did not want the introduction of the imaginary line through the scrum why had they sent a remit to the conference in London asking for it? Praise for 1935 All Blacks. Mr. M. F. Nicholls said the 1935 All Blacks had put up as fine a performance as any Rugby combination which had ever left these shores. At the end of 10 matches, the New Zealand forwards had mastered the new system of scrummaging, and had beaten Scotland, Ireland, Wales and England, for the ball. The New Zealand team in South Africa in 1928 had found that two men had no chance of hooking the ball from three in the serum. In view of the visit of the Australian team this year and the South African team next year he advised New Zealand to stick to-th© three men in the front row of the scrum. Wellington should get Lambourn, the hooker for the 1935 All Blacks in Britain, to cqach them in scrum tactics. New Zealand forwards were the slowest .heelers of the ball in the game. British forwards were past masters.at heeling.quickly from scrums and rucks.

Mr. Hooper said that Nexx’ Zealand forwards liad been penalised for scrum infringements so often that they were afraid to hook the ball. Mr. IL B. Simmons moved that tiie Wellington delegates be given a free hand at the annual meeting of tiie New Zealand Union regarding the question of scrum formation. Mr. W. J. Wallace said that New South Wales played three men in the front roxv of the scrum for the first time against New Zealand In 1905, and beat tiie All Blacks for the ball. He described the different tricks of hooking since 1905, and said that the present rules of the game liad been framed to favour three‘men in the front row. Tiie 2-3-2 serum formation was uo good to New Zealand overseas, as the wingforward was penalised off the field. Two men had no chance of beating three under the present rules. He did not blame the rules; our forwards should become better, players.

Mr. A. McDonald said tliat witli a 2-3-2 formation New Zealand liad n s(i-50 chance of getting the ball against Hie -South Africans. We- had to consider -w-ha-t was best for our football, and our -players had proved' a success with the 2-3-2 formation. He felt sure

that most of the clubs in New Zealand would play this formation this year. The motion to give the delegates a free hand was carried. CANTERBURY DECISION By Telegraph—i’rtas AssiK-i.-itioii Christchurch, March IS. Opposition to any suggestion for altering the miles at present governing Rugby football was shown at the annual meeting of delegates of the Canterbury union to-night, when proposals for reversion to the two-three-two scrum and a revival of the amended kiek-into-touch rule were before the meeting. A suggestion' that the union should make it mandatory on clubs to adopt the txvo-three-two formation found little supiwrt, and a proposal that dispensation be sought from the New Zealand union to introduce these proposed changes xvas also defeated. The proposals were separated for the purpose of voting. The two-three-two serum proposal was defeated by 33 votes to 31, and it was decided to apply for dispensation for the kick-into-toueb rule. INVERCARGILL VIEW By Telegraph—Press Association. Invercargill, March 18. That players themselves desired the return of‘the two-tliree-two scrum formation, and that a move lie made to have it adopted throughout New Zealand was tiie unanimous opinion of the Star Rugby Football Club at its annual nieeting to-night. It was decided ; -to" recommend the Southland I Rugby Union to press -for its return and endeavour to get other unions in New Zealand to do the same.