Why and When Did They Stop Contested Scrumms in Rugby League?

Contested scrums in rugby league were effectively abolished in 1995, a move that deeply altered the strategic dynamics of the sport. The decision to eliminate contested scrums was driven by several key factors, including the desire to enhance the game's flow, improve player safety, and simplify the rules. This article will explore the rationale behind this significant rule change and its impact on the sport.

Speed of Play

One of the primary reasons for abolishing contested scrums was the need to speed up the game and maintain viewer interest. Uncontested scrums allow for faster restarts, enabling the game to flow more smoothly without prolonged stoppages. This quick turnover in play has proven to be engaging for spectators, as it maintains a high pace throughout the match. Teams can now transition more efficiently from defense to attack, keeping the audience on the edge of their seats.

Player Safety

Reduction of physical confrontations was another critical consideration. Contested scrums involved intense body collisions, which could lead to serious injuries. Removing these collisions has minimized the risk of injuries, especially spinal injuries, which were a major concern in rugby union and to a lesser extent in rugby league. By designing a structure that is less confrontational, the game has become safer for players.

Simplification of Rules

The rules surrounding scrums were simplified to make them more understandable for both players and referees. Contested scrums involved complex interactions and subtle tactics that could lead to disputes and ambiguities. By standardizing the scrum procedure, the game has become more straightforward, reducing the likelihood of confusion during officiating. This simplification has not only made the game easier to manage but also fostered a greater sense of fairness and integrity.

Structural Differences and Safety Considerations

Despite the common perception that scrums were dangerous, there were fundamental differences in how rugby league and rugby union approached scrums. In rugby league, scrums were less physically confrontational due to the ability to retain the ball from a tackle. In rugby union, possession had to be controlled, leading to tighter and lower scrums. The open side prop in a rugby league scrum is more upright, allowing the hooker a better view of the ball, while the blind side prop is lower to support the hooker.

These differences in structure mean that rugby league scrums are less compact and therefore less dangerous. The open side prop pushing upwards reduces the risk of the scrum collapsing, which is a significant factor in spinal injuries seen in rugby union. With fewer forwards pushing in a rugby league scrum, the whole structure is more loose and less dangerous.

The photographs below illustrate the differences:

Rugby League Scrums

open side prop (top), blind side prop (bottom).

In rugby league, open side prop pushes upwards (top), blind side prop is lower (bottom).

Rugby Union Scrums

all players lower (top), back row forwards lower (bottom).

In rugby union, all players are lower (top), back row forwards are lower (bottom).

Concluding Thoughts

The decision to abolish contested scrums in rugby league was a well-thought-out move that has had a profound impact on the game. It has improved the flow of play, enhanced player safety, and simplified the rules. While some may argue that scrums were inherently perilous, the structural differences between rugby league and rugby union highlight the safer nature of the latter.

Today, rugby league continues to evolve, and the absence of contested scrums remains a defining characteristic of the sport. Through continued rule refinement and player safety measures, rugby league aims to further enhance its competitive and enjoyable nature for players and spectators alike.