What is a forward pass?

[northerntiger]

Closer to the opponents goal line

[loretta]

Closer to the opponents goal line

I agree. So, if a player or object moves to the front, ie towards the opponents goal line, it has to have travelled “forward”.

[northerntiger]

Player, yes.
The ball, if it is passed by a player moving forward at, say 5metres per second, the ball will be moving forward at the same speed, irrespective of the direction it was passed in. It is the direction it was passed that is important. So the ball can travel backwards relative to the player, but still forward over the pitch.
Someone earlier used a very good analogy of a ball being passed between two moving trains

[loretta]

I understand the physics perfectly, it’s the change in reference point that I have issue with, and I don’t believe I’m on my own. It feels like it’s being changed as it suits.

Here’s another scenario. A scrum half takes the ball out of the back of a ruck under pressure, he’s in retreat moving backwards and is level with his 10, relative to the pitch, and delivers a flat pass to the 10. Now, it’s a flat pass relative to the pitch, but because the 9 is travelling backwards, the pass is forwards relative to him/her. It’s the same argument, just a different direction of travel. But you’d do well to find anyone who would call that a forward pass.

[Rugbygramps]

As JTG in the old days things were a lot less complicated. Rugby really doesn’t help itself sometimes

[northerntiger]

That's a good point, but the relative argument is relative to the player when the ball was passed, it doesn't matter what direction they subsequently travelled. So in your analogy, he passed it flat, relative to him at the time. So fine

[loretta]

In my scenario, the 9 is moving backwards when he passes the ball, the ball has backwards momentum and he has to pass it forwards in order to overcome that and achieve a flat pass relative to the pitch.

Here's another one. A player is running forwards with the ball and gets tackled, just before being hit the ball spills and continues to move forwards with the same momentum as it had when the player was in possession. How many would call knock on? We all would!

The problem is, once we start using a point of reference that has so many variables it becomes a nightmare to referee and consistency goes out the window.

[RichieRich89]

Interesting arguments, loretta. You clearly do understand the physics at play, unlike, I feel, some who argue it should be judged relative to the ground.

[Rugbygramps]

Interesting arguments, loretta. You clearly do understand the physics at play, unlike, I feel, some who argue it should be judged relative to the ground.

If it isn’t judged relative to the ground there is no reason to have unbroken lines going across the pitch, such as goal line , 22, and half way, which referees use to help judge on such matters.

This for me is a classic example of science trying to over complicate something that is relatively simple, and before the days of high definition tv was refereed the same way for decades

[RichieRich89]

The problem with basing it purely on whether the ball ends up further up the pitch is that this would mean you couldn't legally pass the ball to someone behind you if you're both running fast enough.

I’m sorry you’ve completely lost me there. So you’re saying that if 2 players are running at full chuff and the player with the ball passes it to someone who is 2 metres behind him you wouldn’t be able to pass the ball backwards

Perhaps I shouldn't say say 'couldn't', but it would be next to impossible to throw it backwards at a speed that matched a high running speed if you had to get any width in the pass.

[Rugbygramps]

The problem with basing it purely on whether the ball ends up further up the pitch is that this would mean you couldn't legally pass the ball to someone behind you if you're both running fast enough.

I’m sorry you’ve completely lost me there. So you’re saying that if 2 players are running at full chuff and the player with the ball passes it to someone who is 2 metres behind him you wouldn’t be able to pass the ball backwards

Perhaps I shouldn't say say 'couldn't', but it would be next to impossible to throw it backwards at a speed that matched a high running speed if you had to get any width in the pass.

I do understand what you are trying to say. I do wonder if you have played the game as it isn’t uncommon for the passing player to slow down slightly particularly when looking to draw an opposition defender

[RichieRich89]

I’m sorry you’ve completely lost me there. So you’re saying that if 2 players are running at full chuff and the player with the ball passes it to someone who is 2 metres behind him you wouldn’t be able to pass the ball backwards

Perhaps I shouldn't say say 'couldn't', but it would be next to impossible to throw it backwards at a speed that matched a high running speed if you had to get any width in the pass.

I do understand what you are trying to say. I do wonder if you have played the game as it isn’t uncommon for the passing player to slow down slightly particularly when looking to draw an opposition defender

Not since school.

Yeah, they can slow down a bit when running against a set defence, although probably not as much as was common decades ago.

I'm thinking more of when players have broken through and are running in the clear.

I saw this clip recently: https://youtu.be/a9wcuHtWfX4

I don't think many people who say 'judge it relative to the ground' would take issue with Jared Payne's pass to Sexton at 14 seconds in - even though it must end up 3-4m further up the pitch from where he threw it.

[mol2]

The idea that someone running forwards (relative to the try line) can’t pass it backwards relative to the try line is nonsense.
Usain Bolt can’t run as fast as a scrum half can pass the ball.

End the nonsenses excuses.

[RichieRich89]

The idea that someone running forwards (relative to the try line) can’t pass it backwards relative to the try line is nonsense.
Usain Bolt can’t run as fast as a scrum half can pass the ball.

End the nonsenses excuses.

And what if you have to get some width in the pass rather than throwing it directly behind you?

Quickly it becomes impossible for the directly backwards velocity vector to equal a high running speed.

[Hot_Charlie]

The problem with basing it purely on whether the ball ends up further up the pitch is that this would mean you couldn't legally pass the ball to someone behind you if you're both running fast enough.

I’m sorry you’ve completely lost me there. So you’re saying that if 2 players are running at full chuff and the player with the ball passes it to someone who is 2 metres behind him you wouldn’t be able to pass the ball backwards

Perhaps I shouldn't say say 'couldn't', but it would be next to impossible to throw it backwards at a speed that matched a high running speed if you had to get any width in the pass.

Richie:

So basically saying the law should fit the technique (which is what essentially the IRB then WR have done in recent past - the "momentum" forward pass argument being a key example.) as opposed to coaching a technique to fit the laws of the game?

The tail is well and truly wagging the dog.