Isn't that then an argument to check by video ref if it was a forward pass?



Why not just rule that, for televised games, given the available information (existing footage) if a pass [ulooks[/u forward in the build up to a try, then it is. That might rule out some pass which in reality might not have been but also allow the video ref to rule on the many more passes which clearly are. Instead of the current situation where the video ref cannot even rule on obvious forward passes.

The main reason many passes "clearly are" forward to so many punters is that they have no idea what a forward pass is (cf Saddened and his belief that putting lines on the pitch would in any way be relevant).

It was a digustingly forward pass and the fact that Hicks, a Super League referee was the linesman makes it all the worse. It's beyond a joke now

Bollocks.



My idea would work. If you had a line going perpendicular to the touchlines at the point the pass is made you could calculate the angle it departs the hands. Don't tell me they couldnt do it with the technology they have today. One of the things used in hawkeye is the angle it departs the hand for example.



People understand forward passes. It's not the fans that are in the wrong. The pass everyone is talking about leaves the hand at about a 40 degree angle. It's so clearly forward.

Warrington's 2nd try last week was more clearly forward IMO, and none of the commentary team batted an eyelid.

If the video ref can rule on offside at the kick, they can rule on forward passes. The same arguments apply.

Class





I know your serious as well.

Scathing self-critique. But, I suppose, fair comment





But if you could, that wouldn't help. At all.





There is a lot of truth in that. Many passes are called forward by the crowd for the sake of it, but every week there are blatant forward passes, which instinctively half the crowd instantly sees and calls, yet the officials ignore. It puzzles me. I have to assume this is done on instructions as I don;ty believe the officials are the only people in the ground who don't see it.

Rather than trying to find a better way to interpret the current wording of the rule, why not just change the rule to require the player receiving the ball to have been no further forward than the player passing the ball at the moment the ball was released AND at the point at which they receive the ball, with the only exception to the second part being if the player passing the ball was prevented from progressing further by a defending player.



It would then be easy to judge forward passes for the VR as it would effectively be exactly the same as deciding whether a player was onside when the ball is kicked.

Technically they could put a GPS chip in the ball which would calculate initial velocity and final velocity over start and finish position. This could trigger a heat sensor in the ball which if forward, this would make the rugby ball too hot to handle and the receiver would drop the ball. This converts a forward pass into a knock on which the ref and video ref can confirm.........easy.

You do know that GPS isn't a pin point accurate system don't you?

No they don’t unfortunately.



With a kick, you can roughly see where the kick is taken, and where the player receiving the ball is at the time of the kick.



With a pass, if the player delivers the ball with the hands pointing towards his own team, due to physics, the ball could travel in a forwards trajectory, depending on the speed the player is moving at.



Momentum, physics, call it what you want, it’s very difficult to police, unless they just say, if the ball ends up in front of where it was passed, it’s forwards, only then could you use the same system as the kick.



But to be honest, there’s a number of try’s scored from kicks where the referee doesn’t bother using the technology, when perhaps he should.