I think the easiest thing to do is to stop people who don't understand what a forward pass actually is from watching the game.

The idea that you would call every ball that moves forward in relation to the ground would turn our game in to an utter farce with no passing on the move at all. Other than that though it's a great idea.

The ball travels forward and it isn't a forward pass ?....Have I stumbled upon a Monty Python Appreciation site by any chance ?

No, I think you may have stumbled on a 'people with a basic understanding of physics' society. Get in a car, drive forwards and gently throw a tennis ball backwards - that ball definitely went backwards, but it will land forward of the point it was thrown from (unless you throw it at a greater speed than the car is travelling) so technically the ball has travelled forwards but you would never argue it was a forward throw. The only relevant point about passes in rugby is the direction on release, the balls movement relative to the ground and markings, and where the ball ends up compared to where it was released is utterly irrelevant.

How is this still debated?

Nope, you have stumbled upon the real world, it may help with pictures

rlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v

I do like the momentum rule discussions.

People are surprised when they discover that a large proportion of people don't understand physics. It's like a magical world of pixie dust and fairies where up is down and left is right.

I'd say the forward pass is the hardest decision that a ref has to make a call on. Given his angle to the play, relative speed of movement etc.

You could put technology on the balls to give these rulings. It would simply require every pass to show either a 0 or decelaration when leaving the hands, but no idea how clunky or heavy that technology would be. It would have to be installed internally within the ball and probably have several sensors around the ground. Not to mention a pretty quick computer to do several computations a second and report back to the ref.

Or we could just let the ref make the best call they can.

Rugby Union TMO's are allowed to rule on forward passes without using the technology you mention above.



*ss*

In years to come technology will be available that will be able to calculate the forward velocity of the pass and angle. It's probably available now but would be too costly to implement, but it will happen.

GPS in the ball? ??

GPS is not enough. It's the change in speed that is needed. A ball going backwards. Will still showaas forwards on GPS relative to the release point. You could tag every player to to use GPS. Then it would be about the passing player staying ahead of the ball. But I'm not sure how accurate GPS is?

We'd end up with players stuck down a narrow country lane in Burtonwood.

It was intended as a joke.
But I like your joke about Burtonwood.

I remember the great interest that was shown when a company i worked for installed GPS trackers in its wagons. There was great excitement as the transport manager demonstrated a particular vehicle being monitored as it travelled down the A23 to Brighton. The mood was somewhat subdued when a driver brought his keys into the office ....the vehicle they were supposedly watching was parked up in the yard 250 miles away from Brighton !


I am sure a ref would be just as good as expensive technology.

I thought the "GPS in the ball" idea had been trialed in Australia. If the ball goes forward a little light lit up in the VR/officials booth ? I take it, it didnt work.

We appear to have wandered off thread somewhat and in an attempt to retrieve it, I thought the general attitude of the players showed a marked improvement from the Saints game. I have sometimes wondered how effective a three week warm weather training session on the other side of the world (or otherwise) is, especially when players show little in the way of playmaking and try-line crossing in the first game of a season following it! With the exception of Atkins, ALL players were impressive against a good Leeds side and our defence against Burrows, Sinfield and Maguire was spot on. Ormsby impressed me by not letting the inexperience and minor errors he made influence his game. He continued with his head held high and carried on attacking and defending very well. England reminds me of an "old school" pack player which I love. He was solid in defence and made good attacking gains whenever he was handed the ball. I look forward to more of the same. Westwood, Hill, GOB & Grix all impressed as always and Waterhouse has so far (for me) been our most improved player from last year. I would have said he needs his hair cutting and to get rid of that ugly beard thing, but if that would be in substitution for form, then long may they stay. Personally, because I like Atkins, I would keep playing him so that his confidence returns. I think an Atkins hat-trick is only a game away and then we will watch him fly! COYW!

The problem is that we are only one game away from London, so an Atkins hat-trick there isn't really going to prove much!!