forward passes

[Ian_Cook]

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.

Yes, In both your quoted cases, the passer is stationary, and therefore there is no momentum to consider. A ball that travels forward from a stationary passer MUST be a forward pass (unless there is a honking great tailwind). I thought that was obvious enough that it didn't need stating.

 

[Account Deleted]

That's my opinion. My advice is to ignore the "elite" interpretation in your own games...

Richie: The advise of the majority is to ignore the above! The interpretation that our one man crusade rubbishes is, not the "elite" one, it is that of the IRB to ALL REFS. It has been the interpretation for longer than I' care to remember. That Rushforth is unwilling to accept the IRB's guidance is HIS choice However, is it not foolish to ignore the rulings and instruction of the GOVERNING BODY? For that is what Rushforth is doing!

Don't be led by the foolish. Listen to people like Simon T, Ian Cook, OB etc. IE those who have, "Been there done it and won the T shirt". Learn to tell the "wheat from the chaff" and enjoy the site.

 

[OB..]

Here is my view of the problem.

A player is running forward carrying the ball. Obviously the ball has the same forward speed as the player.

While running he stretches out his arm sideways and drops the ball, applying no force. He continues at the same speed. Air resistance will cause the ball to slow slightly, so when it hits the ground, it is slightly behind the point the player has now reached.

At no time was the ball in front of the player, but it has certainly landed in front of the point above which it was released..

How many people would consider that to be (technically) a throw forward?

Now arrange it so the he drops the ball just before crossing the halfway line.

Spectators and those with videos will see that the ball has travelled forward, but will probably not have noticed that in the first case.

Although it is possible to read Law 12 as implying that the ball itself should not travel forward, that is not how it is judged most of the time. Indeed it becomes impracticable when the player is running fast - throwing the ball hard enough to cancel out his forward speed is unrealistic.

This problem has been known for many years (hence the 1948 quote from the RFU) but is not widely appreciated outside refereeing circles (and sometimes not even within them). Most people are quite happy that a pass is not forward if the passer remains in front of the ball and think no further about it.

Grammatically the word "forward" in Law 12 is an adverb, and thus refers to "throws or passes", hence the official view that it is the passing action, not the path of the ball over the ground, that counts.

 

[richie]

thanks for all replies, I was aware of the whole momentum , ball passed back but travels forward debate and pretty much agree with most of the above posts. I suppose where I was coming from is where the ball travels a long way forward but appears to come out of hands laterally (ie not backwards) at best and sometimes its very inconclusive, so in these situations its benefit of doubt to attacking team always?
have been reffing 7 years and can generally 'sell' the close ones, but find it difficult in the heat of a tetchy match to 'sell' the pass that was passed by the trundling prop on the half way but caught 2/3m upfield!!!!
must try harder:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

 

[Rushforth]

http://rugby.about.com/od/rugbyadmina/a/How-To-Cheat-At-Rugby-The-Forward-Pass.htm

 

[leaguerefaus]

thanks for all replies, I was aware of the whole momentum , ball passed back but travels forward debate and pretty much agree with most of the above posts. I suppose where I was coming from is where the ball travels a long way forward but appears to come out of hands laterally (ie not backwards) at best and sometimes its very inconclusive, so in these situations its benefit of doubt to attacking team always?
have been reffing 7 years and can generally 'sell' the close ones, but find it difficult in the heat of a tetchy match to 'sell' the pass that was passed by the trundling prop on the half way but caught 2/3m upfield!!!!
must try harder:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

Yep Richie. If you aren't sure it's a forward pass - play on! In saying that though, it's always best to go with your first impression. If your first thought is 'that looks forward to me', don't then hesitate by wondering if you can be 100% sure. As long as you make a quick decision and look sure about it, half the job is already done.

 

[Account Deleted]

http://rugby.about.com/od/rugbyadmina/a/How-To-Cheat-At-Rugby-The-Forward-Pass.htm

Relevance?

 

[Rushforth]

Indeed it becomes impracticable when the player is running fast - throwing the ball hard enough to cancel out his forward speed is unrealistic.

OB.., you state this as fact, but my fundamental problem with this interpretation is that I see players of all levels - on TV, highest local, right down to the U15s here - executing such passes at full pace. Repeatedly.

The video at http://www.irbcoaching.com/?module=1&section=1&subsection=1 is an example.

