forward passes

[richie]

Is it just me or are there a lot of clearly forward passes being allowed to go by the TMO. Dont have a clip but in the clermont v toulouse match for medards try the pass must have been clearly 2m forward, proximity to 5m line was there to assist, but allow to stand.
Im well aware of the momentum of ball etc but surely some if these 'lateral passes' are not so.

any opinions?

 

[Toby Warren]

It does seem that more are let slide.

The tigers Bath bath one looked forward in any money as well.

 

[evilad]

I think the IRB have given some poor guidance wrt the direction the hands are travelling. As the good book says " a throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. Forward means towards the opposing teams dead ball line. " law 12. Maybe players should be making more of an effort to ensure the ball is passed flat or backwards. Or am I expecting too much ?

 

[MrQeu]

Not once again, no...

http://www.irblaws.com/index.php?law=12

"Definition: Throw forward
A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line."

Take a second to look at the verbs: /throw/ and /pass/

Both verbs are the same as per Merriam webster definiton 7d of pass as a transitive verb: to throw or hit (a ball or puck) especially to a teammate.

So, it's about throw. Throw means causing something to move away from your hand (as per Merriam webster).


No, throw doesn't take into consideration what happens after the object comes out of the hands. Therefore, a throw forward is a throw were the ball is caused to move forward from the hands. Just that split second that the ball leaves the hands. Anything that happens after doesn't matter.

And the ST-CLM decision was spot on: Huget threw the ball over his shoulder. That's backwards.

 

[richie]

The tigers Bath bath one looked forward in any money as well.

that was the other one i had in my mind, had seen so many matches over weekend couldnt rem which game it was

 

[evilad]

Unless you are at elite level, you can only make the call on what you see, not refer to tmo. Therefore the ball travelling forward can be seen, not necessarily the hands that pass it.

Having seen some of the incidents referenced above I agree that hands definitely seemed to be going forward on replays, so how a tmo could not see it is beyond me

 

[leaguerefaus]

Kill me now!

 

[Ian_Cook]

Is it just me or are there a lot of clearly forward passes being allowed to go by the TMO. Dont have a clip but in the clermont v toulouse match for medards try the pass must have been clearly 2m forward, proximity to 5m line was there to assist, but allow to stand.
Im well aware of the momentum of ball etc but surely some if these 'lateral passes' are not so.

any opinions?

That is where you are going wrong, especially the underlined part!

Distance travelled forward by the ball is not the criteria for judging whether or not a pass is forward.....and it never was.

 

[Dickie E]

Richie,

are you familiar with the attached? If not, it may help.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg

 

[Ian_Cook]

Unless you are at elite level, you can only make the call on what you see, not refer to tmo. Therefore the ball travelling forward can be seen, not necessarily the hands that pass it.

And if you can't see than hands, and you still rule the pass forward.... then you are guessing!!

Having seen some of the incidents referenced above I agree that hands definitely seemed to be going forward on replays, so how a tmo could not see it is beyond me

It is easy to be influenced by the flight of the ball, even if you think you are ignoring it. Have a look that the pass that was referred to the TMO at the end of the NZ v Ireland game a few weeks back. Note that the oohs and aahs come from the crowd when the see what the ball is doing, not when they see how Cruden throws the pass.

Try pausing the video at the moment the pass is made so that you don't see the flight of the ball, and therefore cannot be influenced by it. You might find you change your opinion on some of those TMO calls

 

[Rushforth]

Is it just me or are there a lot of clearly forward passes being allowed to go by the TMO. Dont have a clip but in the clermont v toulouse match for medards try the pass must have been clearly 2m forward, proximity to 5m line was there to assist, but allow to stand.
Im well aware of the momentum of ball etc but surely some if these 'lateral passes' are not so.

any opinions?

Hi richie, although you joined this forum in 2010 you may not have been active enough to realise that discussion of the forward pass borders on more fundamentalist than the Ayatollah.

I've always ignored 'lateral' passes. By which I mean, I have not once complained when a referee determined a pass was not forwards when I thought it was as a player, and now as a referee myself I give a heck of a lot of leeway, especially when I am fully aware of my own parallax error.

Having only followed the 1-day entry level IRB course, which prioritises the concepts of "Fair Contest" and "Continuity of Play", you can colour me unimpressed with those who believe that we are playing League. Because it is not a fair contest if the ball travels two or more metres forward, in my opinion.

That's my opinion. My advice is to ignore the "elite" interpretation in your own games, but even more so to ignore those who are incapable of polite discussion, such as the cretinous poster who replied "kill me now". Don't kill him, ok? He is not a union chap anyway.

Nobody has a problem with "very lateral" passes on the half-way line. I personally do when they are only 5 metres out and I am standing/moving on/near the 5m line. I have a much bigger problem with the condoning of massive forward passes (relative to the field), but that's just me.

 

[Rushforth]

And if you can't see than hands, and you still rule the pass forward.... then you are guessing!!

Trust me, I never "guess" when ruling forward passes. Do you, Ian?

 

[Dickie E]

such as the cretinous poster who replied "kill me now". Don't kill him, ok?

Yes, don't kill him. It is just a short hand way of saying "this topic is so polarised & done-to-death we can now expect a very long & tedious thread". Not your fault, Richie. You're not to know.

 

[SimonSmith]

That's my opinion. My advice is to ignore the "elite" interpretation in your own games, but even more so to ignore those who are incapable of polite discussion, such as the cretinous poster who replied "kill me now". Don't kill him, ok? He is not a union chap anyway.

Nobody has a problem with "very lateral" passes on the half-way line. I personally do when they are only 5 metres out and I am standing/moving on/near the 5m line. I have a much bigger problem with the condoning of massive forward passes (relative to the field), but that's just me.

My ironymeter just broke. You're only just back from timeout. Tread careful.

 

[Dickie E]

And if you can't see than hands, and you still rule the pass forward.... then you are guessing!!

Only up to a certain point. A pass can be so egregiously forward that view of the hands is not needed.

 

[MrQeu]

The ball might travel 15 meters forward on a windy friday night at The Sportsground in Galway after a lob pass, but if the passer's action is to give the ball a non-forward component in the pitch-plane, it's good.

 

[leaguerefaus]

Only up to a certain point. A pass can be so egregiously forward that view of the hands is not needed.

Agreed.

Also, if the player is effectively standing still when the pass is thrown, then there is no momentum which would explain the ball going forward (although wind may be a factor on a long / lobbed pass).

And yes, it would be fabulous if no one actually killed me, despite how 'cretinous' Rushforth may find me

 

[OB..]

If the passer is seen to continue running and remain ahead of the ball, then again you do not need to see his hands.

 

[Jarrod Burton]

And if you can't see than hands, and you still rule the pass forward.... then you are guessing!!

I'd dispute this Ian, I've called (and seen) instances where I haven't seen the ball leave the hands but have known that there is no way in the world that the ball has left the hands backwards, for example, a stationary player with his back to me offloading to another player ahead of him across their defending 10m line and another similar where a mark was taken just in goal, player immediately passed and the receiver took the ball about 2m into the FOP. Both had no momentum and no breeze/wind but clearly travelled forward and both were pinged.

I agree that a player in motion passing flat or slightly backwards will always travel forward relative to the goal line though, just for these cases, neither players were in motion.

 

[Ian_Cook]

My ironymeter just broke. You're only just back from timeout. Tread careful.

Obviously he failed to understand Aussie vernacular. Either that or he's never heard the one about the Jazz musician, the Country singer and the KGB.