How can YOU tell?

Were you in line with play at the time, or, as I suspect, looking at a tv screen through lager filled glasses after the forward pass dominated Hull display against a far superior KR team who let you win?

So why are you NOT bagging the player (who was it?) who threw this "alleged forward pass" (in YOUR opinion) and the other player (who was this?) who was in front (i.e offside) to recieve this.

Next who was the coach/assistant coach (who were these?) that COACHED them to pass that way and why are you not bagging them for their terrible coaching technique?

All in all then I would suggest they all are (by YOUR own superior standards) useless and should not be allowed anywhere near a rugby league field.


One day, and on these forums it will never happen due to the high level of myopia, people will realise that everyone involved in the game make mistakes/ errors/wrong decisions and that it is part and parcel of the game overall.

And as for "defending them",

a) which "them" am I defending against what ?

b) Why should I stop pointing out things and asking questions?

All seems very fair and reasonable, are you sure you're in the right place?

.............When Leeds pack up.

I agree entirely. Cheating is the lowest of the low I agree. But unfortunately it's in Wigan's nature to play that way.



Your points would have been valid had this been a normal borderline forward pass or even one at full speed. No one minds too much when mistakes are made in the heat of the moment. However it was one from a player moving across the field with little or no forward movement. The pass leaves the hands blatantly forward. The gleeful cries of hundreds of Wigan fans of "Oh my god, he's going to give it" tell it all. There was nothing remotely unclear about it, it was one of the most obvious decisions all day and none of the officials had the bottle to call on it.

'Alleged forward pass'? Alleged? It's like the other famous one this season at Leeds. Incidents which leave you scratching your head at just how they can be so incompetent as to miss these things.

I think if it isn't clearly back, it's forward. No flat passing. No Momentum. If it ain't back, it's forward.

the rules them selves are not in any doubt. www.therfl.co.uk/a_guide_to_the_ ... rward_pass seems simple to me. the problem is the standards of officials.

the rules them selves are not in any doubt. www.therfl.co.uk/a_guide_to_the_ ... rward_pass seems simple to me. the problem is the standards of officials.

The key part in the rules is the definition of forward.

"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."

This is what Stevo refers to as the momentum rule. It's simple GCSE physics. This is also the reason many forward passes are missed and why Refs and Linesmen are told to look at the hands rather than the flight of the ball. FWIW the pass for Charnleys try was forward, i'm just trying to explain why so many are missed.

ive heard the 'look at the hands' school of thought from several refs over the years. i fail to see how that helps really. if anything the 'momentum' rule is just as easy to judge as the ground relative interpretation a lot of people seem to think is the rule.
if they guy who catches the ball is in front of the guy passing it, its a forward pass. the result is the same. if the guy catching the ball is in front of the passer when he catches it, then the ball must have traveled forward relative to the passer. thats much easier than looking at the hands and trying to judge if it looks like a forward pass up till the point it leaves the passers hands. i dont understand where confusion arises.

That only works assuming the guy who passed the ball continues running at the same speed as when he passed it. If the bloke who passed it stops, is tackled or changes speed or direction then that theory would not work.

Why not just say if you can't see it go backward, then it's a forward pass, if it's flat, it's forward, if its marginal, it's forward.

Because it's not that simple. It never ceases to amaze me that so many RL fans don't understand the forward pass rule. There is no 'momentum rule', but the momentum of the players has a lot to do with why the ball might actually travel forwards relative to the ground, or a static object. The ball only has to travel backwards relative to the players.

rlThis video explains it very well.rl

Actually, that's a good video, thanks.