Talk:Hooker (rugby league)

Improvements
Do bear in mind that we write Wikipedia articles primarily to inform those who know little (or nothing) about a subject, not to reinforce what certain editors (think they) already know. I'll also take this opportunity to remind you of useful tags such as Citation needed and Dubious. Using these is more difficult to misconstrue as non-constructive than the wholesale deletion of well-sourced content.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:18, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Firstly

 * Wearing jersey number 9, the hooker is one of the team's forwards, playing in the front row of the scrum. The position's name comes from their role of 'hooking' or 'raking' the ball back with the foot in scrums. For this reason the hooker is sometimes referred to as the rake.

is being changed to:


 * Wearing jersey number 9, the hooker is one of the team's forwards (8-13). The position's name comes from their duty of binding into the front row of scrums and 'hooking' or 'raking' the ball back with the foot. It is for this reason that the hooker is also referred to as the rake.

because:
 * The first sentence doesn't make it seem as though the hooker's sole purpose in the game is participating in the scrum. Nor can it imply that all forwards play in the front row of a scrum.
 * It includes the number range of forwards as well as the hooker's number within that range, reinforcing the point (as hooker is seen as such a back-like position).
 * It does not include the repetitive use of the word 'scrum' (twice within two consecutive sentences).
 * The inexplicably removed reference for the term rake's usge is restored and the redundant (and subjective) use of the word 'sometimes' is removed.

I'll be interested to hear what any objections might be.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 09:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Secondly

 * Hookers have a great deal of contact with the ball, as they usually play the role of acting halfback or dummy half, picking the ball up from the play-the-ball that follows a tackle. Hookers therefore have a lot of responsibility in that they then decide what to do with the ball, whether that be to pass it (and to whom), run with it, or occasionally to kick it. Therefore, together with the two half backs and fullback, hooker is one of the four key positions that make up what is sometimes called a team's 'spine'.

is being changed to:


 * Even though in the modern game of rugby league they no longer usually make contact with the ball in the scrum, hookers have a great deal of contact with the ball in general play. This is because they frequently play the role of "dummy half" back, i.e. picking the ball up from the "play-the-ball" that follows a tackle. So often being the first player to handle the ball, hookers therefore have a lot of responsibility in that they then decide what best to do with it, whether that be to pass it (and to whom), kick it, or run with it. While passing from dummy-half is the traditional role of the hooker, in the modern game their creativity and running from dummy-half has gained importance. Therefore, together with the two half backs and fullback, hooker is one of the four key positions that make up what is referred to as a rugby league team's 'spine'.

because:
 * It is axiomatic that modern hooker's don't usually make contact with the ball in the scrum (the reference actually uses the word 'never'). It would be absurd to have an article about the hooker position (especially given the preceding explanation of the position's name) that fails to mention this. I think the source is fine. If you want a better one, you go to the trouble of finding one, instead of harming the article.
 * It mentions that the dummy-half not only handles the ball frequently, but is the first player to do so, further clarifying why they have so much responsibility.
 * The redundant (and subjective) use of the word 'occassionally' is removed.
 * It mentions that traditionally the role of hooker in general play was passing which the reference provided does support.

I'll be interested to hear what any objections might be.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 11:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Thirdly

 * The laws of rugby league state that the hooker is to be numbered 9. However, in some leagues, such as Europe's Super League, players can wear jersey numbers which do not have to conform to this system.

is being changed to:

The Rugby League International Federation's Laws of the Game state that the hooker is to be numbered 9. However, traditionally the hooker's jersey number has varied, and in the modern Super League, each squad's players are assigned individual jersey numbers regardless of position.

because:
 * It is worthwhile mentioning the governing body whose laws are being mentioned (as there is more than one), and pipe-linking the word "laws" from the phrase "laws of rugby league" to the article Laws of rugby league makes absolutely no sense.
 * It mentions that numbering was not always like this (useful if you've seen old images of hookers not wearing 9) and deals with Super League's player numbering system in a more informative way.

