Forward passes

First topic message reminder :

What's with this 'shape of the hands' malarkey in determining whether a pass goes forwards?

Given that players will be trained to practice and practice and practice again to get the shape to look right and yet intentionally pass forward, the law-makers (and therefore fans) will once again will have been conned by the coaches to gain an unfair advantage.

What's wrong with forward is forward plain and simple?

Similarly the laws have been influenced by momentum. However they don't keep it simple as Biltong rightly keeps banging on about, they complicate things to make the whole game un-understandable to pretty much everyone.

Momentum is now a fact of rugby life whilst wind conditions are not (which makes the thrower's life a misery on windy or worse, blustery day (speaking as an ex-hooker) in lines-out).

And whilst I'm in a fret of indignation I'll go full-on Brian Mooreish, the coaches influenced the referees to interpret the scrum is a farce. Once the scrum is hinally formed and the 'hits' are eventually sorted, the feed to the back row is somehow acceptable. . First witness for the prosecution :
Aaron Smith - England v All Blacks 1 December 2012.

TJ, I'm afraid it's not as clear cut; the phrase you quote: "‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line." is merely identifying which direction shall be considered forward (otherwise without this clause, one could turn with one's back to the opposition dead ball line, throw the ball over one's head and claim to have passed the ball backward in a justifiable sense). The ambiguity is in the word 'pass'. It can be both a verb: the action of the player - the force I exerted on the ball was backwards therefore, as far as my agency goes, I passed it backwards - OR 'pass' can be a noun: the trajectory of the ball. In the latter sense the absolute motion of the ball determines whether or not the ball goes forward.

the fact that there are conflicting views on this discrepency coming from official sources shows that this law is not clear on how it inteprets 'pass' in this law.

Mr Fishpaste wrote:The shape of the hands is essential to the forward-pass law, because virtually all passes made apparently to the side by a sprinting player will actually being travelling forwards in space (ie will land forward of the position from whence they were released)

Here's a good explanation

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

Thanks! This is a craking video, liked, favourited, bookmarked...well basically made my day.

I have been saying it to my mates or anyone around me when i watch a game, i have been taken for a fool each time...
It's all about kinetic energy (which is common in snooker too).
In rugby terms it's the same case as if the ball is knocked backward but bounces forward (for me not a knock on).

No fishpaste -it really is very clear. If you have passed the ball backwards it goes towards your dead ball line, if the ball goes towards the opositions dead ball line it is a forward pass.

If you~"pass the ball backwards" as you put it it will travel backwards in relation tot eh pitch. If the ball travels forward you did not pass it backwards.

There is no ambiguity and no confusion apart from by some fans. the law is clear and simple - its all about the direction the ball travels in. If the ball goes towards the opposition tryline its a forward pass. What the players were doing is irrelevant.

OR 'pass' can be a noun: the trajectory of the ball. In the latter sense the absolute motion of the ball determines whether or not the ball goes forward.

Indeed - if the ball travels towards the opposition try line it is a forward pass the movement of the ball in relation tot eh players hands is irrelevant. read the law.

TJ wrote:
If you~"pass the ball backwards" as you put it it will travel backwards in relation tot eh pitch. If the ball travels forward you did not pass it backwards.

Something you are missing out is it's all about the initial trajectory of the pass, as shown in the video some pass can initially go backward but because of kinetic energy it will go forward, for me this is not a forward pass.

If it's a forward pass there will be a lot of tries refused i fear and all rugby games to end with a 9-6 scoreline, i don't think rugby fans want that.

TJ ...bring it up with Paddy Obrien and how show him the bit of the law that says "the ball may not travel forward in relation to the dead ball line"

It isnt there.

Youre adding your own words into what is said. Its frankly annoying now that no matter how many times and in no matter what terms its expalined the action and direction of throwing a ball is not always the sole factor which dertermines its direction of travel.
The rule only states that the throw cannot be forward in relation to that line. That is not the same as the direction of travel of the ball.

Heck maybe youre right and the IRB is wrong and the RFU were wrong in the 60s when this was first recorded in the law discussions.

Initial Movement off the hand... (backwards = good)
vs subsequent movement after ball has left the hand (forwards = acceptable)

At least that is my simple understanding.

Peter - read what the rules say as quoted above. Its not me making stuff up at all its what the laws say and what they say very clearly. The only thing that matters in this is did the ball travel towards the opponents try line - yes = forward pass, no = legal pass.

all the rest is discussion and surmise. the law is very clear.

