Why are hookers still throwing the ball into lineouts?
Roar Guru By Matt Brown, 12 Aug 2008 The Crowd is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- George Smith, goal kicking, lineout, Rugby Union, wallabies
I’m constantly bemused by the idea that the hooker has to throw the ball into the lineout. And now there’s talk of dropping Polota-Nau because he can’t throw.
The French are among the many nations that have tried using other players to throw the ball into the lineout.
Why do we doggedly persist with the idea that the guy with the number 2 on his back must be the thrower?
Why don’t the Wallabies trial all the smaller forwards, and whoever has the best skill set, gets the assignment?
In fact, teams should have a few options up their sleeve to cover for replacements.
What is there to be lost by having George Smith, or one of the front rowers throwing?
In this way you can keep a talented player on the field, while covering for their woeful throwing skills (think Jeremy Paul).
Just as in goal kicking, if a player loses the plot, replace them with another member of the team. But keep them on the field for their other roles.
Wallabies, you need to get smarter.
Love this article? Nominate it for The Roar’s Armchair Sports Writer Award. Or vote now for this week’s nominated articles.
Recommend this story.
Jim Beam Devil's Cut
As bourbon ages, a portion of liquid is lost from the barrel due to evaporation. This is known as the Angel's Share. When the bourbon is taken from the barrel, a certain amount is left trapped within the wood. It's that extracted liquid, and the rich flavours from deep within the barrel that are in Jim Beam's Devil's Cut.
Click here to learn more about Jim Beam's wicked new bourbon.
- Explore:
- George Smith, goal kicking, lineout, Rugby Union, wallabies
August 12th 2008 @ 10:06am
ohtani's jacket said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:06am | Report comment
Hookers started throwing in the mid-80s about a decade before lifting.
August 12th 2008 @ 10:08am
Benjamin said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:08am | Report comment
OJ, Wheeler was throwing in in 1980, Pullin and Windsor in the 70s.
August 12th 2008 @ 10:10am
Spiro Zavos said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:10am | Report comment
I’d like to introduce an idea that I once put to Eddie Jones, who apparently thought there might be something in it: namely that a tall player throw the ball in. The theory behind this is that the taller the player the less of a loop that needs to be put on a throw. The less of a loop the less chance there is of a lineout steal.
The point about lifting is that bulky big players are harder to get into the air quickly than lighter, thinner players. I’ve even seen Chris Whitaker win a lineout, being thrown high into the air like a rag doll.
Because lifters can throw lighter players into the air every bit as high as the taller/bigger players can go, it would be relatively easy for these catchers to make the quick, highish leap for the non-looped throw from the tall player.
The question might be asked, what would be the use of tall players if lineout work was taken away from them?
My answer is that the third dimension of rugby, the ball in the air, is moving from the sole point of the lineout to all around the field. Specialist catchers of bombs and kick/passes to the sidelines will be a necessary part of the tall forward’s game in the future.
August 12th 2008 @ 10:11am
eric said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:11am | Report comment
Hoy,
Surely you can understand that throwing can be difficult. Even Warnie bowls the odd long hop or full toss, top tennis players only get 60-80% of first serves in, darts players don’t throw bulls eyes every time. Lineout throwing is no different. But I do agree that it doesn’t have to be the hooker. I am also bemused by the throwing stance, with toes level. Think of nearly every similar sporting action, and it is done using a dominant side action, eg archery, shooting, lawn & ten pin bowling, tennis serving, cricket batting and bowling, dart throwing, golf putting, rugby goal kicking etc. In fact, if you asked untrained people to throw in to the lineout, I reckon they would naturally stand side-on. Why are our coaches stuck on front on?
Also, why do our drop kickers go through that bizarre ritual of bouncing the ball before kicking, at 22′s & kick-offs?
August 12th 2008 @ 10:16am
Mr Mac said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:16am | Report comment
Given there are examples in the 80′s what then makes a tradition and when does keeping a tradition become outmoded?
Is a tactic a tradition – I am sure that if one country changed the way a position was played the others would follow & game would alter.
Its called evolution – after all is that not how hookers came to throw “back then”?
August 12th 2008 @ 10:22am
Jerry said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Spiro – on the Whitaker lineout take, the Hurricanes used to do the same with Jason Spice.
I’m not so sure the tall hooker/tall quarterback analogy is entirely appropriate. A large part of the reason of the effectiveness of tall quarterbacks is that the extra height allows them to SEE over the defence, which isn’t really a requirement for hookers. The difference in trajectory wouldn’t be all that much, even from a 2 metre tall hooker as they’ve got to throw it from 5 metres back at the very least and a bit of a parabola on the throw is necessary unless the throw is going to the very front.
Eric – it’s to test how the ball will bounce of course. The most crucial part of any drop-kick attempt is to get the ball to bounce up uniformly as the kicker has no opportunity to adjust his swing after the bounce. Different spots on the field can bounce differently as there will always be some variation in how hard/soft the pitch is.
August 12th 2008 @ 10:29am
Jerry said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Also – re the front on throwing method.
Have a look at free throw shooting in basketball – a lot of players shoot with both feet level.
August 12th 2008 @ 10:31am
Benjamin said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:31am | Report comment
Mr Mac, there are examples in the early 70s and the 60s. I think therefore that basic chronology makes throwing a hooking tradition.
Spiro, I thought that was the point of the second row pairing – one larger, no.4, and one slimmer and more agile, no.5.
There is a balance on purpose, and in any case Whitaker could not get higher in the air than Matfield, or somebody even taller like Bekker or Charteris. Furthermore I don’t think a players weight comes into lifting as long as he has a moderate vertical jump. On a simple level there will always be a place for taller players because forwards by necessity have to be larger than backs.
August 12th 2008 @ 10:37am
Benjamin said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:37am | Report comment
Throwing – the opposition jumpers are often in the air by the time the hooker has released the ball, the arc and release would take even longer with a taller thrower, thus giving further opportunity to the defensive lineout to throw a player upwards.
August 12th 2008 @ 10:37am
Mr Mac said | August 12th 2008 @ 10:37am | Report comment
Benjamin
Bible or evolution – I’ll go for the latter – that’s life