That is largely impossible & I would argue unnecessary as there isn't, in reality, that much of a problem. The problem is largely with the fans.

At the end of the day it is all subjective anyway; even things which are ostensibly totally objective, like a ball touching the ground for instance, are all, "in the [very subjective] opinion of the referee".

Momentum is a product of mass x velocity. It is also a vector which has magnitude and direction.
Mass is the rugby ball.
Velocity the speed given to the ball when thrown/passed.
Magnitude - size, distance etc used for comparison.
Direction is direction the ball travels.
Since the ball is an inanimate object with so means of self propulsion it can only travel in the direction it is thrown/passed.
There can be no momentum rule in rugby.
The clue in the rule is" relative to the player" - backwards from the throwing/passing player - only way, all the rest is tosh.

But obviously, there is a problem, if there is a problem with the fans, often with the players, very often with the coaches even to the extent of regular fines for open criticism. If, in reality, there isn't that much of a problem - then what's all that about?

As for the "momentum" rule - it's easy. Viewing the pass from the side, just imagine obliterating the pitch, obliterate the markings, the stands, obliterate from your mind any point of reference. However fast or slow the player's little legs may be going, have him suspended in the dead centre of your mental screen, legs thrashing furiously. Then, you do not have to take his forward motion into account, you don't have to consider the pitch, or the lines, the stands, the fans, you can ignore other players, you can ignore everything else. You can concentrate 100% on the only thing that matters, does the ball go forward from the hands, or does it not.

I suspect, if you re-think that bit, you may find that, as Isaac Newton suggested, objects can change direction due to external influences applied to them.
That, in our particular case of the rugby ball, would include the forward momentum of the player making the pass which would be imparted into the ball and also [if applicable] any wind, not to mention any external object [other player] which may be in the way.

If the players momentum is taken into consideration any ball would travel at the same speed in the same direction as the player, ie the ball is carried by the player. As soon as the player releases the ball it falls to the ground, no momentum.
External influences on the ball are tosh, the initial momentum is initiated by the player throwing/passing the ball. Any influences after the ball is thrown/passed changes the direction of the travel and possibly velocity, creating a new vector - knock on etc.,

Try dropping a ball out of the window of a moving car. Guarantee it won't drop straight to ground. It will carry on moving forwards while dropping to ground. Basic physics.

]


Which is exactly why momentum is taken into account - you couldn't play the game otherwise, unless you stopped everytime you passed the ball.

The ball is [ipassed[/i backwards by the player's hands but goes forward due to player's momemtum - the pass is ok [see notes in laws], aka Stevo's 'momentum rule'.
Ball is passed backwards but is blown forward by the wind - the pass is ok[ note in the laws].
These are two specific instances which are mentioned within the laws of the game to show that external influences are taken into account.
It is the direction of the pass which is important [ie, it is not [ithrown[/i forward] and not where the ball finishes up. In the opinion of the ref, natch!

Should look at players hands, wrists, shoulders and body position to determine whether a ball has been passed forward. Travelling forward is different.

All I wish to see stamped out in the matter are the blatant ones for example, Sammut runs diagonal at the line, straightens up, slows down then throws a forward pass, he's slowed right down to engage the defender but still passed forward.

Example 2 - Sammut runs diagonal at the line, straights up then throws the pass without slowing down, ball goes slightly forward.

Example 2 is momentum, Example 1 is just forward.

What rubbish. When I fly my Lear jet home to tot towers tonight, travelling at 300mph, I will turn off the engine the moment I hit the entrance to my drive. What's the chance of me stopping within my 10m of driveway? Or I might make a fly-by to impress the neighbours; if tigercub is exercising the fox hounds in the gardens I will drop a rugby ball vertically from 100 feet. The initial direction is not forward by the RL rules but I would wager it has more chance of landing in Bingley than my garden.

Not necessarily, the ball could still have impetus & will travel forward as a result. Get in your car, drive it 100 mph at a wall, do not wear a seat belt. I can be fairly sure the car will stop but would be surprised if you were still sat in your seat.

Your hitting a solid object there. I'm talking about a player naturally slowing down as they reach the defensive line to the point they are almost jogging (they've drawn the player). Then throwing the pass. So your example is a little invalid, however your car example could be used for my example 1.

the momentum rule is purely an inaccurate label for what is a pretty complex subject. For example the black and golden showers rule is a label for the fact that you can measure the amount of over-debate of a topic on this forum by the degree of Tigertots p@ss taking.

It's strange how some debates do conjure up a strong sense of dêja vu...but without wishing to be disrespectful, sometimes the statements are sooo daft, and demonstrably untrue, you just can't not respond.