Its frankly annoying now that no matter how many times and in no matter what terms its expalined the action and direction of throwing a ball is not always the sole factor which dertermines its direction of travel.

this is nonsense. the only thing that determines what direction the ballis travelling is the action of thowing it.

Its quite frankly really annoying that people keep on about this forward pass being backwards nonsense despite the clarity of the rules. I think its a lack of understanding of basic physics.

If you were on a train travelling at 100mph and threw a ball backwards from you at 20 mph that ball would still be travelling at 80 mph forwards. whereas you would call this a backwards pass despite the 80 mph forward velocity

Its in relation to the ground - thats is what the rules say.

find me one quote from the IRB that allows this "momentum pass"

gregortree wrote:Initial Movement off the hand... (backwards = good)
vs subsequent movement after ball has left the hand (forwards = acceptable)

At least that is my simple understanding.

This is imposssible - if the hands go backward so does the ball.

TJ
I guess you did not watch the 'IRB 'movie then.
Hands go back (initially).

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

Gregor - I have watched it. Its all about the motion relative to the ground. If the hands go backward relative to the ground so does the ball. if the ball goes forward relative to the ground it is because it has been thrown forward relative to the ground.

I understand the point. its just its irrelevant to the rules which define forward and backward in relation to the tryline.

A pass that travels forwards can never have been throw backward relative to the ground - it can have been thrown backwards relative the player but that is of no consequence as forward and back are clearly defined in relation to the tryline

Oh dear, TJ, I'm not sure if you've grasped the distinction between the two senses of 'pass forward' that I've outlined above...oh well. But the upshot of your narrow interpretation of the rule (which is not the intepretation held by the IRB refs association: see Paddy O'Brien reference above) is that a winger sprinting at full pace can virtually never pass the ball without it going forward according to your definition. Why? Well: sprinters top-out at just over 40km/h; as Hammer noted above, rugby passes max out at about 50km/h. So assuming I'm sprinting at full speed, the only way to avoid passing forward (according to your definition) is to throught the ball as hard as possible virtually directly backwards (or within, say, 20 degrees of directly backwards). All other passes will travel forwards relative to the ground. This interpretation would certainly stifle backline play if it were to be effectively applied!! Which is perhaps why it is not the official interpretation of the IRB ref's association.

is it me or is TJ being a bit dense here?

the only phrase in the rules is: "forward means towards the opposition's dead ball line". This has nothing to do with relative to the ground, it's just there to say that an opponent running backwards can't fling the ball backwards over his shoulder as that would be "forward". the whole point is that forward passes are considered forwards relative to the player. Otherwise, as Fishpaste points out, pretty much any back who passes the ball is throwing a forward pass.

Mr Fishpaste wrote:Oh dear, TJ, I'm not sure if you've grasped the distinction between the two senses of 'pass forward' that I've outlined above...oh well. But the upshot of your narrow interpretation of the rule (which is not the intepretation held by the IRB refs association: see Paddy O'Brien reference above) is that a winger sprinting at full pace can virtually never pass the ball without it going forward according to your definition. Why? Well: sprinters top-out at just over 40km/h; as Hammer noted above, rugby passes max out at about 50km/h. So assuming I'm sprinting at full speed, the only way to avoid passing forward (according to your definition) is to throught the ball as hard as possible virtually directly backwards (or within, say, 20 degrees of directly backwards). All other passes will travel forwards relative to the ground. This interpretation would certainly stifle backline play if it were to be effectively applied!! Which is perhaps why it is not the official interpretation of the IRB ref's association.

It is the ref's duty (just as a judge or magistrate) to uphold the Law not to wilfully misinterpret it.

As it stands, the law is quite clear - forward is forward toward the goal-line.

If it's rephrased as something like 'the receiver must at the point of the pass be behind the passer', then the Law is different and refs can uphold it properly.

Mad for Chelsea can you please explain where you get this from?

the whole point is that forward passes are considered forwards relative to the player

there is nothing in the rules to say so anywhere. the only reference to how things are judged forward or back is in relation to the try line which is a fixed mark on the ground ie in relation to the ground.

