Props and Sin Binning

When a prop (or hooker) for that matter is sin binned I fully understand that for safety reasons a replacement front rower has to be brought on at scrum time.

But one thing that has always puzzled me is that its a back rower that makes way, now does this have to be the case as like on Friday when Lewis Evans went off to make way for a replacement prop Brew went into the back row. Wouldn't it have been easier to just have taken say Brew off and leave a specialist back row in position.

On the other side should teams who are down to 7 in the pack not be allowed to put some on the flank because they should in theory be getting punished for the sin binning.

Lets say someone like Nuggett was sin binned, if the Blues then put Cuthbert in the back row the pack in theory would have more weight and bulk than before Williams went off, I know they would lose out of the technical side of things but if it was purely wight defended to defend a push etc.

Possible that most teams defensive structures use the backs but the openside sides often have more roaming roles to get involved in rucks. Better the sacrifice a few possible turnovers rather than holes in the defence. Teams often replace the flanker with a big back if needed anyway. That's just my take on it.

I think it is stuipd to bin a prop for constantly being worse then his opposite

For illeal yes but not just being bad.

I was at the Munster v Edinburgh match were they had two sinbins for being rubbish. Just give the try and move on.

BRENDAN, interestingly Wayne Barnes said something like that after one match. He said he didnt feel it right to yellow card someone for being an inferior player.

BEDFORDWELSH, it can be any player that gets subbed. The reason it is usally a back row player is that teams will usually win their own scrum and if they do they will have a great chance at scoring a try with an extra man. (edit: just seen that hammerofthunor already said it)

Munster used Doug Howlett at flanker in a match where they got a forward yellow carded. They knew that Saints would try shove them over and win a try so they wanted a full 8 men in the scrum. It worked for them.

Bedford - there is nothing to stop the Blues form putting Cuthbert on the flank for defensive scrums even if they have a full complement of players and leaving Williams out in the backs, like England did when they were useing Worsely to chop down Jamie Roberts off every set peice.

red_stag wrote:BRENDAN, interestingly Wayne Barnes said something like that after one match. He said he didnt feel it right to yellow card someone for being an inferior player.

Correct me if im wrong (never played in the scrum bar an emergency appearance as a flanker for 10 minutes funnily enough) but if a prop is just "inferior", he'd go backwards/round (and then possibly down), not just down?

Whether you take the scrum down on purpose or just by being rubbish, you're still taking the scrum down in my eyes.

I think there was a report that if they had a straight feed that the props would have to accually prop and so that would happen as the hooker would need to be kept balanced.

The problem now is that every prop's main goal now is to get a penalty from his opposite so lots of the problems happen.

Each person tries to get the upper hand so one tries and get a better grip to give him the upper hand while the other tries to make him not get any hold thus pen for not binding.

As a result people go all different ways and not always because they a phyisically inferior. Look at hartley who pops up because he can not because of force because few put that front row under pressure