Why is the Wallabies’ scrum at best very average compared to most top rugby nations, and at worst ineffective and a barrier to winning the 2011 World Cup?
Article by Chris Bjornestad
During the ’90s, the likes of front ranker hardmen Tony Daly, Ewan McKenzie and Michael Foley did the Wallabies pack proud. But even a strenuous brain-racking exercise makes it difficult to recall a time over the past ten years when the Australian scrum was a force in international rugby.
At least since 2003, the Australian front row in particular has often been heavily criticised – even ridiculed – when their scrum appears to glide backwards on roller skates by a brutish pack from South Africa, England or New Zealand. It’s truly remarkable that the Wallabies backline has been able to attack so successfully from the back foot, often behind a wobbly and retreating scrum.
Until about two years ago, the Wallabies scrum had been subjected to such intense pressure that accusations of deliberate collapsing had been hurled their way from coaches and rugby pundits from the north and south. Whether there was any truth to this cynical, nose-diving tactic we shall likely never know for sure. It’s doubtful Sir Clive and his 2003 World Cup-winning front row will ever be convinced otherwise.
In fairness, some progress has been made over the past two years with the inclusion of Benn Robinson, Stephen Moore and Ben Alexander. In 2009, Robinson was widely regarded as one of the top looseheads in the game, often giving taller tightheads more than they could handle. These Wallabies front rankers have served to beef up the Australian scrum, and provide the backs with a slightly stronger platform from which to attack on the front foot.
In this year’s Tri Nations, the Aussies sorely missed Alexander. A jelly-filled Salesi Ma’afu struggled against the likes of Tony Woodcock and a much-improved Gurthro Steenkamp, who now relishes his clashes in the scrum with opposing tightheads.
A closer look at the Wallabies scrum
The tendency is to blame the front row for scrumming woes, often justifiably. In the Wallabies’ case, however, this is only part of the puzzle. Upon closer observation, the fascinating sky cam footage of the scrums between the Wallabies and Springboks in the Tri-Nations in South Africa points to another area of concern.
To gain a better understanding of why the Australian scrum consistently struggles against the top scrumming nations, pop the hood and take a good, hard look at the middle and back sections of the engine. You will see that scrums in Australia are put together rather differently than those in this country.
Australian scrum gurus believe that locks need not bind closely together to generate power. This is just the opposite of what young South African second rowers are taught in schools and clubs across the nation.
In fact, certain Australian scrum coaches believe the need for locks to bind tightly in the engine room is a total myth. The Wallaby locks tend to use a loose bind and channel their energy directly behind the props.
If the props shift their hips around slightly to gain an upper hand on the opposing front row, the ‘waltzing’ locks move right with them. When their locks are furthest apart, exposing a large gap, it appears a boy could park his mini-quad bike between them, with room to spare.
Wallabies scrum at a disadvantage
There are at least two disadvantages to this scrum style.
First, the Wallabies locks’ loose bind on each other leaves the hooker isolated and unprotected. A savvy and battle-hardened opposition tighthead and hooker combination will take advantage of this and put a painful squeeze on the two, who’s got no one behind him.
Second, the eighthman at the back of the scrum almost becomes a non-factor. It’s essentially a seven-man push. In this year’s Tri-Nations, Richard Brown and Ben McCalman, in the last two Tests, could not propel forward and stabilise the locks with their shoulders. Instead, the Wallabies No 8’s were limited to pushing on the locks’ backsides with just their forearms. This does not generate nearly enough push as a shoulder drive.
In South Africa, a tight lock bind offers a concerted and powerful shove on the props, and provides support for the hooker. 2009 Western Province Super League A and National Club champions Hamiltons forwards coach, Troy Lee, likens the scrum to a number of three-man pyramids working in unison. One of the pyramids so crucial to the strength of the scrum consists of the locks and No 8 working as a unit.
In 2009 Cheetahs eighthman, Ashley Johnson, mistakenly believed he was strong enough to thrust his locks forward only with his arms. This approach simply does not generate enough power as do the shoulders. During this year’s Currie Cup season, his head was where it belonged – between the locks’ hips.
In the tackle, in concert with our legs and core, do we generate more power using just our arms to drive the ball carrier back, and to the ground? Or do we harness more strength using our shoulders first, and then quickly wrap the player with our arms? The answer is obvious. Rugby power is channelled through our legs, core and then shoulders. The scrum is no exception to this.
Let’s put it another way. Take three thin sticks (representing the two Australian locks and No 8 in the scrum) and push them individually against a door, slightly ajar, with some weight leaning against it on the other side.The individual sticks will not have much force and leverage. They will bend and eventually break under the pressure.
Tie another three sticks together and push them against the door. Notice the difference in power. Now, imagine the power of eight sticks tied together and being pushed forward. No, this is not taken from Peter de Villiers’ pocket book of philosophy for dummies. It’s just plain physics at work.
In the Boks vs. Wallabies encounters, Brown did not seem overly concerned with scrumming on his team’s put-in. In several Australian scrums, he would bind with his arms, quickly detach his bind, re-bind and alternate his movements on the locks’ outside hips.
