Was it a try? If you think yes then say why

First topic message reminder :

I am not biased when it comes to TMO, if it isn't a try then I won't try and defend it. Shane Williams in 08 v Scotland, amazing move, no try. Mike Phillips 2011 v Ireland, sneaky move clever thinking, but no try. Also Scotland scored a good try against Wales 2 weeks ago which should have been given.

Strettle yesterday was not a try.

Why? Because the only clear angle CLEARLY shows that by the time he gets "NEAR" the tryline, the ball is ABOVE his arm and balancing on it. If his arm was above the ball then there would be much more scope for debate. He did get very near the try line, but as he did get near the line he also got pushed back at the same time. There was no momentum downward force or grounding ESPECIALLY on the line. By the time the momentum had stopped he was a fraction behind the line, but irrespective of how far he was from the line. The ball was NOT touching it!

The replay clearly shows this.

Hmmm.

God HERSH are you still moaning?

I think different sports have different interpretations as follows,

In cricket the benefit is given to the batsmen
In football it is given to the attacking side
In Rugby League the benefit is given to the attacking side
In Rugby Union the benefit is given to the Welsh side

idris wrote:God HERSH are you still moaning?

Umm No, but let me guess you saw my name and jumped to the wrong conclusion?

HERSH wrote:Hmmm.

That post was quite funny Hersh

Next time I'd let the chauffer guard the Rangey, B safer

RubyGuby wrote:I think different sports have different interpretations as follows,

In cricket the benefit is given to the batsmen
In football it is given to the attacking side
In Rugby League the benefit is given to the attacking side
In Rugby Union the benefit is given to the Welsh side

HERSH wrote:

idris wrote:God HERSH are you still moaning?

Umm No, but let me guess you saw my name and jumped to the wrong conclusion?

Can you blame me? or anyone?

When was the last time I moaned about anything?

HERSH wrote:When was the last time I moaned about anything?

When you turned on the TV this morning and discovered Wales still existed.

idris wrote:God HERSH are you still moaning?

to be fair to Hersh, it was more of a cynical query rather than a moan.

Isn´t it time rugby introduced ball cams? No not in the players´shorts. In the ball. Then we could have really cool angles with kicks from goals and know for sure if the ball went through the posts or not. We could also use the camera for these types of situations.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Isn´t it time rugby introduced ball cams? No not in the players´shorts. In the ball. Then we could have really cool angles with kicks from goals and know for sure if the ball went through the posts or not. We could also use the camera for these types of situations.

No good all we'd get is a lip reading version of Strettle going "bollxxcks that fecking North got his hand under it"

there is a new technology used in SA, where they use a little tiny chip that is put all over a vehicle, it can be covered in paint etc.

If you put a number of these chips in a ball, it will be able to tell the TMO exactly how far the ball is off the gound. so if the camera shows the attacking player has control, the chip can provide a three dimensional visual of exactly where the ball is, even if obscured from the camera.

And I thought it was us welsh who had all the chips Bilton

You do mate, we have micro chips, they are smaller and not so important...



get it?



Ah, forget it.

Biltong,

How accurate are they though and how accurate is the 3 dimensional model of the pitch the y have to compare the balls position to the actual height of the grass at that point? We are talking milimeters here.
If teh measurement was even slightly off you could have a guy pressing the ball down hard and the system saying it was hovering a tiny fraction above the ground.
If its accurate to within a couple of centimeters it would have value in decideing if a ball crossed the line ( theyve talked about this for soccer) but I dont see it for grounding.

Peter it will obviously have to be adapted for that purpose, but currently this is a tracking system that uses satellite and has a 10 second delay from the time the signal shows a position where the signal has to travel up to the satellite and back.

So if a system is altered for this purpose I am sure it can be done.

There's a simple solution to this: see-through grass and turf and a load of cameras underground along the tryline. Or train moles to TMO standard.

Just get the player to put the fxxxing thing down

I want to know if the director who was supplying the TMO with the footage was Welsh?

MrsP wrote:I want to know if the director who was suppling the TMO with the footage was Welsh?

No but the ref was Steve Welsh

And I sincerely hope he wasn't suppling!!!!! Nervous post there MrsP

Is there really an angle that shows the ball being grounded on or over the line? I'll admit I haven't gone looking for one.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:Is there really an angle that shows the ball being grounded on or over the line? I'll admit I haven't gone looking for one.

The one from behind ( that Shane Williams referred to) does show it may have been grounded but you cant tell for sure. It would only be the end of the ball and very breifly if it was.
Theres a still photo of it maybe a centimeter above the ground, but from that you cant tell if thats the furthest down it got or not.

