Friday fun - Origins of rugby.

Official sources state that RUGBY takes it's origins from a day way back in 1823 when one William Webb ELLIS picked up the ball and ran with it during a soccer (OK, football, if you prefer!) match at Rugby school in England. Like all good stories, tales and jokes, this is good to know and remember, but believe me, it's the biggest lot of nonsense since man started scribbling on cave walls. There are quite a few facts to disprove this outrageous claim:

1) We all know in soccer ELLIS would immediately have received a red card for handling the ball, and that would have been end of story.

2) It is unimaginable that a noble sport like RUGBY could have originated from a non-sport like soccer. I personally think this is a scheme from soccer to lend credibility to their 'sport'.

3) There's been ample evidence in recent times that no-one in England ever runs with the ball.

4) No-one has ever proved that RUGBY is being played in Rugby. In fact, no-one has ever proved that RUGBY is being played in ENGLAND, for that matter!

5) Anyone knowing anything about RUGBY knows that the only ELLIS ever to have played the game, was JAN ELLIS of South Africa.

With that laughable theory now discarded, you can believe me and my reverend that RUGBY has decended upon us from heaven. According to the good reverend, the name RUGBY comes from the ancient Hewbrew term RA-UGH-BEY, which means 'Hooligans game for Gentlemen'.

I found this Gem of a website, dedicated to Springbok rugby by a guy in the US.

This is one of his humorous pieces

The Laws of Rugby.

RUGBY is a sport for intelligent people, and the reason is obvious. RUGBY has 164 laws (that's right, laws, not rules - this is serious bussiness, mate!) in comparison to soccer's 2. Each law has on average 10 sub-laws, which in turn have 5 sub-sub-laws each. Not even the most intelligent RUGBY player can calculate the total number of sub-sub-laws.

A good friend of mine read the complete Encyclopaedia Brittanica one Sunday afternoon (of course, he's a RUGBY player - it was off season!), and he assures me 75% of it consists of the Laws of RUGBY.

It is recommended that you know the Laws of RUGBY by heart. In the unlikely event of your team ever loosing, you can always point out that the referee misinterpreted law 18.a.i, sub-paragraph 2.b. No-one will deny it, in fear of being thought of as being uneducated regarding the Laws of RUGBY.

The only thing that complicates the game slightly, is the fact that some laws are subject to the referee's interpretation, as you could have guessed from the above paragraph. That is about similar to asking a traffick cop to interpret the speed of lightning. Something that touches on this is the fact that there appear to be different sets of Laws for different playing countries. Of course, this has the effect that highly intelligent people often appear to be quite stupid, which suits me. I've said all along there is not enough humour in the game.

I forgot to mention that the Laws are also available in braille, for the benefit of referees. If you have any aspiration of becoming a referee (something I strongly discourage), I suggest you contact your nearest School for the Visually Impaired. A psychiatrist is a good alternative.

The Objective of Rugby.

Winning is not everything in RUGBY, it's the only thing. To achieve that, your side should score more points than the opposition. The fact that one side scored more points is not always accepted as proof that they have won. Not by the opposition, anyway. In a case like that, the following phrases come in handy:

i) 'Looks at the scoreboard.'
ii)'Read about it in the paper tomorrow.' (If someone tells you that, a good reply is 'Don't believe everything you read in papers.')

There's another phrase you need to know, in case your team ever looses (highly unlikely):

'We wuz robbed!'

Points can be scored in several ways. The most important is by scoring a 'try', where the ball is carried over the opponent's goal line, and put down with 'downward pressure'. If you want to ensure that a try, which is worth 5 points, is given, it is best to bury the ball in the in goal area. An extra 2 points can be accumulated by 'converting' the try into a goal. This is done by placing the ball and kicking it over the cross bar of the goal posts.

Another way of scoring is the 'penalty kick', similar to a conversion, but it is worth 3 points. It is highly unlikely that points will ever be scored against you in this way, since your team never transgress in a punishable way. Don't be to sure about it, though (see 'Referees' under 'Officials').

The most hated form of scoring is the 'drop goal', where the ball is allowed to drop onto the ground, and kicked over the cross bar on the bounce. It also counts for 3 points. If you want to achieve hero status, you do this in the dying seconds of a match, with your team trailing by 2 points. But please, don't try it with an open goal line in front of you!

Of course, there are other objectives as well. From a player's point of view, it can be a lot of fun to see how many opponents can be hurt to the extend that they can't complete the match. They'll show a lot of respect for you, and buy you tons of beer afterwards, but remember, chances are you will play them again sometime in future.

Pride and Honour comes into play, as well. In the dressing room before a match, your coach will say something like 'Remember, you do not only play for yourself, you do not only play for your team, and you do not only play for your school/club/province. You are playing for your NATION and COUNTRY!' In which case you will wonder for whom the opposition are playing.

