Why does the hooker throw in lineouts?

[TOCC]

Why in the professional age is it purely up to the hooker to throw line outs?

 

[What2040]

TOCC - good question - back when dinosaurs roamed the earth it gave wingers something to do - remember back at Ballymore in the 70's a winger from the Golden Bears (think a Californian team) threw the ball gridiron style to his winger on the other side of the field (well nearly) - funny funny thing and was a treat

 

[TOCC]

I guess my point is..
If I were a player borderline selection of higher honors, then adding another string to your now could only be looked favorably upon..

A halfback who could throw would free up numbers at the line out, or another prop or flanker could do so as well.

 

[wamberal]

Because he is too short to jump, and is usually the smallest of the potential lifters.


Back in the good old, bad old, days, the winger threw the ball into the lineout.

 

[What2040]

sometimes the throw started off between the legs and was lobbed into the line

 

[Rebel rouser]

I guess my point is..
If I were a player borderline selection of higher honors, then adding another string to your now could only be looked favorably upon..

A halfback who could throw would free up numbers at the line out, or another prop or flanker could do so as well.

I've argued this before as well. To me a logical way of doing it would be the whole front row should be potential throwers (being the shortest on the team) and then you just take the best one. In addition the entirety of the backline should be kickers.

On a very tangential note, I've also thought it would be amusing (just for fun) to make whoever scored a try or whoever was directly fouled against take the subsequent kick...

 

[TOCC]

On a very tangential note, I've also thought it would be amusing (just for fun) to make whoever scored a try or whoever was directly fouled against take the subsequent kick...

We used to do this in juniors.. Finished the year as premiers

 

[grievous]

Props have too physical a job to worry about throwing, its not as easy as some here seem to think either.
Brian Moore put it as simmilar to a biathlete, intense physical activity then while trying to get your breath, hit a target with no margin for error

 

[Sully]

Hookers have usually been doing it for years. More practice makes them usually the best option. Some props a hitting 195cm tall these days. Not that short really.

 

[Mank]

I've argued this before as well. To me a logical way of doing it would be the whole front row should be potential throwers (being the shortest on the team)

Would it benefit at all to have a tall thrower, one of the locks perhaps? (leaving aside that you lose him as a jumper).

 

[Groucho]

There is a good mathematical reason why hookers should throw: there is always precisely one of them on the bench. You can never be sure of having a lock, a six, a seven, eight on the bench, but you can always be sure of having a hooker. If props were to throw, then you would have to train all props, else you risk not having a thrower on the bench. That means you have to train twice as many players to throw. Ergo, hookers are the only logical choice.

That is, if you're going to use a forward. There is no rule that you must.

 

[Baldric]

As pointed out, it used to be the wingers who threw it in. It was the blindside winger who did it which meant that you had two people throwing in. I suppose that with the same person throwing in you would have more consistency. It made sense to have a forward throw because they were always at the lineout.
As a youngster it was fashionalble for the wingers to either throw from between the legs or if more flashy to "bowl" it overhand into the lineout. I cant remember if anyone stood in the "tramlines" back then. Any help here?

 

[TOCC]

^^ the way I see it groucho, its no different to kickers..
You say it's simple maths, but if you open the door to any forward then mathematically you have a better chance of unearthing a better thrower and greater depth in throwing..

As or the argument about hookers been shorter, well not really, in QLD, NSW and the ACT the openside flanker were all shorter..

But looking outside the forwards, in some lineout moves you have the hooker throwing in and then wrapping around and playing halfback... In this case, the halfback is a suitable candidate and almost guarantees a better pass to the 5/8..


It's just food for thought.. TPN used to suck at lineouts, it would have been awesome if someone could have thrown in for him during that period

 

[Rebel rouser]

Respectfully, Sully, Grievous and Groucho, I don't really feel any of those arguments are particularly strong.

'Hookers have been doing it for years' - Well so have wingers before that. This is the equivalent of 'everyone says the world is flat, so that's how it is' argument.

'Props can be tall too' - Well yeah, but the key point is you don't want to take anyway any jumping options, and no prop or hooker is ever going to jump. John Smit and Pek Cowan are two examples of people who have moved between prop and hooker at S15 level.

Grievous - You can not tell me a props have a build that can not master throwing. See Smit and Cowan above.

Groucho - that reasoning is exactly what I meant. I can't see why every front row forward shouldn't be trained. It's like kicking currently, it tends to be the flyhalf, but there's no reason it has to be, and there should be enough cover in the squad that there'll always be someone to backup.