Someoen said scrum V had a picture of it down, but its uncertain if that was after it was rolled back over the line or not.

It was similar to Scotlands v England actually where for a brief millisecond it may have touched the top of a blade of grass - Shame really would have been an exciting kick

biltongbek wrote:Peter it will obviously have to be adapted for that purpose, but currently this is a tracking system that uses satellite and has a 10 second delay from the time the signal shows a position where the signal has to travel up to the satellite and back.

So if a system is altered for this purpose I am sure it can be done.

Right but satelitte positioning isnt accurate enough to do what we need it to at the moment for checking groundings, and you wpould still need a contantly updated 3D model of the pitch accurate to the same extent. Waht if someone grounded the ball on a bit of turf that had just been kicked up? Legally thats a try, but if the model shows the pitch wasd flat there the system would say it wasnt.
The delay as well would presumably cause the asame problem snicko has in cricket of matching the sound to pictures in matching the ball position to the video feed.

I dunno how about they electrify the pitch and make the ball a lightbulb?

[quote="Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler"]

biltongbek wrote:

I dunno how about they electrify the pitch and make the ball a lightbulb?

I was just thinking something similar. Glow-mats in the deadball line that light up in different colours depending on which team's in contact with the ball when it touches down. Of course the players would have to be wired up in VR suits or similar ...

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

biltongbek wrote:Peter it will obviously have to be adapted for that purpose, but currently this is a tracking system that uses satellite and has a 10 second delay from the time the signal shows a position where the signal has to travel up to the satellite and back.

So if a system is altered for this purpose I am sure it can be done.

Right but satelitte positioning isnt accurate enough to do what we need it to at the moment for checking groundings, and you wpould still need a contantly updated 3D model of the pitch accurate to the same extent. Waht if someone grounded the ball on a bit of turf that had just been kicked up? Legally thats a try, but if the model shows the pitch wasd flat there the system would say it wasnt.
The delay as well would presumably cause the asame problem snicko has in cricket of matching the sound to pictures in matching the ball position to the video feed.

I dunno how about they electrify the pitch and make the ball a lightbulb?

everyone might be running around screaming bright light, bright light.!!!

I agree it won't work via a sattelite, but the hollywood guys have those motion camera's so it can't be far off?

I think video technology is as far as we need to go. If, after several slo-mo replays of footage from several different angles, the TMO can't be sure a try's been scored, then that should be that. It's tough, perhaps, but it's the same for all sides.

If Bojo can track every single car number plate passing through the congestion zone, I'm pretty sure we could digitally confirm that when England have scored a legitimate try.

TOO MANY JOKES, MUST RESIST URGE!

Like Tindalls attempts to score in slow motion for example bluesman?

most people think it was a try. so wales only win by 2 points. a slimmer victory but still an historic victory.

I think England should have had a penalty try with 2 minutes to go.

My feeling is that if that had happened, England would invariably have scored against 14 men.

You're going to have to accept reality sooner or later, Mitey.

OK - next vote:
"Would Flood have got the conversion?"

Then we can decide if the score should stay at 19-17 or move to 19-19.

Or would he get a blood injury forcing Farrell to come back on? (OK bad taste there).

Shane Williams said in the paper today he thought it was grounded and should've been a try.

However, as dogtooth has alluded to, I still think England would've lost as Floor would've spooned the kick anyway.

Shane Williams - politician to the end.

Ryan Jones also scored a brilliant try vs Ireland, that was denied by the TMO.

It doesn't really matter whether they would have made the kick as the try wasn't given. I was under the impression this was more to do with the technicalities of grounding the ball and the TMO. Also some excellent suggestions for determining groundings.

Regarding Shane Williams, well he thought his try against Scotland a couple o years ago was fair. It would be like if Cueto said it was a try.

Was Jiffy on Scrum V and what did he say? He's always been a benefit of the doubt going to the attacker kind of guy

Alex_Germany wrote:OK - next vote:
"Would Flood have got the conversion?"

Then we can decide if the score should stay at 19-17 or move to 19-19.

Or would he get a blood injury forcing Farrell to come back on? (OK bad taste there).

IronMike wrote:Ryan Jones also scored a brilliant try vs Ireland, that was denied by the TMO.

If the TMO didn't award it, it wasn't a try He obviously didn't see a 'grounding'. If Jones got a brilliant 'try' then I'm afraid Strettle scored a beautiful seat-of-the-pants one too

SecretFly wrote:

IronMike wrote:Ryan Jones also scored a brilliant try vs Ireland, that was denied by the TMO.

