Front Row Troubles (September 2006)

"My kingdom for a prop forward. "How many times in recent weeks have coaches up and down the land surveyed their players running around on the training pitch and, as Shakespeare's Richard 111 bemoaned his lack of a trusty steed to carry him back into battle, wondered just how their side will cope with the new season without two or even three loyal workhorses. Yes, never mind the fancy runners in midfield, forget the sidesteps of that stylish stand off who has just joined the club, and don't put too much faith in that new pacy, attacking fullback who has just joined for money the treasurer can't really afford. For, without those two prop forwards and their fellow tradesmen waiting to emerge from off the substitutes' bench, any coach can contemplate a hard season ahead. Hence the parcels and large cardboard boxes arriving daily in the post and marked 'New Zealand, South African or Argentinian props - not fragile!'

And yet, despite the importance and traditions within the game of rugby union of props and the arts of front row play whispers are already circulating in the corridors of the International Board and in and around the inner sanctum at Twickenham to the effect that serious consideration is shortly to be given to the dangers of the modern scrummage. Indeed, in an effort to avoid the rising number of severe injuries now caused by the collapsing scrum, there is even talk of adopting at senior level the rules of school and youth rugby where the push forward in the scrummage can progress no further forward than 1.5 metres and where the props pack, as in rugby league, in an upright position. Even an uncontested scrum - horror of horrors for union devotees - is being considered as a way of avoiding the sad and terrible cases we ocasionally see of a young man being paralyzed for life after a freak accident in the front row of a scrum. Accidents which, whatever anyone's views on the make up or the value of a scrum, must be avoided at all costs and must be the sole criteria for any change. The mystique and the folklore which has built up around the union scrum and the work of the front rowers - myths usually perpetuated by members of the front rowers' union themselves - must be cast aside when decisions are made. Though the 15 a side code's lawmakers must seek to maintain the fabric of the game which has served it so well in the past, the safety of its players must be paramount and consideration must be given to what has changed in the front row of a scrum over the past twenty years, never mind the previous century.

In days of yore when the game of rugby was played for relaxation, fun, and exercise by a hardy band of amateur players and when the first seven or eight players to arrive at the scrum were actually the ones who packed down and pushed for the ball there was no problem. Until the advent of professionalism and the daily use of the gymnasium and weight training regimes at both country and all club levels technique was by far the major factor in the winning of the ball. Now that technique is accompanied by the sheer power of men with 20" shirt neck collar sizes, boasting muscled 50" plus chests, and supported on legs resembling the thickest of oak trees. The power and muscle being exerted and channelled down the centre of any scrum is now immense and unlike any in the past, whatever the standards and reputations of prop forwards of long ago. Any imbalance between the packs is a recipe for disaster. And such is the shortages of prop forwards currently emerging from schools rugby in this country that those imbalances are frequently seen on pitches at all levels and in all leagues, professional or amateur.

The solution to the search for a safe scrum is a tricky one with administrators needing to balance the demands and the traditions of the game with the safety of its players. There will be those who rant and rail against the "uncontested scrum" - not a suggestion of mine -  simply because the 13 a side code adopted the ruling many years ago. But changes must be made if we are, firstly, to guarantee the safety of the players and, secondly, return the emphasis of   the game to back play which is what  paying spectators particularly want to see for their money. 

Ray French