I'll be interested to hear what any objections might be.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:49, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Fourthly

 * One book published in 1996 stated that in senior rugby league, the hooker and stand-off half (five-eighth) handled the ball more often than any other position. The same book also stated that in defence the hooker ranked behind only the props and second-row forwards in tackles made.

is being changed to:


 * A 2006 Australian paper found that in senior rugby league, the hooker and stand-off half (five-eighth) handle the ball more than any other position. On average the hooker runs the least distance with the ball, because the dummy half, a role usually taken up by the hooker, often distributes the ball to running team-mates. The same paper also found that in defence the hooker is on average second only to prop and second-row forward in tackles made. This is due to their mid-field position.

because:
 * It doesn't appear to be a book.
 * The fact that it is Australian and published in 2006 is important for contextualising its findings.
 * It is worth mentioning that the hooker runs the least distance with the ball.
 * It is worth mentioning that the hooker's position is mid-field.

Again, I'll be interested to hear what any objections might be.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:46, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't have time to answer all these trivial points one by one again. I have already explained my objections to each in edit summaries which you have chosen to ignore or do not understand.
 * However, please read the wikipedia policies on what constitutes a reliable source. For one obvious example, the 1996 book which you cited clearly states on the first page that it is a book, written in 1996. It is not a paper, as most people understand a paper, and it was not written in 2006. It did not 'find' anything - it simply stated statistics without explaining where these findings cane from. The details you have attributed to it about running with the ball etc do not appear in the source - please read it carefully. --hippo43 (talk) 14:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, making non-constructive edits is far easier than justifying them isn't it? I don't envy you the task. The 'no time' argument doesn't wash I'm afraid since you have all the time in the world for edit-warring. Don't think for a minute that this is anything but a complete waste of my time. However your points made about this paragraph are correct. I don't know why I didn't notice the 1996 book part. And I meant to specify that amongst forwards, the hooker runs the least with the ball. I don't see why you're against mentioning that the book is Australian since you're so for specifying that certain terminology is. And why you're so against mentioning the hooker's mid-field position is similarly confusing.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 08:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Except my edits are all constructive, and I justified them all with appropriate edit summaries. So when I say I don't have time to explain each of them, I mean I don't have time to do so again.
 * The 1996 book may or may not be Australian - I don't see anything in it that confirms that either way. If there was more detail provided on the statistics in it, like if they stated that the info came from Australian RL games, I would have no problem including it.
 * On the subject of metres run, I don't have a problem with including something if it is well-sourced. However, this book doesn't state when or from what level of games (only 'senior' games - pro, amateur, what?) this analysis comes, and as we only have this one, poor quality source, it ends up being given too much prominence. It is also misleading because there is a difference between total metres and metres per carry. If we can explain this concisely it may be useful.
 * The mid-field thing confuses me a little. The book itself doesn't, as far as I can see, draw the conclusion that the hooker's (most common) position on the field affects how much he runs, so we can't draw that conclusion ourselves - it amounts to original research.
 * You have obviously contributed a great deal to this article - you seem to have written most of it, so it's understandable that you are protective of it. However, please relax a little and see if any other editors have an opinion on it. We both want the same thing, as strong an article as possible. --hippo43 (talk) 13:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Finally
I don't see the need for an entirely new section just for a list of a few notable hookers. And "see also" hatnotes that link to categories? I don't think that's what they're for. It also makes for a better transition from mentioning the hooker's role and how some play halfback to mentioning specific indivuduals. Also, how including an unusually notable example is "undue weight" escapes me.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:58, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Jersey number
So does he wear 9 except in Super League or does he wear number 2 ? It's confusing right now.- Sticks  66  11:48, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The reference to the number 2 is incorrect, someone has obviously just copied the rugby union page. In the Super League they can wear any number they want 0-99. Mattlore (talk) 22:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Managed to go more than a year without some clueless changing the number. Current streak: three weeks. And... back to zero :rolleyes: Local Potentate (talk) 10:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC) Only been one this year, 2023 had about 10.Local Potentate (talk) 09:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)