Mr Fishpaste wrote:Oh dear, TJ, I'm not sure if you've grasped the distinction between the two senses of 'pass forward' that I've outlined above...oh well. But the upshot of your narrow interpretation of the rule (which is not the intepretation held by the IRB refs association: see Paddy O'Brien reference above)............... Which is perhaps why it is not the official interpretation of the IRB ref's association.

got a link to where it is written that a ball thrown forwards in relation to the ground can be ruled backwards? I have seen a lot of discussion around this including that video - I have seen do alteration of the law or guidance that a "momentum pass" can be allowed

TJ, here's the link to the interview with Paddy O'brien:
http://www.irb.com/totalrugby/newsid=2042269.html

Tiger: Here's a scenario, not directly related to rugby, but it might be informative. I am on a fast train that is travelling at 250km/h. In order to avoid confusion with other passangers, we agree that the front of the train shall be defined as the end where the engine/driver is. So if a ask a fellow passenger to please move forward through the train, we know that I mean they must head toward the end of the train where the driver is, and must not interpret the command 'move forward' to mean move in the direction that your body is facing, because that could be facing any direction. If I ask a passenger to move back wards, having asserted that 'forwards' means towards the front of the train, I will be satisfied that they are indeed moving backwards if they head towards the back of the train. This is despite the fact that they are not moving backwards in an absolute sense, but are moving forwards at around 250km/h.

I trust the parallels between this analogy and the forward pass are relatively (excuse the pun) clear.

MF then as I say the Law is an ass in the way it's phrased.
If you chuck an object out a moving train window and you accidentally injure an innocent person, then you are guilty at least by negligence even how far ahead of your eyeline the victim was.

A fellow passenger in the corridor moving towards the back of the coach has the same momentum as yourself in the same body of air. Differences in relative velocitie are entirely different.

Mr Fishpaste - so no binding direction to refs, no change in the rules, no clarification of the rules - just O'Brian continuing the confusion and getting muddles in his physics in an interview.

Mr Fishpaste - we understand what you are saying - its just its irrelevant in the law as forward and backward are defined by the tryline. Ie relative tot eh ground

TJ what did you make of the 'over the head' pass ?

Its all the same thing - the overhead pass is backward relative to the player but forward relative the ground - its still a forward pass according to the rules.

it would never be given I doubt but thats because of the falibility of humans and the optical illusion inherent in the over the head pass.

Unless the IRB has repealed Newtons laws or their own rules..............

As has been stated constantly TJ, it is not just "some fans" but on the evidence the top referees as well who use the "momentum" interpretation. You may not like it, you may think the law states clearly that they're wrong, it doesn't change the fact that Mark Lawrence, POB and Craig Joubert have all said that that's the interpretation they use at the highest level.

Moreover rugby league uses the momentum viewpoint (and states it explicitly in law) and the momentum was the law in the 1940s...

Yes its law in rugby league. again this adds to the confusion.

can someone actually point me to where refs have been told to do this, any actually IRB directive on this or any other binding piece of official data.

Anything that is not a discussion piece but is a directive

Mark Lawrence, POB and Craig Joubert have all said that that's the interpretation they use at the highest level.

reference?

There is no directive that I know of. Only common sense I guess which says you shouldn't penalise almost half of all passes as forward.

Mark Lawrence did a piece on it for SA refs, you can trawl through it if you're that interested. POB did an interview, and Craig mentioned it at a meeting someone I know attended.

I can't honestly be bothered finding the interview or the Lawrence piece, because it's not something I can get excited about. I wish the iRB would come out and officially clear it up, because it clearly causes quite a bit of confusion with players, fans and coaches, but until then, I'm perfectly happy applying momentum at the (lowly) level I ref at. Much easier than the relative to ground which is only practical if near a line.

thank you mike - thats my point. You can only go on what you see and the optical illusion of the momentum pass means some forward passes do not look forward.

However the law remains as it is and does not allow for momentum passes nor has there ever been a directive saying you can allow for them.

As I've said before I personally think it should be forward in the ground frame of reference. However if it was clarified in the law that it was in the players frame of reference then fine.

If you're for the 'momentum' interpretation then we need to allow a player running forward to pass the ball 'back' over his head, run into the in-goal area, catch the ball and score a try. That, IMO, is ridiculous.

Roughly a player running at 20kph gives a 'backward' pass just over his head and will go forward 5m in a second. So a little more (or a little faster) would take you from the 5 yard line to the in-goal area.

HammerofThunor wrote:
If you're for the 'momentum' interpretation then we need to allow a player running forward to pass the ball 'back' over his head, run into the in-goal area, catch the ball and score a try. That, IMO, is ridiculous.

Roughly a player running at 20kph gives a 'backward' pass just over his head and will go forward 5m in a second. So a little more (or a little faster) would take you from the 5 yard line to the in-goal area.

If you allow momentum passes you must allow a pass that goes forward over the try line if done between two players running flat out, with the receiving player slightly behind the passer, who throws the pass just before the line. Now that surely cannot happen legally in a game of rugby?

It will be interesting to see if a case comes up with the experimental use of the video replay ref