I appreciate that you agree there is a problem. Let me leave you with a thought experiment:

Red is on the attack, and 13 releases the ball in the general direction of 14 around the 5m line. Blue 11 raises an arm to intercept, and succeeds in preventing a try. The ball would have travelled 5 metres towards the opponents dead ball line (hawkeye blah), and 10m to the right, but after interception attempt in the middle of those 10m it only travelled forwards relative to the field 1m instead of 2.5m. Has Blue 11 knocked on, despite the ball travelling backwards relative to the blue player and field?

 

[Account Deleted]

You really don't understand basic physics do you!

 

[thepercy]

what if it is not the balls initial forward momentum that causes it to go forward but the wind?

 

[MrQeu]

The same as if the ball is brought back into the FOP after crossing the plane of touch or a conversion kick/goal kick. It's good all day long.

 

[Rushforth]

You really don't understand basic physics do you!

I appreciate the exclamation mark, but I must admit I'm stuck on how to resolve general relativity with quantum mechanics.

General relativity deals with things moving really fast on macroscopic scales - where gravity is relevant.

Quantum mechanics deals with very microscopic effects. More than a single atom and it gets confusing - I'm only understandint it at the level of a single electron.

Oddly, neither of these aspects of basic physics are even vaguely relevant to the sport of rugby, let alone the laws.

Let me put it differently: I have seen players pass the ball NOT towards the opposition dead ball line. I have seen this often. On the order of 90% of passes made whilst running at pace. Over the last 30+ years.

Telly-tubby-night-night!!!1one!

 

[Account Deleted]

Oh Dear. Humour failure too.

 

[Camquin]

Of course they can, very few rugby players can manage 10m/s (22mph) in boots on muddy grass - Olympic sprinters may go faster in spikes on a Tartan track. If a rugby player gets anywhere close it means there is nothing between them an the try line and they are generally not thinking about passing.

According to the Guinness Book of Records the fasted recorded pass was by Joe Simpson at 22m/s (48 mph)

So Joe at full pelt would need to pass around 30 degrees backwards for the ball not to go forward relative to the grass.

In the end the ref is not going to be doing trig - they have a mark one eyeball and make a judgement,
So if a player makes an effort to make it look like the balls goes backwards the ref will probably allow it.

Which is roughly what Derek Robinson said in "Rugby Success starts here - endorsed by the RFU" which tried to explain the old law book ("Law 1. No side is the end of the match") to humble players.

Camquin

 

[Dickie E]

and I think we can all do a pretty fair job when the passer continues to run at pace after passing the ball.

The problem arises when the passer is stopped after passing the ball. It looks wrong but is, in fact, OK.

Refer IRB video.

 

[Browner]

I suppose where I was coming from is where the ball travels a long way forward but appears to come out of hands laterally (ie not backwards) at best and sometimes its very inconclusive, so in these situations its benefit of doubt to attacking team always?

:clap: yes yes yes , why ever wouldn't it be

 

[Camquin]

Do you mean attacking team or team in possession?
It seems odd that you would change interpretation based on position on the pitch - but that is how the laws are written.

 

[leaguerefaus]

Do you mean attacking team or team in possession?
It seems odd that you would change interpretation based on position on the pitch - but that is how the laws are written.

Where the LotG says attacking team, it means the team with the territorial advantage. What we actually meant when we were talking about giving the 'benefit of the doubt' to the 'attacking team' regarding forward passes, was to only call those which are clear & obvious, i.e. don't call it if you aren't sure.

 

[Browner]

Do you mean attacking team or team in possession?
It seems odd that you would change interpretation based on position on the pitch - but that is how the laws are written.

Yep, sorry for the confusion, I define defending to be when you haven't got the ball... and attacking as soon as you come into possession. Starting from deep inside your own half [or from inside your own goal line ] sometimes is a good attacking option

My favorite ........ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf9Elzj7ZPU :clap:

& one for our Wannabees to re-live & enjoy epper:........ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHiICyeYISA

 

[Ian_Cook]

Yep, sorry for the confusion, I define defending to be when you haven't got the ball... and attacking as soon as you come into possession.

On a referees forum, you should really try to stick with the LotG definitions of "attacking team" and "defending team". Its like calling all Australian philosophers "Bruce"; it saves confusion! :biggrin: