• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

The Naming Of The Backs

Status
Not open for further replies.

Scott Allen

Trevor Allan (34)
Received this e-mail recently from an ex-Wallaby forward:

It is largely unknown to players and followers of the modern game rugby, that in the very early days it started off purely as a contest for forwards in opposition in line-outs, scrums, rucks and mauls. This pitted eight men of statuesque physique, of supreme fitness and superior intelligence in packs against one another.

In those days, the winner was the pack that had gained most set pieces. The debasement of the game began when backs were introduced. This occurred because a major problem was where to locate the next scrum or line-out. Selecting positions on the ground for these had become a constant source of friction and even violence.

The problem was resolved through a stratagem of employing forward rejects, men of small stature and limited intelligence, to select positions on the field from where, when in receipt of the ball they could be guaranteed to drop it in a random pattern but usually, as far from the last set piece as possible. Initially these additional players were entirely unorganized but with the passing of time they adopted positions.

For instance, the half-back. He was usually generally the smallest and least intelligent of the backs whose role was simply to accept the ball and pass it on. He could easily (given his general size) have been called a quarter forward or a ball monkey but then tolerance and compassion are the keys to forward play and the present inoffensive description was decided upon.

The five-eighth plays next to the half-back and his role is essentially the same except that, when pressured he usually panics and kicks the ball. Normally, he is somewhat taller and slightly better built than the half-back and hence his name. One-eighth less and he would have been a half-back, three-eighths more and he might well have qualified to become a forward.

The centres were opportunists who had no specific role to play but who were attracted to the game by the glamour associated with forward packs. After repeated supplication to the forwards for a role in the game they would be told to get out in the middle and wait for the ball. Thus, when asked where they played, they would reply "in the centre". And they remain to this day, opportunists and scroungers, men so accustomed to making excuses for bad hands and errant play that most become solicitors or real estate agents.

You may ask, why wingers? The answer is simple. Originally these were players who had very little ability and were the lowest in the backline pecking order. They were placed far from the ball and given the generally poor handling by the inside backs, were rarely given the opportunity to even touch the ball. This is basically why, through a process of natural selection, they became very fast runners and developed the ability to evade tackles.
But to get back to the name. The fact that they got so little ball led to the incessant flow of complaints from them and the eventual apt description "whingers". Naturally, in the modern game, the name has been adapted to become more acceptable.

Lastly, the full-back. This was the position given to the worst handler, the person least able to accept or pass the ball, someone who was always in the way.. the name arose because, infuriated by the poor play invariably demonstrated by that person, the call would come "send that fool back" and he would be relegated to the rear of the field.

So there you have it. The fact is that if a side does not have eight men of statuesque physique, of supreme fitness and superior intelligence then they might as well play soccer.
 

p.Tah

John Thornett (49)
Ha, surely this belongs in the Fiction thread:)
I was putting together an explanation as to how forwards got their positional names in a way forwards could understand... But unfortunately this new forum software doesn't allow you to draw pictures.
 

BPC

Phil Hardcastle (33)
I was putting together an explanation as to how forwards got their positional names in a way forwards could understand.

I understand that you need a special monitor to scan and upload the finger painting.
 

suckerforred

Chilla Wilson (44)
Received this e-mail recently from an ex-Wallaby forward:

It is largely unknown to players and followers of the modern game rugby, that in the very early days it started off purely as a contest for forwards in opposition in line-outs, scrums, rucks and mauls. This pitted eight men of statuesque physique, of supreme fitness and superior intelligence in packs against one another.

In those days, the winner was the pack that had gained most set pieces. The debasement of the game began when backs were introduced. This occurred because a major problem was where to locate the next scrum or line-out. Selecting positions on the ground for these had become a constant source of friction and even violence.

The problem was resolved through a stratagem of employing forward rejects, men of small stature and limited intelligence, to select positions on the field from where, when in receipt of the ball they could be guaranteed to drop it in a random pattern but usually, as far from the last set piece as possible. Initially these additional players were entirely unorganized but with the passing of time they adopted positions.