It was almost comical to watch as he clumsily attempted to secure possession of the ball. A headless chicken comes to mind. This begs the question of whether the Wallabies really value the eight-man push whatsoever.
As Springbok forwards coach Gary Gold pointed out to schoolboys on an episode of FNB Classic Clashes earlier this year, the back five generate the strength in the scrum, and the front row conduct it.
Just to give a sense of how important the locks and loosies are in the scrum, according to New Zealand scrum coach Mike Cron, 62% of the power comes from the back five. With the Wallabies loose scrumming style in the engine room, this potential can never be fully harnessed.
A re-think among the Wallabies brain trust is in order and overdue. It’s hard to believe that Robbie Deans, the former Crusaders coach, has not suggested a re-crafting of the Wallabies scrum, given the potency of the Crusaders’ set piece during his watch.
One direct consequence of poor Wallabies scrumming was apparent for all to see in the 67thminute of the Sydney Test against New Zealand. The All Blacks drove their opponents scrum back with impunity from Australia’s five-metre line. Although a poor decision in retrospect, James O’Connor probably felt compelled to come to the aid of a back-peddling Rocky Elsom as All Blacks eighthman Kieran Read emerged from the back of the scrum with ball in hand.
A sneaky – and perhaps prematurely detached – Richie McCaw broke away blindside and gratefully accepted an easy pass from Read, touching down in the corner. Had the Wallabies scrum held its ground, Elsom, who it must be said broke early from the scrum as well, would have been able to deal with Read breaking away and O’Connor could have focused his attention on McCaw.
A change in order
The Australian scrumming technique was arguably an innovative approach once upon a time. And hats off to the Australians for attempting an alternative style.
The Argentineans have certainly proved that thinking outside the box in this crucial set piece can pay dividends. The ‘Bajada’ technique, invented in the late 60’s by Francisco Ocampo, is a testament to this. Unfortunately for the Wallabies, their style has proved ineffective, while the Argentinian approach has made them a scrumming powerhouse.
There is no shortage of strong, quality locks in Australia. Nathan Sharpe, James Horwill, Mark Chisholm and Dean Mumm are but a few that come to mind. Others are moving up the ranks. McCalman, a young, strong No 8, is well suited to beefing up the scrum and is a better option than Brown.
With tighter positioning and working in unison, the Wallabies locks and No 8 could help transform the scrum into a solid attacking platform and a means to disrupt attacking scrums from which so many tries are launched these days.
The Australians have always been avant-garde in devising a myriad of back plays that is the envy of the rugby world. An intelligent coaching staff also needs to recognise when something doesn’t work, no matter how many times it’s tried. It’s time for the Wallabies to look at what leading scrumming nations are doing. A real shot at a winning a third World Cup depends on it.
I don’t doubt the veracity and accuracy of this article whatsoever. Unfortunately, like most Australian backs, I haven’t the faintest idea what goes on in this strangest of challenges, the scrum.
I also agree 100% with the posit that, if Aus seeks to win next year’s RWC, the scrum needs to be fixed – once and for all.
Hey, Superbul, are you online right now? I want to share something with you…
Yes i am here now
One thing the commentators kept on saying was that Australia’s back 3 did not scrum, and then i looked and yes they pull their heads out way to fast. Many times the second shove by Wales was against 5 men.
i must leave for work now OG14, drop a mail on my webmaster2 mail or i will try and pop in within the next hour.
@ superBul:
Howzit mate?
I’ve had a rather serious health issue over the last week and had an appointment earlier today with a neurologist. Her name is Dr Elizabeth Reyneke. As soon she spoke to me, I recognised her south african accent. We enjoyed a few Afrikaans phrases and a bit of a laugh, and when she walked me back to reception she declared to the 20 or so other patients in the waiting room that I am her first patient to speak to her in her native language in the 15 years she has been practising in Australia. She complimented me on my Afrikaans, saying I spoke without a trace of accent – that’s thanks to life in Kimberley.
However, the story doesn’t end there. Elizabeth asked me if I’d met another South African doctor practising in my area. She said he is a former Springbok hooker – his name is Uli Schmidt. I recognised his name immediately. Dr Danie Craven once described Uli as a genius and possibly the best hooker in world rugby at that time. As you will be aware, Uli became the Blue Bulls team doctor in 1997. He lives only about 20 kms from me. I’ve called him and we hope to catch up for a beer one day next week.
That’s made my day!!!!!!!!
@ Old Griquas 14 in Sydney:
Hi Old G, please can you do me a favour, as you may or may not know Uli Schmidt was involved with a collsion with Tony Watson in a Currie Cup match and the injury to Tony ended his career, I would love to hear his take on things because there have been so many stories about that and I would like to hear his take on it. It was rumoured that he never contacted Watson or visited him in hospital, I dont know, I was very young at the time so would like to know for my enrichment.
WIth all that said a legendary player and as hard as nails.
5@ Old Griquas 14 in Sydney:
Oldie, kindly introduce Uli to Rugby-Talk… would be nice to have him blog here and share some stories.
