trendylfj wrote:Don't think too many of us old uns like the new directive re forward pass but we are just going to moan and eventually accept it. Maybe it will lead to a new technique - top hand goes backwards whilst the bottom hand pushes it forward. Am going outside to practice it to see if it works
I think if you run backwards towards the opposition try-line very fast and throw the ball over your head in the direction you're running and the ball pitches just outside the line of leg stump then...no...hang on...I'll get back to you on this...where's Marais Erasmus when you need him...?
(Apologies to anyone who's taking this seriously!)
Happy days clearing straw from the pitch before the Baa-Baas games! KBO
Wear a Mask>Protect The NHS>Save Lives
You either need a proper physics based calculation using speed and direction of players which would be rather time-consuming, or accept that it is based on opinion and accept opinions may vary.
1. If the ball goes forward, it's a forward pass regardless of imparted momentum and the movement of the passer's hands, or
2. We stay with the latest rulings.
Personally, I prefer the first choice as it hard and fast. The second choice is open to interpretation and what might be deemed forward by one ref won't be by another.
If advantage is to be allowed to the attacking team on marginal forward passes why is a player possibly a fraction in front of the kicker on an attacking kick penalised yet there is no penalty for off side at practically every kick off. The game needs consistency from the officials and there should be no excuse for TMO's getting it wrong after time spent on a considered decision.
johnthegriff wrote:If advantage is to be allowed to the attacking team on marginal forward passes why is a player possibly a fraction in front of the kicker on an attacking kick penalised yet there is no penalty for off side at practically every kick off. The game needs consistency from the officials and there should be no excuse for TMO's getting it wrong after time spent on a considered decision.
Quite agree, it is so often the case that a player is well offside, eg a metre or two, at a kick off, and they are often the player who gets to the receiving opponent first - really annoying when sometimes the tiniest margin of offside is otherwise penalised.
Perhaps refs shouldn't penalise 'slight' knock-ons, or should award kicks that only just miss the upright! Grrr.
I would have loved an overlay on the Thompson offside call. It was probably offside and was called as such but I want to know if his back foot was level or behind the kicker. The reason why the back foot is important is that the foot you push off is often your back foot and AT's front foot was in the air. His body and front foot certainly looked to be in front but are you off side if the part of the body which is in contact with the ground is level or behind? It just looked offside to the naked eye at full speed BUT????
trendylfj wrote:but are you off side if the part of the body which is in contact with the ground is level or behind?
You're offside if any part of your body head to toe is in front of the offside line. Micro-analysing via TV replays to see whether a head or arm was in front is unfortunately getting more like football.
The pass for Gloucester's first try was a short pass to a man already level with the passer. In the Quins Bristol game the receiver of the short pass was in front at the time the pass was made. The rule and interpretation used to be that a pass had to be backwards then they said level was ok; now confusion.
All this guff about excusing forward passes because of momentum, direction of hands and/or arms gives the players little credit. It assumes that a professional rugby player is unable to overcome the fact that they are running when they pass the ball and are, therefore, incapable of passing it in any direction but forwards. This is blatant nonsense. Forward passes frequently hit their target, if momentum were a problem in controlling the pass, the receiver would have more trouble taking the ball. Also, in any game there will be plenty of passes made where both the passer and receiver are running at full tilt, yet the ball does not travel forwards in absolute terms.
It may come as a shock to some, but professional rugby players can pass when running without it going forward!
It's all so much sophistry - I can see there is a problem (perhaps) when passer and recipient are running at high speed towards the try line and they ball may actually go forward but both players have moved on and relatively it is still behind the passer: this is, however, seldom the case. Normally one or more of the players involved is either static or moving across the pitch.
What really bugs me beyond measure is when at the time of passing the receiver is already ahead of the passer and pundits still prattle on about writs etc. This should be the first thing they look at and it it is the case then no further discussion is needed.
For when the One Great Scorer comes to write against your name,
He marks - not that you won or lost - but how you played the Game."
I am not aware that the law has changed just the interpretation. Can we please go back to a ball moving forward over the ground being a forward pass regardless of where you put your hands or any other part of your body. TMO can then lay a grid on the pitch and see if the ball went forward from departing hand to receiving hand. Any momentum impact should be allowed for by the passer.
