Andy Gilder is right, if the ball has gone backwards then Phelps isn't offside and if he's run back behind the point of the pass then he's put himself back onside anyway.

According to the RFL guide to the rules -
"the ball has to be passed backwards. It can be passed as many times as you like until a player is tackled in possession"

Thanks for clearing that up, is that the same rule for a kick?I know if the kicker doesn't get in front of the offside players they have to give the defender 10 meters if neither can be achieved, if the attacking player returns behind the line of the kick is he then deemed onside?

Apologies for the slightly long winded question

Now go read the actual rules, rather than the guide to the rules. I'll save you some time, section 10 is the bit you want.

Ok I'll bite. Whether or not you agree that forward passing is more beneficial to the attacking side than incorrect ptb, why does an incorrect ptb result in a penalty whereas a forward pass only results in a scrum?

Illegal play the ball doesn't end up breaking the defensive line unless you have an incredible turn of pace from a standing start, howeverr some forward passes allow the receiver a metre or so advantage in a movement that is already going forward at pace.

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are trolling, and I have no wish for you to bite anything of mine.

Generally an incorrect ptb ends up in a scrum when the ref thinks it wasn't deliberate. The same as a forward pass.

I'm sorry? A quick play the ball doesn't break up the defensive line? A forward pass only allows the receiver a metre or so advantage if he's running into a gap. Sort your defence and he's not getting through anyway.

I still don't see this evidence that forward passes are so much more beneficial to the attack than other issues. A scrum is a perfectly acceptable punishment for accidentally passing forward, especially as a scrum means almost certain possession for the other team. The fact that some are missed by officials is a separate issue to that of the punishment itself, also, as MjM pointed out some "forward passes" are not forward and merely not understood/not cared about by partisan fans.

The simple question is, if 10,000 people from every point in the ground can see a forward pass, why can the relevant TJ and/or ref both be the only people in the ground who don't see it?

I would therefore put it another way. What is the role of the TJ in relation to the blatant forward pass? We often hear that the ref is absolved from blame in many cases as "no call came from the TJ". But if the ref defers in those cases to a TJ, then that doesn't make it much better; no competent TJ could feasibly miss all the baltant forward passes that everyone else sees. The question to me is, what is the reason why the TJs so frequently make no call? I am not a conspiracy theorist and I do not believe that all TJs are incompetent or blind, but am convinced beyond any doubt that on many occasions they do regularly see well forward passes, yet do not call them, and the easy solution would be to ask them why. A video analysis session of one weekend's games would do the trick. An explanation would be obtained why so many forward passes went undetected. I honestly can't even speculate on what the reason is, but there is no doubt at all in my mind that TJs regularly do no call forward passes that they see as forward. It would be illogical to conclude anything else. Occam and all that.


I'm with you on that one. The move which always leads to a try is the very short forward pass, to the man who is already through the hole by a metre, and is therefore undefendable. That's the killer. I believe an exception should be made to the general "VR can't rule on a forward pass" for that particular pass, for the reason that it is both (a) extremely difficult for the ref to see, as his view is by definition obscured by the bodies around the pass, and the distance travelled is so short, and (b) of the many we see on TV replays, it does seem a category of pass that is obvious regardless of the general problem of angles etc. The VR should of course be directed not to disallow the try unless he was convinced beyond reasonable doubt. I think this would be an improvement in the game.

The Twitter refs Q&A is an education. For one thing, we hear Eddie mantra-ing every game that it is impossible to judge a forward pass on video. If so, how come on one of the Twitter answers, the refs said they had had a look at the video and yes, a couple of the passes not given forward were forward. Now, these are the same guys that ref, and video ref. If they cannot judge a forward pass from th multifarious angles Sky provide, then how on earth can they say definitively after having watched whatever tehse videos were, that yes those passes were forward?

It is a perfect example of why Eddie's mantra (and the rule that the VR can't look for a forward pass) is ridiculous. Of bloody course he can, and should. It is again often parroted that it may look forward from one camera angle, but OK from another, and "that's why" we don't let the VR decide. Come again? If that were the situation in any given case, then obviously the VR would not call the pass forward, as there was plenty of doubt.

Him - I know you're not trolling, just an interesting argumentative discussion. The bit about it being accidental is fine but I don't believe a deliberate forward pass even gets more than a scrum. I guess the next time a try is scored against you from a forward pass that you won't be annoyed about it then?

Ferocious Aardvark - you're bang on the money regarding the short forward passes although I've witnessed slightly longer ones as well.

Even reading everything on the thread I'm still convinced teams gain more from forward passing than incorrect ptb, but as a HKR fan what would I know (magic weekend vs FC anyone)

Him - More evidence of forward passes leading directly to trys...

"RT @KCCLARKY have you had chance to review the forward passes (plural) from Friday's game between Hull FC v Wigan Warriors?"

". @KCCLARKY Yes..First Wigan try was forward from Tomkins and also Hull’s 3rd try there is forward pass from Horne in build up - RS"

Two in a single match. Yes they evened out here, but that isn't always the case.

Is it acceptable to just let this continue? According to Tim Roby:

"@hullfc1997 A pass can look very different from one replay/angle to the next so they’re not conclusive. TR"

If they cannot use technology to stop them, when they are spotted, shouldn't there be a harsher punishment considering that many of them lead to 4 points?

Imagine if you were caught doing a forward pass in your own half. 2 easy points to the opposition and receive the next kick off. That would be interesting.

The challenge is still catching it, not how we punish it.

FWIW, I think forwards passes happen in only a fraction of the quantity most fans believe. The punishment of loss of possession via a scrum is sufficient.

I'd be happier if they could be caught more often and leave it as a scrum, but considering all the evidence points that it's too difficult to catch, increasing the punishment in some way is the only other option to use as a deterent.

Yes lots of fans shout forward when it's not, I agree with you there, which adds more weight to it being hard to spot as mentioned above.

However, when they are missed, at crucial times it can lead directly to a try.

The combination of the difficulty in judging it and the direct impact it can have on the scoreline means that this basic rule of our game often leads to the most arguments come the final whistle, especially when players/coaches/officials admit they missed it after the event.

But that brings me right back to my main point about why the hell can't the VR have a look at forward passes. HOW DO THEY KNOW these passes were forward? Because if the proposition that "you can't tell from a video" is true, then the only reply the refs could give is "well, we can't tell if it was forward or not because video evidence doesn't help a ref decide".

If video evidence can't be and shouldn't be used for the stated reasons, then how do we account for these admissions?

(The answer is, of course, that I'm right, and in many cases it is perfectly clear from the video whether or not a pass was forward).

Any update on the proposed trail of the GPS chip in the ball that was happening down in Oz? This was supposed to be able to distinguish if the ball was released backwards and would alert the video ref/4th official who would then alert the ref.

Deliberate forward pass was generally identified by the ball being released to a player already in front of the passer. This is basically covered by the offside rule as well and the offence is generally given for that. I have seen these given.

Deliberate knock on is hardly ever seen now as the identifying indicator was the hand position of the defender. If your hand is facing down you have no intention of catching the ball....result, players go for the ball with their hand up/sideways on so therefore no indication of it being deliberate.