TMO Guessing on Forward Passes

[OB..]

My main concern is now that the RL interpretation of 'Relative velocity/momentum' has filtered in & been accepted

I don't know what the RL position was in 1948, but I have several times quoted the RFU's view back then that "a throw-forward is not decided in relation to the ground".

and given that referees don't have the ability to calculate 'slide-rule' measurements instantaneously

Are you claiming that when passing to a flying winger, the passer is calculating "slide-rule"(?) measurements instantaneously? He is indeed doing it instantaneously, but using judgements and experience, not explicit calculation. A referee works just the same way.

 

[Browner]

but using judgements and experience, not explicit calculation. A referee works just the same way.

unnecessary TMO referral is my main point ..... as Damo says #7 ... "I have a suspicion based on Joubert's speed to motion for the TMO and his body language and reactions that last year he would have just called a forward pass himself"

1 Min 30s it took to reach the a decision that his experience would have probably [previously] said was forward.I'm not blaming Joubert, clearly the 'fear' & 'on the safe side' nudges toward referral & IMO we're seeing the thin edge of the future wedge here .....

but on the plus side, the players can all get a hydration moment during the 1.30s between time off & back on.

 

[Browner]

I don't know what the RL position was in 1948, but I have several times quoted the RFU's view back then that "a throw-forward is not decided in relation to the ground QUOTE]

could you come up with a definition that makes the subject clearer , if only for the benefit of the people who don't have your in depth historical knowledge? something along the lines of 'leaves his hands' etc

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

 

[Rassie]

My apology. I got mixed up with the Bulls and the Ndugane try in the Bulls game which was also a TMO referral.

I think the pass thrown over the head explanation is the most common way to explain it when both are in motion with rugby. We have seen videos and two blokes running then throw the torpedo passes which by itself drift forwards and the hands will point to the target one is throwing. So the hands will appear forward as well.

BUT

Have any seen a video from a guy who drifts across the field (like Cooper) then throws a flat torpedo pass forward. He is not moving forward but sideways so throwing the ball over your head won't be same scenario. Because one would stop at a angle and not straight

 

[Dixie]

I don't know what the RL position was in 1948, but I have several times quoted the RFU's view back then that "a throw-forward is not decided in relation to the ground

could you come up with a definition that makes the subject clearer , if only for the benefit of the people who don't have your in depth historical knowledge? something along the lines of 'leaves his hands' etc

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.

How about this:

Definition: Throw forward A throw forward occurs when a player deliberately releases the ball such that it leaves the player's hand in a direction that is more toward the opposing team’s dead ball line than his own. A throw forward is not judged in relation to the ground, but in relation to the thrower at the moment of release. Consequently, it is possible for a backward throw to travel forward in relation to the ground. This is not a throw forward.

 

[OB..]

There are several ways of expressing the concept of a throw forward.

(1) A throw forward occurs when the thrower increases the forward speed of the ball.

(2) A throw forward occurs when the ball travels forward relative to the thrower.

(3) A throw forward occurs when the thrower's hands move forward relative to the thrower.

I prefer something like (1) (and that is something Hawk Eye could measure).

In each case I would probably add: The path of the ball over the ground is not relevant.

 

[Browner]

Hawkeye would be a great tool at all the clubs I referee at ..... :biggrin:

 

[Browner]

I think the pass thrown over the head explanation is the most common way to explain it when both are in motion with rugby.

Rassie,
..........yes but, it is possible to deliberately throw the ball up in the air forward & ahead of you & then run under it, so that the person following you catches the ball that eventually comes down behind your back.
[note - height of throw & time that it hangs are the key factors]

I know, cos I did this with him my son recently, as part of a teach him about 'momentum' session

 

[Rushforth]

Very tight call. Relative to the ground,t eh ball possibly went forward. The direction of the hands seemed to me to be clecarly backward. Good call by the TMO in my view to refuse to cancel the try on the basis of the earlier suspect pass.

