Richard Loe: Scrum changes seem a touch unnecessary

The IRB's proposed scrum changes seem to me to be a classic case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

The reasons for changes which seem to aim at a more gentle engagement are safety and reducing the number of collapsed scrums which can delay and affect a game. But, take it from an old front-rower, the changes requiring props to touch each other on the arm before engaging will make little difference - to safety or to scrum re-sets.

That's because the engagement will still be a contest to see who can get the best hit and therefore have the other guys at a disadvantage. And the guys at a disadvantage will seek to disrupt the scrums and gain a re-set so the competition happens all over again.

I guess the intentions are good in that they want to avoid a situation where both scrums accidentally go down hard. Fair enough - but the main reason scrums collapse is that a prop has let go of his bind.

I don't have the figures but I'd bet far more players are injured in tackles than in scrums.

OK, there's the Derren Witcombe accident and Australian prop Ben Darwin but, generally speaking, they are few and far between.

Very few senior and representative props have the feared neck injuries. I would contend strongly that most neck and spine injuries to front rowers come in reserve or social grades where maybe the players are not always conditioned to the level they need to be to play in that position. We are maybe not far away from "don't play there if you haven't done the work" or the use of Golden Oldies rules, as already happens.

Representative and international front rowers do an amazing amount of work and conditioning to make sure they have the physical ability to handle a demanding position. The same is true of today's rugby players in general - they are bigger, stronger, faster and more powerful than when I played. The hits are bigger and the stresses on the body much greater.

So we see players train very hard and carefully now in techniques - including tackling. A lot of lower grade players see Jerry Collins whacking the ball up and try to do the same thing when they play. But they are just not conditioned for it. A lot of lower grade players try for "big hit" tackles, but end up putting their lid on the wrong side of the runner's legs and get head injuries. You even see it in Super 14.

So what's the answer? I think it's already being applied in New Zealand. We have taken responsibility for making sure our young players understand scrummaging technique and safety.

The "touch arm" device being proposed by the IRB is what used to be done with young players. I coach under-11s but I still make sure they do this.

It is primarily a way that they can best judge the distance between the two scrums. It helps them to take note of the safety saying we use all the time: "Chin off the chest and spine in line."

At the top level, I don't think the "touch arm" thing is necessary. The game has moved on since I played when scrums were all about getting there quickly, getting your grips and then smashing into the other guys. I think scrums are much more contrived now, with the refs controlling the engagement but they are not necessarily any safer and there are many more re-set scrums now than there used to be.

At the top level, there needs to be a balance between the contest and not sanitising the game so much that no one wants to watch it.

They have tried a lot of things already; there was the hand on the ground for props who felt they needed a steadying hand; there was bracing the arm against the thigh. The truth is - the only props who used those techniques were props with a weakness.

Teach the kids and teach them well - so they are well versed in technique, safety and know what to do. Then you need to condition them the right way.

If you'll forgive a bit of cynicism. I'd say that New Zealand was good at rucking so they changed it. When we got good at mauling, they changed that too. Now it's scrums and I doubt whether the new laws, if approved, will make a great deal of difference.