For instance, the half-back. He was usually generally the smallest and least intelligent of the backs whose role was simply to accept the ball and pass it on. He could easily (given his general size) have been called a quarter forward or a ball monkey but then tolerance and compassion are the keys to forward play and the present inoffensive description was decided upon.

The five-eighth plays next to the half-back and his role is essentially the same except that, when pressured he usually panics and kicks the ball. Normally, he is somewhat taller and slightly better built than the half-back and hence his name. One-eighth less and he would have been a half-back, three-eighths more and he might well have qualified to become a forward.

The centres were opportunists who had no specific role to play but who were attracted to the game by the glamour associated with forward packs. After repeated supplication to the forwards for a role in the game they would be told to get out in the middle and wait for the ball. Thus, when asked where they played, they would reply "in the centre". And they remain to this day, opportunists and scroungers, men so accustomed to making excuses for bad hands and errant play that most become solicitors or real estate agents.

You may ask, why wingers? The answer is simple. Originally these were players who had very little ability and were the lowest in the backline pecking order. They were placed far from the ball and given the generally poor handling by the inside backs, were rarely given the opportunity to even touch the ball. This is basically why, through a process of natural selection, they became very fast runners and developed the ability to evade tackles.
But to get back to the name. The fact that they got so little ball led to the incessant flow of complaints from them and the eventual apt description "whingers". Naturally, in the modern game, the name has been adapted to become more acceptable.

Lastly, the full-back. This was the position given to the worst handler, the person least able to accept or pass the ball, someone who was always in the way.. the name arose because, infuriated by the poor play invariably demonstrated by that person, the call would come "send that fool back" and he would be relegated to the rear of the field.

So there you have it. The fact is that if a side does not have eight men of statuesque physique, of supreme fitness and superior intelligence then they might as well play soccer.

Kernsy I presume?
 

Swat

Chilla Wilson (44)
You may ask, why wingers? The answer is simple. Originally these were players who had very little ability and were the lowest in the backline pecking order. They were placed far from the ball and given the generally poor handling by the inside backs, were rarely given the opportunity to even touch the ball. This is basically why, through a process of natural selection, they became very fast runners and developed the ability to evade tackles.

I'm not sure if this is the case. I've always gone by the logic that wingers score tries because they're marked by wingers in defence.
 
K

kinghitz

Guest
Cmon I know this is fiction coz forwards can't read ... :confused: So either they bullied a back or orange boy into writing or asked Andrew Bolt ...
 

AngrySeahorse

Peter Sullivan (51)
Articles like this certainly don't help us backs ;)

"Merseyside teenager uses her graceful ballet moves out on the wing in rugby union"

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/spor...t-on-the-wing-in-rugby-union-100252-30326123/

I wouldnt be too worried about articles like that, our second rower/main jumper is a ballet dancer too & she is very good in the air. Ballet is super hard too!

I played Winger from 16yr old-20yr old then Flanker (with occational stints at Prop or Second row) up until now (late twenties). I find that whilst I make more tackles at Flanker (or indeed in any forward position) than when on the Wing I remember that I always copped the BIGGEST hits when I was on the wing. I suppose the distance between the offside lines at the breakdown & the opponent doesnt allow as much of a run up as the back line. Open side wing always has the most opportunites in the game for what I call 'total humiliation' moments, that was balanced out somewhat by the glory of getting tries. As such I am a bit forgiving of the back three. If my first club had of liked the Digby Ioane 'Roving' style of wing play rather than that 'stay in your tram line BS' then I probably wouldve been content to stay a princess & never make my way into the piggies for more action.

The fly half & the scrum half in my experience have always been the most self important, they believe the whole fate of the game starts & ends with them, lol.
 

naza

Alan Cameron (40)
The running of the bulls. The naming of the backs. Irony intended ? Layed on thick methinks. Not thick enough for the Wallaby backs who love to find people to run into and open ground to collapse onto for improptu rucks.
 
S

spooony

Guest
Wingers, centre midfield, forwards, fullbacks etc etc where have we heard it before? Aah that game where Mr. Ellis picked the ball up and dived over the line that is called Football or Soccer around the world
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top