I find it bizarre that the TMO was called upon to even consider a potential forward pass in the other half of the field. Although it is obvious that the AR raised the issue, why did the referee send it upstairs?

Fortunately the TMO stuck by the TMO protocol that a forwards pass must be clear and obvious.

OB.., are you suggesting Hawk-eye be used?

 

[Rassie]

Rassie,
..........yes but, it is possible to deliberately throw the ball up in the air forward & ahead of you & then run under it, so that the person following you catches the ball that eventually comes down behind your back.
[note - height of throw & time that it hangs are the key factors]

I know, cos I did this with him my son recently, as part of a teach him about 'momentum' session

Now do that same trick but instead of running straight and forward, run sideways (drift sideways over the pitch)

 

[OB..]

Now do that same trick but instead of running straight and forward, run sideways (drift sideways over the pitch)

Why? What matters is the passer's forward speed, which mathematically would be negative if he was running back instead of forward.

 

[The Fat]

unnecessary TMO referral is my main point ..... as Damo says #7 ... "I have a suspicion based on Joubert's speed to motion for the TMO and his body language and reactions that last year he would have just called a forward pass himself"

1 Min 30s it took to reach the a decision that his experience would have probably [previously] said was forward.I'm not blaming Joubert, clearly the 'fear' & 'on the safe side' nudges toward referral & IMO we're seeing the thin edge of the future wedge here .....

but on the plus side, the players can all get a hydration moment during the 1.30s between time off & back on.

I watched the highlights of this game last night and I have to agree with you regarding Joubert. Last year he would have confidently made a call and then just got on with it. Unfortunately the down side of all of these referals is that referees like Joubert now look unsure of themselves and the abilities that got them to the top of the pecking order.
I definitely felt, after watching this game, that Joubert has lost something.
It took 90 seconds and several camera angles to come to a decision on a forward pass, not a grounding under a pack of bodies, a forward pass. The camera angle finally used to make the call is from in front of the play and over the top of a scrum.
The pass may have been forward but it is arguable and it is certainly not clear and obvious. Certainly not as obvious as the final touch which led to the Reds last try.
The TMO referral system has had a positive overall effect this season but the down side is that it has put fear into some of the referees and unfortunately, Joubert is one of them.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I watched the highlights of this game last night and I have to agree with you regarding Joubert. Last year he would have confidently made a call and then just got on with it. Unfortunately the down side of all of these referals is that referees like Joubert now look unsure of themselves and the abilities that got them to the top of the pecking order.
I definitely felt, after watching this game, that Joubert has lost something.

Give it a chance. The referee are still getting used to it

It took 90 seconds and several camera angles to come to a decision on a forward pass, not a grounding under a pack of bodies, a forward pass. The camera angle finally used to make the call is from in front of the play and over the top of a scrum.
The pass may have been forward but it is arguable and it is certainly not clear and obvious. Certainly not as obvious as the final touch which led to the Reds last try.
The TMO referral system has had a positive overall effect this season but the down side is that it has put fear into some of the referees and unfortunately, Joubert is one of them.

I disagree. I thought it was clearly and obviously thrown forward.

The perception is that these new TMO protocols add a lot of overtime to the game... the reality is different.

So far, referral under the new TMO protocols (subtracting those involving issues that would have been TMO calls under the old protocols anyway) have amounted to a total of 81 minutes of added time. Over the 88 matches played, that's 55 seconds per match. IMO, this is a very small price to pay for getting a higher proportion of decisions RIGHT!

 

[Mike Whittaker]

Now do that same trick but instead of running straight and forward, run sideways (drift sideways over the pitch)

I raised this extra dimension to the issue in a theoretical case elsewhere where the player is running towards his own goal line.

Quote "Those not interested in vectors or the purely theoretical - please pass by and ignore this post.

Red 15 is chasing back to his own goal line to retrieve ball and is chased by blue 12.
Red 15 scoops up ball, which immediately gains his velocity, with blue 12 close on heels.

