For probably the 20th time on these boards, there are some great videos on YouTube that explain, very clearly, why the position of the ball in relation to the pitch is irrelevant.

There's the old classic: "Rugby Union "Forward Pass" video"
...or an updated version: "Total Rugby - Forward Pass"

It doesn't have to hit the ground to be offside.
If youu catch the ball but drop it forward and I catch it in front of you, I'm off side.

That's effectively what they rules against Cas.

If we can't use video footage to determine a forward pass then how does a referee manage it (occasionally)? I understand they are taught to watch the passer's hands & initial trajectory of the ball. Is it not possible to look at this via video footage?

It's the modern-day equivalent of the Schleswig-Holstein Question. As Lord Palmerston said:



I*'ll leave you to work out which one of those is Stevo.

Of course it's possible to judge forward passes,referee's do this all the time?,isn't it better to ask the video ref to have a quick look to make sure?,if he can't decide the decision goes with the attacking side,any way it will come in the end.

That's how I see it. All the talk following Hull KR's dodgy try was of Ganson's position and an unsighted touch judge, so why not use the technology available?

It's still a judgement call, whether on the spot or via VR. And I'd suggest it's far easier to make that call with a few angles than at full speed when your angle and distance from the incident might not be the best.

People seem to have this strange opinion that multiple angles makes the judgement of forward passes more difficult. Completely disagree, used correctly it can make it far easier.

And there's always the option for a 'ref's call' decision if the VR doesn't feel he can call it.

Always amuses me when people say it's impossible to judge forward passes.

At times, it's blatantly obvious the movement of a player's hands when passing is forwards. A video ref should be allowed to rule out tries where there's obvious evidence of a forward pass. If there's any doubt it should simply stand. It's no more ridiculous than awarding tries with 'benefit of the doubt' for getting the ball down when not one single camera angle shows the ball touching the ground

I know this. Im sorry, i probably didnt make my point as clearly as i could have. My point being that if you are tracking both the players AND the ball you can indeed judge a forward pass accurately. im fully aware that they are not judged relative to the point on the pitch at which the ball is passed.

Like I said, if Sky can project computer graphics onto the pitch, live, which appear to remain static as the camera moves, then why can't the position of a player, and the relative motion of the ball be tracked in a similar way?

Exactly, accurate tracking technology is already used by many superleague teams, (showing not only distance covered but trajectory tracing also) all thats missing is another tracking device in the ball.

The Brent Webb is the best Quarter Back in the game.

The reason that the VR can easily rule on a player in an offside position is that he has a 2D frame of reference to judge it by - the pitch. If the Vr can plainly see that when the ball was passed, the receiver was a yard ahead of the passer, it is not a matter of debate, but a simple call.

It is completely unlike forward passes, because the 2D frame of reference - the pitch - is 100% irrelevant.

Having said that, there are plenty of examples in a season where a VR could clearly confirm and judge a pass forward. I don't believe the "camera angles" thing is the true reason. I reckon the true reason is that it would be unworkable. Let's take the Wigan v Bulls "wide to West" try - if that was referred to the VR, it would take about a week before he had had a good look at each and every pass since the last PTB, and that's the reason they won't do it, too many things for the VR to tackle within a reasonable timescale.

I've just had this great idea. Why don't we let the touch judges earn their corn and actually MAKE THE DECISION and not just suggest to the referee that a forward pass has been made. At the moment there is no reason, other than standing behind the posts for goal kicks, for them to be anywhere near the pitch.

PITT THE ELDER

A frustrating thing about the Sunday was the Frenchy ref, twice he was going to make a decision but let the play run on until a try was scored and then immediately scuttled up to the video referee. If he sees it call it and don't rely on a try being scored to pull you out of the brown stuff.

I am of the opinion that the video referee is a failed experiment...

1. there is no way that the RFL can afford to have a VR at every game (they can barely afford decent touch judges)
2. 1 means that the game is played to 2 sets of rules
3. It gives the defending side valuable recovery time in what might be a tight game
4. even the video ref makes monumental f* ups!

So, the answer drop the VR and let us fans get on with bemoaning the injustice when we see the replay. Then either go with 1 ref or employ 2 refs on the field.

P.S. Call me old fashioned, but I also fail to see how professional refs has enhanced the quality of decisions



P.P.S. OOOPS forgot the original post. Yes, technology could track the ball but you'd also need location tags on all the players and a set of samples of the passing players location leading up to the pass to be able to calculate the vectors needed to make an accurate decision. Oh, and (economically priced) location devices don't tend to be overly accurate. Maybe one day!

Unfortunately most of the said Touch judges are not fit for purpose.

Did you see the Warrington game this weekend?

Warrington missed a relatively easy conversion, one T.J got it right the other (the old looking guy – grey hair, stuck his flag up!)

If they can’t manage that, how the hell can they assist the Ref!

With better quality training? (available when the RFL lose the cost of full time refs!!)

This has been going on since the game began (and is an inevitable consequence of two observers looking at the same event from different viewpoints). It's why there's a specific clause in the rules on how to address this very situation (and that is: the ref decides)

But there's an easy solution to this one. On match day, you fix an array of extra high power light sabres fixed to the crossbar pointing straight up. Whenever there's a goal kick you switch them on. If the kick is good, the ball is burst by the laser, if it makes it in one piece, then it missed. This would work, definitely.

That's mad, think of the cost. then calls are like fifty quid each

According to Shaun McRae there is no momentum rule, heard him say it in commentary at the weekend, I would much sooner take his word for it than Stevo.

I agree that we (and the ref) should be getting alot more from the touch judges, some of the decisions they make/don't make, are just cringingly embarrassing.

To have a "momentum" rule would suggest that a player's mass has an effect on the direction of the ball whilst passed as momentum = mass x velocity. It doesn't.

However a player's forward motion (velocity) whilst carrying the ball does have an effect on the direction of the ball whilst passed which can make the ball appear to travel forward relative to the pitch markings even though it's clear at the point of release the player has passed it behind himself. Which is why the rule is relative to the player not the ground because otherwise you'd have a pretty static game.

The Notes to the RFL Operational rules do refer to "momentum". Strictly it might not be a "momentum rule" as such, but it seems valid to refer to that way?

10 KnockOn & Forward Pass


Deliberate 1. A player shall be penalised if he deliberately knocks on or passes forward.

Accidental 2. If, after knocking-on accidentally, the player knocking-on regains or kicks the ball before it touches the ground, a goal post, cross bar or an opponent, then play shall be allowed to proceed.
Otherwise play shall stop and a scrum shall be formed except after the fifth play-the-ball.

Charge-down 3. To charge-down a kick is permissible and is not a knock-on.

Heading the ball 4. It is illegal to head the ball in a forward direction.

NOTES


Direction of Pass 1. The direction of a pass is relative to the player making it and not to the actual path relative to the ground. A player running towards his opponents’ goal line may throw the ball towards a colleague who is behind him but because of the thrower’s own momentum the ball travels forward relative to the ground. This is not a forward pass as the thrower has not
passed the ball forward in relation to himself. This is particularly noticeable when a running player makes a high, lobbed pass.