course it can readily be understood that both backs must not be in an advanced position at the same time. Each man of the defence marks one forward of the opposite side, the backs and half-backs on each side respectively arranging between themselves which of them shall take the outside man, the centre half acting rather more independently than the other two halves, but still paying more attention to the centre forward than any of the others. As an illustration, suppose the ball to be run down the right wing of the attack, the left back and half of the defence will mark the two wing men, the right full back will come across so as to be at hand to assist his fellow back, but keeping well behind in case the ball should be kicked beyond the left back and half. The centre half will mark the centre forward, and the right half will take up such a position as will enable him to prevent either man of the left wing opposed to him taking a pass. This system distributes the work equally among the whole of the defence, and therefore requires less individual excellence, though utilizing the powers of the full backs to a far greater extent than the independent system. Each has its advantages, the former of the two alone answering when players are new to one another, and when the adoption of the latter would probably lead to disaster. The great advantages of the latter system where it can be adopted are—
"1. It to a great extent prevents the opposing forwards getting the ball,
"2. When by any chance they do get the ball, it prevents any combination whatever, as there is no clear space between the backs and half-backs in which they can get together.
"3. It tends to put the opposing forwards off-side, and so prevents 'lurking.'