I just think that it would make sense having more people to choose from. And would remove that situation where a great scrummaging hooker is subbed off because they are having the yips with throwing. (eg. TPN in his early days, Corey Flynn in the Crusaders v Reds match)

Edit: Lol, didn't see your post TOCC. Think i had already started writing mine. Similar thoughts again.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

I can recall a time when the French used to have halfbacks throwing the ball in.

 

[Groucho]

Respectfully, Sully, Grievous and Groucho, I don't really feel any of those arguments are particularly strong.

'Hookers have been doing it for years' - Well so have wingers before that. This is the equivalent of 'everyone says the world is flat, so that's how it is' argument.

'Props can be tall too' - Well yeah, but the key point is you don't want to take anyway any jumping options, and no prop or hooker is ever going to jump. John Smit and Pek Cowan are two examples of people who have moved between prop and hooker at S15 level.

Grievous - You can not tell me a props have a build that can not master throwing. See Smit and Cowan above.

Groucho - that reasoning is exactly what I meant. I can't see why every front row forward shouldn't be trained. It's like kicking currently, it tends to be the flyhalf, but there's no reason it has to be, and there should be enough cover in the squad that there'll always be someone to backup.

I just think that it would make sense having more people to choose from. And would remove that situation where a great scrummaging hooker is subbed off because they are having the yips with throwing. (eg. TPN in his early days, Corey Flynn in the Crusaders v Reds match)

Edit: Lol, didn't see your post TOCC. Think i had already started writing mine. Similar thoughts again.

The downside, Rebel rouser, is you'd have always have to select a trained thrower on the bench. That's a pretty important dependency. One might argue that it'd be good to have more throwers, but training a thrower takes a lot of time! That time would be taken from other skills.

 

[Groucho]

^^ the way I see it groucho, its no different to kickers..
You say it's simple maths, but if you open the door to any forward then mathematically you have a better chance of unearthing a better thrower and greater depth in throwing..

As or the argument about hookers been shorter, well not really, in QLD, NSW and the ACT the openside flanker were all shorter..

But looking outside the forwards, in some lineout moves you have the hooker throwing in and then wrapping around and playing halfback... In this case, the halfback is a suitable candidate and almost guarantees a better pass to the 5/8..


It's just food for thought.. TPN used to suck at lineouts, it would have been awesome if someone could have thrown in for him during that period

TOCC, the argument for halfback is the same as for hooker. There is almost always precisely one on the bench. Like hooker, they are a mathematically ideal substitute thrower. In fact, there is a good argument that either hookers or halfbacks should kick for goal for the same reason. The problem is, their body types suck for kicking.

 

[grievous]

Respectfully, Sully, Grievous and Groucho, I don't really feel any of those arguments are particularly strong.

'Hookers have been doing it for years' - Well so have wingers before that. This is the equivalent of 'everyone says the world is flat, so that's how it is' argument.

'Props can be tall too' - Well yeah, but the key point is you don't want to take anyway any jumping options, and no prop or hooker is ever going to jump. John Smit and Pek Cowan are two examples of people who have moved between prop and hooker at S15 level.

Grievous - You can not tell me a props have a build that can not master throwing. See Smit and Cowan above.

Groucho - that reasoning is exactly what I meant. I can't see why every front row forward shouldn't be trained. It's like kicking currently, it tends to be the flyhalf, but there's no reason it has to be, and there should be enough cover in the squad that there'll always be someone to backup.

I just think that it would make sense having more people to choose from. And would remove that situation where a great scrummaging hooker is subbed off because they are having the yips with throwing. (eg. TPN in his early days, Corey Flynn in the Crusaders v Reds match)

Edit: Lol, didn't see your post TOCC. Think i had already started writing mine. Similar thoughts again.

I didnt say they didnt have the wrong build, I said it would be extremely difficult to get the accuracy one needs after such a physical contest as scrummaging is. You are wrestling with your opposite and tend to tense up in the upper body, not so much with hooking as its more hooking the ball and then driving straight on with your arms pinned

 

[Manuel]

I think it would have been a good idea to have John Smit throwing in for the Boks in 2009, when he was playing 3. It would have meant to teach Du Plessis how to lift, but that can't be that hard.
Similarly, imagine if the Crusaders had discovered that Crocket was a very talented line out thrower, perhaps they could have won the Super 15 final...

I tend to agree with Rebel rouser, it looks to me as a paradigm that has little use. If we have wingers or centres kicking to goal, why can't we have props throwing in?

 

[grievous]

Then why doesnt Smit throw when he props?