The playing field.


This can be anything from your mother's lounge to a holy temple like Newlands or Loftus Versfeld. That includes streets, highways and city squares. It is however preferable that the playing area be marked out properly, and remember the lines are not part of the playing field. A disregard for this normally leads to serious arguments. In fact, even knowledge thereof leads to serious arguments.

The playing field should be level. Literally. Few things are as annoying as having to decide before the start of a match whether you want to play up- or downhill. Especially when you also have to decide whether you want to play with or against the wind, and with the sun in your eyes or behind your back.

A well grassed surface is preferred, but not essential. Mud will also do - ask anyone who's been to Newlands and New Zealand. Deep sand can be annoying when it gets in your eyes. Rocks and boulders shouldn't be as big as to cause stumbling.

Try not to have a cricket pitch in the middle - you will find that all play occurs in the covers, and all tackles are made at a good length outside off stump. In a case like that it is recommended that you have a good excuse not to play. Something like, 'I've only remembered now that my sister is getting married today, and I'm the best man', will do.

NOTE: In certain countries you will notice that the playing field is also called the 'paddock'. Yes, I agree it is silly, but from that I suppose one can deduct that the people who play there, show similarities with sheep. Either that, or they allow sheep to graze there when it's raining, hence the muddy surface.

The Players.

A team normally consists of 15 players, sometimes of 14, but often of 16. Here follows a short description of the different playing positions:

PROPS. No.'s 1&3. These guys are more or less as tall as they are broad, without necks, and very strong. They are supposed to push in the scrums. Previously it was not essential for them to touch a rugby ball, and there are quite a number of cases known of props who have completed successfull international careers without ever touching the ball. Nowadays it is required of them to handle like flyhalves and run like centers, which results in them being hopeless in the scrums.

HOOKER. No. 2. Yes, I know the name is a bit silly, but believe me, it becomes these guys. He is slightly smaller than a prop, but twice as aggressive. They throw the ball in at a lineout, and used to have a quick foot for hooking the ball in the scrum. These days they are the same size as props (to compensate for the deficiencies of the latter), which means they disrupt the balance in the scrum and struggle to find their jumpers in the lineout. The result is that they are highly frustated, and tends to give away penalties. Fortunately they don't have to hook the ball in the scrums anymore, since it is put in underneath the feet of the locks anyway.

LOCKS. No.'s 4&5. As broad as props, but twice as tall. Good natured giants that could jump high in lineouts, and used to be kind to scrum halves. Nowadays they are built like high jumpers, with the difference being they can't jump. It's not really necessary, because they are lifted by teammates now. Their main purpose now is to loiter on the wings from where they score tries.


FLANKFORWARDS. No.'s 6&7, en EIGHTHMAN. No. 8(!). Collectively known as LOOSEFORWARDS, for they have a tendency to let flyhalves loose their nerve, and they also knock your teeth loose. I recommend you try and stay out of the way of these guys.

SCRUMHALF. No. 9. The smallest chap on the field, about half the length of a prop (hence the name), one eigth his width, but twice as aggressive as a hooker. Talks a lot, especially to the referee. Previously they could pass the ball in a straight line across the width of a rugby field, but since they are now the size of looseforwards, they find it difficult to pass a ball further than 2 metres. They therefore prefer to kick, or run into forwards, which necessitates that they should be even bigger.

FLYHALF No. 10. The ballerinas of rugby, who could slip through the smallest of gaps, and let the opposition confused in one place with their illusiveness. They used to be the generals on the field who dictated play, and could kick a ball the whole length of a rugby field, with both feet. Nowadays they look like old time locks, the idea being that they bulldoze into the opposition, who unfortunately also look like old time locks.

CENTRES. No.'s 12&13. Two variations, one being the playmaker, who, with quick hands and feet, caught the opposition asleep, and put their outside players into gaps to score tries. The other one was a man with an incredible acceleration, that could make a 90 degree change of direction at full pace. These days they both look like old time props, and their duty is to enforce a ruck in the middle of the field.

WINGSS. No.'s 11&14. As the name indicate, guys that could fly down the touch line. Racehorses. Their hands used to be somewhat suspect, but with ball in hand they could beat the opposition with sheer pace. They are considerably slower nowadays, but very reliable under the high ball, which enables them to assist the fullback. It is not required of them to score tries anymore - this is done by locks after the centres enforce a ruck in the middle of the field.

FULLBACK. No. 15. The guy in the last outpost. Calm, collected, reliable under the high ball, with a solid defence. Nowadays an absolute risk under the high ball, with suspect defence, but the wings make up for this. Now extremely quick, with all the properties of old time flyhalves, centres and wings in one person. Indeed the most exciting player on attack of the modern era.

