They Pull off the "Hook and Ladder"

[OverAndBack]

I've always heard both. I think the derivation is from hook (the route the receiver runs) and lateral (what happens after that), but in the way that terms in our language often get corrupted (or run through Cockney slang translators), it has become "hook and ladder" as that is an already-accepted phrase in our vernacular.

Speaking of that, here's probably the most famous instance of that play:

[Clark Kent]

What league/state that allows 12 players and why did they do that?

[ref18]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

What league/state that allows 12 players and why did they do that?

Canadian football. 12 players on a 110 Yard field.

[wwcfoa43]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

What league/state that allows 12 players and why did they do that?

Actually 11 players and the tiny U.S. field was because Harvard did not have enough room on their field for the proper size Rugby pitch and so 100 yards with 10 yard end zones and 11 players was born!

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by wwcfoa43

Actually 11 players and the tiny U.S. field was because Harvard did not have enough room on their field for the proper size Rugby pitch and so 100 yards with 10 yard end zones and 11 players was born!

A nice bit of trivia

[Warrenkicker]

That was far from a hook and whatever you want to call it. 5 backward passes on the last play of the game. And the second one was almost caught with a knee down.

So do Canadian rules only state that the teams must be dressed differently and not one in a colored jersey and the other in white? It wasn't hard to tell them apart but maroon and bright red on the same field looks odd to us southerners. It was like seeing Nebraska play Texas A&M both in home uniforms.

[wwcfoa43]

Originally Posted by Warrenkicker

That was far from a hook and whatever you want to call it. 5 backward passes on the last play of the game. And the second one was almost caught with a knee down.

So do Canadian rules only state that the teams must be dressed differently and not one in a colored jersey and the other in white? It wasn't hard to tell them apart but maroon and bright red on the same field looks odd to us southerners. It was like seeing Nebraska play Texas A&M both in home uniforms.

You must remember that the budgets for high school football in Canada are vastly different than in the U.S. There are not too many high schools with two sets of uniforms. So we must deal with uniforms that could look similar.

The Canadian rule book does not specify that the schools must wear different colours.

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by wwcfoa43

You must remember that the budgets for high school football in Canada are vastly different than in the U.S. There are not too many high schools with two sets of uniforms. So we must deal with uniforms that could look similar.

The Canadian rule book does not specify that the schools must wear different colours.

Couldn't they just "borrow" the hockey sweaters? Isn't that where the money goes?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by wwcfoa43

Actually 11 players and the tiny U.S. field was because Harvard did not have enough room on their field for the proper size Rugby pitch and so 100 yards with 10 yard end zones and 11 players was born!

Not true. Harvard played 15s with everyone else until Yale prevailed to reduce sides to 11s in 1880, with an accompanying reduction in width of the field to what we have now. Yale had been used to a soccer-like game and wouldn't play the rugby game until then, but yielded on everything else and got as a concession a reduction in the number of players. Isn't that strange, conceding on a change in the entire nature of the game but getting the number of players they'd been used to? You'd think once you changed your game to that degree, your attitude about those particulars would change. Can you imagine if their baseball team had been in on the negotiations, and we'd be playing 9 a side now?

What you may be thinking about is that in 1906 consideration was given to widening the field, but the cement had just been poured for Harvard's Soldiers Field, which wouldn't accommodate the widening that was considered.

Robert

[hawkishowl20]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Not true. Harvard played 15s with everyone else until Yale prevailed to reduce sides to 11s in 1880, with an accompanying reduction in width of the field to what we have now. Yale had been used to a soccer-like game and wouldn't play the rugby game until then, but yielded on everything else and got as a concession a reduction in the number of players. Isn't that strange, conceding on a change in the entire nature of the game but getting the number of players they'd been used to? You'd think once you changed your game to that degree, your attitude about those particulars would change. Can you imagine if their baseball team had been in on the negotiations, and we'd be playing 9 a side now?

What you may be thinking about is that in 1906 consideration was given to widening the field, but the cement had just been poured for Harvard's Soldiers Field, which wouldn't accommodate the widening that was considered.

Robert

Where did you find this trivia? Rites of Autumn? Some other history? (I will probably read immediately after finding out what it is) The stuff from Yale and Harvard is always so interesting; think Alonzo Stagg.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by hawkishowl20

Where did you find this trivia? Rites of Autumn? Some other history?

Damned if I can remember. I did a lot of study of this subject decades ago, but the business about Yale & 11s is widely available.