McKenzie seeks IRB explanation for scrum troubles
November 7, 2013
England enjoyed supremacy in the scrum on Saturday © Getty Images
Australia coach Ewen McKenzie says some of the refereeing decisions over his team's scrum have defied logic and he has written to the International Rugby Board to seek clarification.
The Wallabies scrum was heavily penalised on Saturday in their 20-13 loss to England and has traditionally been an area of uncertainty for Australia. McKenzie, who is no stranger to the front-row having won 51 Test caps for the Wallabies, claims his team were hard done by and has asked the IRB for an explanation as to why they were on the wrong end of so many penalties on Saturday.
"I know a fair bit about the scrum, more than most, so I know what was going on, and I've made a submission (to the IRB)," McKenzie said. "I actually thought we did some good stuff out there. The referee didn't think we did some good stuff, but I actually thought we did, so we will address that through the official channels.
"It's down to matters of consistent interpretation. I haven't got my mind around the fact you can win your own scrum ball cleanly and you get seven scrum penalties against you and they get none. It defies some logic there.
"I get that the whole business is human and that our players are making mistakes, and so is the opposition, so I don't expect a perfect outcome in any game, but I do look at the critical moments where things turn around. If you say nothing, nothing happens. It's more inquisitive than critical, it's more saying could you explain this so we understand."
© ESPN Sports Media Ltd
The time for tinkering is over - England must nail their colours to the mast in key positions, writes Phil Vickery
"New Zealand-born Joe Schmidt has forged the Irish into a street-smart, well- prepared side," John Mitchell on the Irish renaissance
"I am bored of hearing 'I can't fault the effort'. Let us take that for granted and look for some quality." John Taylor writes
Reports comparing the 2014 Wallabies with their rabble-like predecessors of 2005 are unfair and self-serving, Greg Growden reports