Red 14 is also running back but not yet as near to red goal line as red 15.
Red 15, just before being tackled by blue 12 passes to red 14

Given the right speed and angles, I visualise what is clearly a 'forward' pass (towards the opponents blue goal line) to the casual viewer but which, due to the velocity of both red players towards their own line is in fact not a forward pass. What do you give? Unquote

So the ball leaves the carriers hand towards the opponents goal line ... TMO would have to say forward pass under momentum considerations but not when relative to the ground. Consistency??

 

[OB..]

I raised this extra dimension to the issue in a theoretical case elsewhere where the player is running towards his own goal line.

Quote "Those not interested in vectors or the purely theoretical - please pass by and ignore this post.

Red 15 is chasing back to his own goal line to retrieve ball and is chased by blue 12.
Red 15 scoops up ball, which immediately gains his velocity, with blue 12 close on heels.

Red 14 is also running back but not yet as near to red goal line as red 15.
Red 15, just before being tackled by blue 12 passes to red 14

Given the right speed and angles, I visualise what is clearly a 'forward' pass (towards the opponents blue goal line) to the casual viewer but which, due to the velocity of both red players towards their own line is in fact not a forward pass. What do you give? Unquote

So the ball leaves the carriers hand towards the opponents goal line ... TMO would have to say forward pass under momentum considerations but not when relative to the ground. Consistency??

Under the momentum interpretation it is a forward pass. Why bring in the path over the ground? it is irrelevant, as the RFU said in 1948. I see no problem.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I raised this extra dimension to the issue in a theoretical case elsewhere where the player is running towards his own goal line.

Quote "Those not interested in vectors or the purely theoretical - please pass by and ignore this post.

Red 15 is chasing back to his own goal line to retrieve ball and is chased by blue 12.
Red 15 scoops up ball, which immediately gains his velocity, with blue 12 close on heels.

Red 14 is also running back but not yet as near to red goal line as red 15.
Red 15, just before being tackled by blue 12 passes to red 14

Given the right speed and angles, I visualise what is clearly a 'forward' pass (towards the opponents blue goal line) to the casual viewer but which, due to the velocity of both red players towards their own line is in fact not a forward pass. What do you give? Unquote

So the ball leaves the carriers hand towards the opponents goal line ... TMO would have to say forward pass under momentum considerations but not when relative to the ground. Consistency??

It doesn't matter which way the ball carrier is facing or how fast or which direction he is moving in or even whether he is moving at all; if he throws the ball in a direction that is forward of a line, parallel to the DBLs and through the ball, at the moment he releases it, then he has thrown it forward.

That is the beauty if ignoring the path of the ball over the ground... the same interpretation applies to ALL situations.

 

[Mike Whittaker]

Under the momentum interpretation it is a forward pass. Why bring in the path over the ground? it is irrelevant, as the RFU said in 1948. I see no problem.

Indeed, OB! I put it to show that with a purely mathematical approach the answer is the same which ever way the players are running.

And yet thread after extensive thread the issue is debated and argued.

I am happy with what I know to be a forward pass - it is as you say! and the RFU say! and 99% of all refs say!

PS and Ian as well!!

 

[Rassie]

Why? What matters is the passer's forward speed, which mathematically would be negative if he was running back instead of forward.

Because Quade Cooper don't run straight. He runs like a crab across filed due to the Reds trying to run around a drift defense. Throwing a torpedo pass which is design to go slightly forward his hands will always point to his target.

 

[OB..]

Because Quade Cooper don't run straight. He runs like a crab across filed due to the Reds trying to run around a drift defense. Throwing a torpedo pass which is design to go slightly forward his hands will always point to his target.

Sorry, but I don't follow your argument. Are you agreeing or disagreeing that a forward pass should be judged using the momentum interpretation?

 

[Davet]

Throwing a torpedo pass which is design to go slightly forward his hands

So that's a forward pass, then.