[Law] England Barbarians

[Last_20]

A great advert for the game from a fans perspective but less so from an officials one?

We risk making a mockery of the game if we allow forward passes - where the ball travels forward clearly, especially when there are lines on the pitch to confirm forward passage, and the tv shows multiple replays... and then the TV official decides its ok? to the incredulity of tv viewers, without any explanation.

I will say nothing of Mr Owens performance in a match where England are playing, only to see that it was fascinating that we didn't hear from the other Touch Judge at all?

Great spectacle for the viewers and the better side won!

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Lines on the pitch do not cofirm forward passes.

That said it is a BBs match, that's only one step removed from the Harlem Globetrotters. Who cares?

 

[Last_20]

Lines on the pitch do not cofirm forward passes.

That said it is a BBs match, that's only one step removed from the Harlem Globetrotters. Who cares?

You will note that I used the expression 'forward passage' - Laws of physics would suggest that if an object left the hands of a player one metre behind a line and was gathered by another player one metre in front of the same line (without touching the floor or another player and we weren't playing with a Force 12 gale) then it had travelled forwards - and probably by two metres.

Now if the Laws of Rugby suggest that there are circumstances under which that is not a forward pass - then I think we need to have a look at ourselves - because its non-sensical and worse makes a mockery of the game, particularly for people who don't watch regularly and who we should be trying to attract.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

This subject has surely been done to death. I refer you to the, easily, searchable Australian video. Whe players are moving forward, momentem is imparted on the ball which moves tha ball forward. It is very basic physics. If the player is standing still I would agree with you. Try playing catch on a train. You simplistic understanding of physics may need a rethink.

 

[dave_clark]

Hi Last_20

Marc is quite correct when he says there are a number of videos available to help on this.

Simply - the accepted meaning of the law, and I mean accepted by World Rugby (or whatever they call themselves these days), is that whether the ball travels forward across the ground is irrelevant. It's whether or not the ball travels forward, relative to the momentum of the player giving the pass, which is the key matter.

Having said that, I do think that there were a number of forward passes in the game today which weren't given. But then I called a forward pass in the Challenge Cup final (which M. Garces agreed with), which on replay was shown to be anything but, so I guess that shows the difficulty in judging a dynamic situation on a 2D screen in real time.

Or something, no doubt someone sober will come along to correct me at some point!

 

[didds]

You will note that I used the expression 'forward passage' - Laws of physics would suggest that if an object left the hands of a player one metre behind a line and was gathered by another player one metre in front of the same line (without touching the floor or another player and we weren't playing with a Force 12 gale) then it had travelled forwards - and probably by two metres.

Now if the Laws of Rugby suggest that there are circumstances under which that is not a forward pass - then I think we need to have a look at ourselves - because its non-sensical and worse makes a mockery of the game, particularly for people who don't watch regularly and who we should be trying to attract.

*sigh* here we go again.

player A runs forward at 10 mph

A passes the ball backwards directly over his head at 5 mph

Ball is thus moving at +10 -5 = +5 mph.

QED a pass directly backwards over A's head is moving up the pitch at 5 mph.

If you insist any movement up the pitch is forward you will then have to blow this pass directly backwards over A's head as a forward pass. Good luck selling that one.

didds

 

[leaguerefaus]

You will note that I used the expression 'forward passage' - Laws of physics would suggest that if an object left the hands of a player one metre behind a line and was gathered by another player one metre in front of the same line (without touching the floor or another player and we weren't playing with a Force 12 gale) then it had travelled forwards - and probably by two metres.

Now if the Laws of Rugby suggest that there are circumstances under which that is not a forward pass - then I think we need to have a look at ourselves - because its non-sensical and worse makes a mockery of the game, particularly for people who don't watch regularly and who we should be trying to attract.

I'm not sure what's more deficient - your understanding of physics or your understanding of rugby.

 

[Camquin]

*sigh* here we go again.

player A runs forward at 10 mph

A passes the ball backwards directly over his head at 5 mph

Ball is thus moving at +10 -5 = +5 mph.

QED a pass directly backwards over A's head is moving up the pitch at 5 mph.

If you insist any movement up the pitch is forward you will then have to blow this pass directly backwards over A's head as a forward pass. Good luck selling that one.

didds

Depends if he gets tackled - but as he is loitering he probably will.
The ball will land ahead of the tackle and it is an easy knock on call.