NOTE: In certain countries you will hear terms like '1st 5' and '2nd 5'. It comes from '1st 5/8' and '2nd 5/8', and refers to the flyhalf and inside centre respectively. I recommend you ignore these terms, because they were thought up by someone without any clue of fractions. We all know there are only 7 players in the backline, so the 'eigth' is meaningless. Add to that the fact that in a set of fractions there can only be one 5/8, the '2nd' becomes even more ridiculous. If you ask me, these were thought up by people without the faintest idea of counting, never mind fractions.

The Officials.

The guys who are supposed to control a match and regulate play. It is interesting to note that in the early days of RUGBY's development they were not around. The two captains applied the laws in those days, and according to all reports from then, there was considerably more order and discipline in the game. After studying the following paragraphs, you will agree on this, and support me in a campaign to rid the game of these undesirable characters.

REFEREE: This is the guy on the field with a different jersey than the rest. Do not be misled by that, quite often he does indeed play for one of the teams. He is the most important person on the field, the game centres around him, and he makes sure that everyone knows it. For that purpose he wears a whistle around his neck or wrist, and plays a variety of tunes on it, ad naseum. He also loves card games, but has only two cards in his deck, one being red, the other yellow. No-one else understands the rules of these card games. In a recent match the Springbok World Cup prop, Balie Swart, showed the referee a red card. For this effort Balie was send off the field, which more or less proves my point on the understandability of these card games. I mean, if there was any logic in it, the referee should have walked. After all, Balie showed his card first! To add injury to insult, Balie's card was confiscated by the referee. I'd lay a complaint of theft if I was in his position.

Needless to say, the referee is the most hated person the field. They don't understand the game, and have never seen a book on the laws of the game, probably due to the fact that they are visually impaired (read 'blind'), and do not possess the intellect to realise that the laws are available in braille for their benefit. Most people agree that referees are the guys that give RUGBY a bad name.

In view of the above, it is very important to use the correct terminology when addressing the referee. The beginner will tend to address him as 'Mr. Referee'. He will appreciate your politeness, but will instantly recognise you as new, and go on to punish you without mercy. The correct, and universal form of address is 'Mr. Ref', as in 'Open your bloody eyes, Mr. Ref!'. Before one receives a red card, one normally says 'Your mother's ....., Ref!'

It is unfortunately so that the referee, and not the players, determines the outcome of matches. If you still have difficulty in identifying him, wait for the final whistle. Look for a guy that is being chased around by two players, one each from the opposing teams. He will normally leave the field under protection of the police. If for any reason you would like to talk to him, you may find him under the pavillion in a room marked 'Referee'. Stand in the que and wait your turn. The door will be locked, either by the players who have been chasing him, but most probably by himself. Chances are, he will leave quietely the next morning, if you are prepared to wait that long.

If you harbour any aspirations of becoming a referee (something I strongly discourage), I suggest you contact your nearest School for the Visually Impaired. A psychiatrist is a good alternative.

TOUCHJUDGESS: The guys that patrol the touchline with a flag on a stick. Their main function is to point out alleged foul play to the referee. This they do by hanging out the said flag in a sideways manner. Additionally they have to indicate a mark where a lineout should be formed. This is normally about 5-10 metres from where the ball crossed the touchline after one of your teammates kicked it. The touchjudge also indicates to the referee that a try has been scored when a player has knocked over the corner flag before grounding the ball.

Touchjudges are supposed to indicate from a position behind the posts when a kick at goal is good or not. This is done by watching each other, with the result that most often one flag is up and the other waved sideways. The referee, which we know is blind, must then decide for himself.

Touchjudges are normally from the home team, except with internationals, when they are 'neutral'. In that case they spin a coin beforehand to decide on who's side they are. One of them is also the reserve referee. If you are the visiting team, you should pray that the referee is not injured, no matter how pathetic he is. For if that happens, the reserve referee takes over, and you won't have a snowball's hope. It is better to leave the field for early beers at that point.

NOTES: i) The fact that the term 'judge' appears in the title of a rugby official is highly misleading. 'Policeman', 'prosecuter' and 'executioner' should also have been included.

ii) It amazes me that no RUGBY referee has ever appeared before South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission, a fact that says a lot about the impartiality of that commission.

The Experts.


EXPERTS are people who are supposed to know the game, analyse it, and make predictions on game plans, player choices and strategies. My late grandfather always said one should be wary of experts.

RUGBY JOURNALISTS: These guys claim they attend RUGBY matches and then write reports for newspapers. If you have attended the match yourself, you are advised not to read what they write, unless you've forgotten the score. The report will be from a completely different match, and please, never use the scoreline they give when playing Trivial Pursuit.