If the TMO didn't award it, it wasn't a try He obviously didn't see a 'grounding'. If Jones got a brilliant 'try' then I'm afraid Strettle scored a beautiful seat-of-the-pants one too

Fair point. But Morg is lead to believe that IronMike is implying that Wales are not getting the 'rub of the green' as often as some online fans are suggesting. What does Fly think? Morg heard that the word on the streets in Dublin is, no pyjama's no Guinness.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:Is there really an angle that shows the ball being grounded on or over the line? I'll admit I haven't gone looking for one.

does this help?

https://i.servimg.com/u/f41/17/31/32/57/try210.jpg

Morgannwg wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

IronMike wrote:Ryan Jones also scored a brilliant try vs Ireland, that was denied by the TMO.

If the TMO didn't award it, it wasn't a try He obviously didn't see a 'grounding'. If Jones got a brilliant 'try' then I'm afraid Strettle scored a beautiful seat-of-the-pants one too

Fair point. But Morg is lead to believe that IronMike is implying that Wales are not getting the 'rub of the green' as often as some online fans are suggesting. What does Fly think? Morg heard that the word on the streets in Dublin is, no pyjama's no Guinness.

Well Fly might say to Morg that the green, the green that we're supposed to bloody well own, and have copyright to, has just about upped and deserted us this last few years... So we know how it feels to feel sick in the gut............... BUT............................................

Alwiys luke on the Broyth Syde of Loyfe

Heaf wrote:

luckless_pedestrian wrote:Is there really an angle that shows the ball being grounded on or over the line? I'll admit I haven't gone looking for one.

does this help?

https://i.servimg.com/u/f41/17/31/32/57/try210.jpg

Its the best Ive seen but its still ambiguous, the angle is looking down, its blurred, and theres shadow obstruting the botom of the ball. Youd want a few frames either side as well.

Given the number of people snapping at it and the number of TV cameras on it if thats the best we have still I think the TMO can be forgiven for saying it was inconclusive. We cant say it certainly wasnt grounded, still seen nothing that proves it was.

Morgannwg wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

IronMike wrote:Ryan Jones also scored a brilliant try vs Ireland, that was denied by the TMO.

If the TMO didn't award it, it wasn't a try He obviously didn't see a 'grounding'. If Jones got a brilliant 'try' then I'm afraid Strettle scored a beautiful seat-of-the-pants one too

Fair point. But Morg is lead to believe that IronMike is implying that Wales are not getting the 'rub of the green' as often as some online fans are suggesting. What does Fly think? Morg heard that the word on the streets in Dublin is, no pyjama's no Guinness.

Are you still refeering to yourself in the third person?

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Heaf wrote:

luckless_pedestrian wrote:Is there really an angle that shows the ball being grounded on or over the line? I'll admit I haven't gone looking for one.

does this help?

https://i.servimg.com/u/f41/17/31/32/57/try210.jpg

Its the best Ive seen but its still ambiguous, the angle is looking down, its blurred, and theres shadow obstruting the botom of the ball. Youd want a few frames either side as well.

Given the number of people snapping at it and the number of TV cameras on it if thats the best we have still I think the TMO can be forgiven for saying it was inconclusive. We cant say it certainly wasnt grounded, still seen nothing that proves it was.

Fact is I've never seen a try disallowed with this much evidence of a grounding, maybe it's not 100% but perhaps 90%. I've seen many a try awarded with only 50% proof or less of grounding.

A World Cup and 3 Finals wrote:Fact is I've never seen a try disallowed with this much evidence of a grounding

Yes you have, it happened last Saturday.

HammerofThunor wrote:It doesn't really matter whether they would have made the kick as the try wasn't given. I was under the impression this was more to do with the technicalities of grounding the ball and the TMO. Also some excellent suggestions for determining groundings.

Regarding Shane Williams, well he thought his try against Scotland a couple o years ago was fair. It would be like if Cueto said it was a try.

Was Jiffy on Scrum V and what did he say? He's always been a benefit of the doubt going to the attacker kind of guy

But Cueto's was a try too

On the weekend there was found to be no grounding to this grounding evidence. The debate appears though to be very much up in the air. Unfortunately all the evidence in the world won't change Saturday´s result.

If the ref had awarded the try, most people (not the Welsh fans no doubt) wouldn't have been surprised. That suggests there was reasonable doubt to suggest no try was not scored but doubtful that beyond a reasonable doubt that no try had not been scored. Do you follow me? Nor did the video ref and Steve Walsh. You may not not award the try- And that´s why the try wasn´t allowed. He got mixed up with the double negatives. Too much listening to Pink Floyd epic songs.