Rugby Hooker

[Overcheck 167]

Why is the term hooker still used in rugby when the ball is invariably hooked by the prop?

[eljay 892]

The prop does not hook the ball.    The half back throws it straight in to the second row.      

[eljay 892]

Which poses another head scratcher.       The rules say balls into scrums and lineouts must be straight - yet referees turn blind eye to dog leg put in to scrums but a throw into the lineout which is just a whisker off the straight and narrow courts a sharp blast on the whistle.    And further what has always struck me as inconsistent - why is the "penalty" for a crooked throw into a lineout just a scrum, opponents ball, when a crooked throw into a scrum incurs a penalty kick and possible points??

[Overcheck 167]

10 hours ago, eljay said:

The prop does not hook the ball.    The half back throws it straight in to the second row.      

Then if that is the case there is no such thing as a hooker in the historical position, which now should be renamed I would have thought. The centre position of the front row doesn't do any hooking anymore.

[Hufkissen 22]

On 5/25/2018 at 10:06 AM, eljay said:

Which poses another head scratcher.       The rules say balls into scrums and lineouts must be straight - yet referees turn blind eye to dog leg put in to scrums but a throw into the lineout which is just a whisker off the straight and narrow courts a sharp blast on the whistle.    And further what has always struck me as inconsistent - why is the "penalty" for a crooked throw into a lineout just a scrum, opponents ball, when a crooked throw into a scrum incurs a penalty kick and possible points??

Not straight throw to line-out a "technique" issue whereas not straight to the scrum considered more "deliberate". Maybe?