Uli’s dad, Louis, is the original Blue Bull, from where Northern Transvaal then and now the Blue Bulls get their name.
Uli was a doctor in Ppretoria, think his wife is a doctor too. He did duty at the Medicross in Silverton, right next to the Engen Filling station, Pretoria Motors.
@ Winston:
G’day Winston. I wasn’t aware of the Tony Watson incident. I’ll ask Uli for his side of the story and let you know.
@ grootblousmile:
I’ll do that mate. I’ll take my laptop when we catch up and invite him to join us or at the very least, post a comment on South Africa’s foremost rugby site!!!!
@ grootblousmile:
He now practices at a place called Kanwal, situated 2 hours north of Sydney, and he acts as the team doctor to the Warnervale Wildcats Rugby Club. Uli works in a practice that includes 3 or 4 other SA doctors: Dr Wolf Du Plessis, et al.
@ Old Griquas 14 in Sydney:
Thanks for sharing the info , did you get onto my photos?
Sorry will catch up later it is hectic here, going cris cross all over the area today
I do not dispute the truth of this article, however if it is Aussie policy for the locks to NOT be tightly bound to each other then it is amazing that they scrum as well as they do at times!!
There is no point in trying to understand or justify any player in the scrum NOT being tightly bound as it is just madness!!
I have not noticed this loose binding of the Aussie locks and as I say it is hard to believe.
Their loose forwards are certainly guilty at times of not contributing to a 8 man shove and keeping their heads down, but this is a fault that other international loosies are also guilty of from time to time.
The Aussies are always very short of depth and quality players in the front row and whereas Robinson, Moore and Alexander are respectable enough, there are farked when any of these get injured!!
I did write an article some time back on the technical make up of the scrum from a coaching point of view and I understand that it can be a bit boring if you are not that interested in this dark region, however if anyone is interested I can have another go at explaining the correct method in setting up a scrum and scrumming for maximum efficiency.
13@ tight head:
Go for it, write us another one!
I watched the 1994 test against Wales on ESPN Classic last night with Uli playing.
Geez but the game has changed dramatically in the last 16 years.
As for the Aussie front row, the lock and flank make or break a prop. End of story.
@ tight head:
As an ignorant former back, I’d like to read your thoughts tighthead. Just as importantly, can you explain why the Wallaby coaches, a few very experienced and astute former players, aren’t able to successfully impart their knowledge on the Wallaby scrum? Surely, after watching last weekend’s scrum debacle, you could make immediate amendments to the betterment of the side??
Uli Schmidt….what a machine, probably our best hooker ever. I think he did go and see Tony Watson, but it was after a while and that caused a bit of a furore. I was at a Natal function with my late friend Herman Joubert who propped for Natal under 21 and we were chatting to Tom Lawton the Aussie Hooker who played for Natal for a while (Herman called him a wimp because he only weighed 120 kgs) anyway Tom said first time he scrummed against Uli a much smaller man, he thought this would be easy and in his own words “5 seconds later I was lying on the deck like a stunned mullet” and Uli said to him “I did that to you”…nothing dirty, but Uli put him flat on the deck….immensely strong man.
If my opinion is worth anything “locks must bind with each other” its fundamental…the only rugby I played was in the Navy and I played no 7…if the backrow pushed and the locks werent bound, they just used to pop out sideways….kannie werk nie. Scrums at one stage became a staid affair where people accepted that if you had the put in you got easy ball…it has become much more an area of contest now, like it was many years ago….the trick is to find a way to get loosies off quickly with the ball or to tackle, so keeping your head up is the only option. Otherwise you need a flyhalf like Honibol who used to tackle harder than anyone and scare the sh!t out of the opposition.
Hey GBS, the heading incorrectly describes the name of the Australian rugby team. When you have one wallaby, the word is spelt as is; two wallabies are spelt this way; the collective proper noun: Wallabies, doesn’t become the singular, as in Wallabie, it remains the plural, being Wallabies. Possessive case, as in the Wallabies’ scrum is described thus.
[merely a trivial point . . .]
16@ Old Griquas 14 in Sydney:
Having only played in the front row as prop in Primary School, as a skinny runt, therafter concentrating on Openside as from High School, the Dark Art of the front row amazes and puzzles me…
What I am however sure of is that Saia Faingaa is not a strong scrummaging hooker… as well as being penalty prone for illegal ground-play…
Huia Edmonds does not strike fear into anybody at hooker either, he did not even manage to hold down a regular spot here in SA when he played here for a season or so.
I believe Moore has flown out to help the Aussies out and strenghten the hooker position, that alone is a huge positive. Hooker is the glue in the middle of the front row and a weakness there impacts all the way, through the locks and then through the backrow who bind on all of them.
@ grootblousmile:
It wasn’t Moore who flew out to join the team, it was Polota Nau. Moore suffered back spasms 2 mins before last weekend’s fixture and had to be replaced by Faingaa (a poor replacement in my view).
I also agree with your thoughts on Edmonds; just a journeyman hooker to say the least.
Users Online
Total 249 users including 0 member, 249 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,439,819 Page Impressions
_