Although as the video proves it can be quite hard to spot a forward pass and some passes that look fine could be called forward. I believe the current law is written for the TMO not the solo ref.

It has been worded to stop the TMO from calling back tries that would have been scored without TV evidence.

But about the one law the man in the street know is the ban on forward passes - and if they see refs waving them on, it make them think the ref is incompetent. Then they see them permit feeding, crooked line out throws and they are convinced. The fact we know the ref is looking for safety issues. Tough I am not quite sure how to explain how the show biz scrum is safe.
And yes - even with the current wording - I am much more likely to call a forward pass if the player chooses to make it while stood on a line than if they do so while in open grass as it will look wrong.

 

[OB..]

Although as the video proves it can be quite hard to spot a forward pass and some passes that look fine could be called forward. I believe the current law is written for the TMO not the solo ref.

No. As early as 1948 the RFU said

... it is pointed out that the definition of a throw-forward is not decided on relation to the ground but on the direction of the propulsion of the ball by hand or arm of the player passing the ball, which must be left to the discretion of the referee."

The principle has therefore been understood for many years. Given that most passes do not cross white lines, it is in fact natural to assess a pass relative to the player rather than the ground, and basic physics shows that when players are sprinting it is unrealistic to judge passing relative to the ground.

 

[didds]

Depends if he gets tackled - but as he is loitering he probably will.
The ball will land ahead of the tackle and it is an easy knock on call.

You've completely lost me now.

The ball goes clearly back over the passers head. Nothing to do with being tackled or not.

If you want to call a pass thrown backwards over the passer's head as forward, fill your boots.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg&start=93

But I will say you are incorrect to do so. End of.

didds

 

[Camquin]

Had they been tackled to a standstill at the point of release, the ball would have followed the same path and still landed well in front of the tackle - are you sure you would not call a knock on.

 

[OB..]

Had they been tackled to a standstill at the point of release, the ball would have followed the same path and still landed well in front of the tackle - are you sure you would not call a knock on.

If the ball has been released backwards relative to the carrier BEFORE the effect of the tackle stops him dead, it is NOT a throw forward, even though it is the sort of thing that often gets called.

 

[Last_20]

The deficiency appears to be only in your rudeness.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

The Law has been in place all my life and a fair time before . I've never know it not to be the case. Clearly there is a "shortfall" somewhere Last_20.

As OB Points out:

"As early as 1948 the RFU said... it is pointed out that the definition of a throw-forward is not decided on relation to the ground but on the direction of the propulsion of the ball by hand or arm of the player passing the ball, which must be left to the discretion of the referee."

 

[dave_clark]

I'm not sure what's more deficient - your understanding of physics or your understanding of rugby.

not a particularly helpful thing to say to someone that could be a new ref - are we here to help, or to mock?

 

[dave_clark]

The deficiency appears to be only in your rudeness.

i disagree, i think he did quite a good job of being rude :biggrin:

 

[Ian_Cook]

A great advert for the game from a fans perspective but less so from an officials one?

We risk making a mockery of the game if we allow forward passes - where the ball travels forward clearly, especially when there are lines on the pitch to confirm forward passage, and the tv shows multiple replays... and then the TV official decides its ok? to the incredulity of tv viewers, without any explanation.

I will say nothing of Mr Owens performance in a match where England are playing, only to see that it was fascinating that we didn't hear from the other Touch Judge at all?

Great spectacle for the viewers and the better side won!

A forward throw only occurs when the ball is THROWN forward by the player. The ball traveling forward over the ground does not necessarily mean the throw was forward;

Its not a recent thing either... it has been like that since at least 1948

RFU 1948. Case Law (in effect a Law Ruling by the RFU)

"If a player passes to one of his own team who is in line with him parallel to the dead ball line, both players running towards the opponents goal line, must not the pass be a forward pass in relation to the ground, owing to their forward movement?"
The R.U.Decided:

"Yes, but it is pointed out that the definition of a throw-forward is not decided on relation to the ground, but on the direction of the propulsion of the ball by the hand or arm of the player passing the ball, which must be at the discretion of the referee."

 

[Swiss Ref]

Hi Last 20.
There are a few on here well..... please don't let it put you off the site