A more important function of RUGBY writers is to analyze players' form, and write reports on them. This they do in the hope that the SELECTORS (see below) will take note of their favourite players, and thus pick them. In this vein you may find that the rugby writer of the Letaba Herald writes that Tzaneen's 3rd team centre is a sure pick for the Springboks, and don't be surprised if some or other selector invites him to trials.

Another favourite pastime of theirs is the picking of representative sides, for the same reasons as stated above. From the composition of their teams it is obvious whom they support. If, for instance a journalist pick a Springbok team with 14 Blue Bulls players, and one from Western Province, you can bet on it that the WP player is only there to prevent you from accusing him of provincial bias. Expect a team with 14 WP, and one Bulls player (see SELECTORS).

EX-PLAYERS: This is a very interesting and weird group of experts. According to them RUGBY is the only sport that underwent retrograde development only. The game was better, tougher and faster in their playing days. The opposition stronger and dirtier, although they were never involved in foul play themselves. Even referees were more pathetic in their time. Admire these guys for what they have achieved, but ignore their views.

COMMENTATORS: Should actually read commOntators. These are guys who tell you on TV what is happening during a match, something which you can see with your own eyes anyway. It is often not the same. Before the arrival of TV the radio commentator was essential to describe the match for you, for there wouldn't have been much sense in listening to the buzzing noise of a short wave radio for 80 minutes. At least they kept you updated on the score, but if you compared their version of the match with that of the newspaper journalist the next day, you could just as well have listened to the buzz.

Commentators are of very little use these days, because they know almost as little about the game as referees. The most dangerous and boring commentators are ex-players, for reasons already stated. It amazes me that no TV channel has ever thought of broadcasting a match with the background noise of the crowd as the only sound.

SELECTORS: The guys that pick rugby teams. They normally operate as a committee, and we all know that if you want to make a hash of something, you leave it to a committee.

I can say with a clear conscience that SELECTORS know even less about RUGBY than referees. I doubt whether any selector has ever attended a RUGBY match, which may prompt you to ask how they pick teams then. Easy, they read what journalists write in newspapers!

These are gold. Cheers Bilt

Great read BB.  

I don't know nor care who invented rugby. I do know which two countries took it up and perfected it.  

Have you read "The Art of Coarse Rugby", by Michael Green? If you enjoyed Biltong's clippings above, I suggest you look it up.

Amazon link:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Coarse-Rugby-Michael-Green/dp/1861050011

I'll see if I can get it as an ebook. Cheers

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Great read BB.  

I don't know nor care who invented rugby. I do know which two countries took it up and perfected it.  

Got me on that kia.... I have 1 of them, which is of course WALES, but who is the second ?    


Nice post Bilt... but think you may need to put that Mods jersey back on and check out the vile tripe being posted on other threads here, and put a stop to it... ( https://www.606v2.com/t47368-jonathan-davies-victim-of-twitter-abuse-and-threats-after-displacing-brian-o-driscoll-in-lions-side-for-deciding-test )

sirBiggles wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Great read BB.  

I don't know nor care who invented rugby. I do know which two countries took it up and perfected it.  

Got me on that kia.... I have 1 of them, which is of course WALES, but who is the second ?    

Gatlandball is perfection? I'm off to League!

Thought you were leaving (again) Biggsy

Nice posts biltong. A bit of light relief!

Of course the William Webb-Ellis story has to be a fabrication. No way could a game as skillful as rugby union come from a place as dull as Rugby...

I thought everybody knew rugby was invented in New Zealand and brought back to England. The British have simply been reinventing history to control the game and stop us running with the ball. That's the revisionist interpretation.

And of course we all know the rugby ball became its distinctive shape as a result of where the ball was shoved after Webb Ellis picked it up and ran with it

Rinsure wrote:Have you read "The Art of Coarse Rugby", by Michael Green? If you enjoyed Biltong's clippings above, I suggest you look it up.

Amazon link:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Coarse-Rugby-Michael-Green/dp/1861050011

Haven't read this book for years but I do remember it was really funny although it will probably be very dated now.
Bilts, even if it can't be found as an e-book, try to get the real thing from Amazon. He wrote a shed load of other "coarse" books eg acting, fishing - they are all worth a read

The idea of an Englishman running with the ball is laughable. Was he playing via qualification via a grandparent? Or did he merely pick the ball up and then attempt to kick it over the goal posts from where he was standing?

This is a bit off-thread but I think it's quite funny.

In the '70s I helped take a mixed group of kids to France. In one village where we stayed there was a rough football pitch - so rough there was a two-foot deep hole in the middle, so a lad who didn't want to play stood in it as a marker during the game!

The game itself was a hybrid of soccer and rugby.  In the first half the kids (mixed teams of boys and girls) played soccer.  At half-time one side was leading 3-0.

But in the second half they played rugby with the same round ball. The team losing at half-time scored 2 tries - 8 points, tries being worth 4 back then, so claimed victory!