the three three-quarters do not get nearly enough work given them; in such teams, then, it would be simple madness to have a fourth. In other words, the fourth three-quarter would be worse than useless unless the whole team, and especially the half-backs and the other three-quarters have worked up a system of passing sufficiently reliable and accurate to make sure of the ball reaching him pretty often, otherwise he will play the part of a spectator during the game when he might be doing good service in the ranks of the forwards.
It will thus be seen that the place is at the best a highly artificial one, which would be spoilt by any breakdown in the passing; but granted that a captain feels sure enough that he can make good use of the man if he has got him, he still has to consider whether he can safely spare the extra forward. This depends so entirely on the character of the opponent's forwards, that it is impossible to lay down any hard and fast rule beforehand. 'If they are slack, or not in good training, or even if only they are not good scrummagers, he may perhaps be able to leave his eight men to cope with their nine, and make the most of his extra man behind. We have often seen eight forwards hold their own against nine, when a man has retired hurt, so the thing can be done; but we should advise any captain who is bent on playing a fourth three-quarter, to select for the post a man who can also play a good forward game, so that he can change him after the game has begun, if he finds that the scrummages are being carried against him.
Supposing that only three are played, the next question to be decided is, which of them to put in the centre, and which on the wings. In our opinion, the best player of the three should always be in the centre—mere sprinters will do for the wings, if nothing better can be secured; but the centre
