Blues v Highlanders
-
or they make it less subjective and just say it cant go forward at all, so yes, people will have to pass a long way behind them when they are running at speed...but less argument
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
or they make it less subjective and just say it cant go forward at all, so yes, people will have to pass a long way behind them when they are running at speed...but less argument
Pretty much every pass where a player is running will be forward if that's the standard. Will only be able to pass the ball when pretty much standing still.
-
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
or they make it less subjective and just say it cant go forward at all, so yes, people will have to pass a long way behind them when they are running at speed...but less argument
Pretty much every pass where a player is running will be forward if that's the standard. Will only be able to pass the ball when pretty much standing still.
@kirwan thats not true, basic physics mean you just have to pass it further backwards to offset the the running players momentum, so support players cant run as flat
personally i think id rather that was the case then continued arguing over "cleary forward out of the hand" or "clearly backwards out of the hand"...when in reality neither is clear, and the refs having to make subjective decisions which is going to put people off watching
-
@kirwan thats not true, basic physics mean you just have to pass it further backwards to offset the the running players momentum, so support players cant run as flat
personally i think id rather that was the case then continued arguing over "cleary forward out of the hand" or "clearly backwards out of the hand"...when in reality neither is clear, and the refs having to make subjective decisions which is going to put people off watching
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan thats not true, basic physics mean you just have to pass it further backwards to offset the the running players momentum, so support players cant run as flat
personally i think id rather that was the case then continued arguing over "cleary forward out of the hand" or "clearly backwards out of the hand"...when in reality neither is clear, and the refs having to make subjective decisions which is going to put people off watching
Watch the video posted above to see how wrong your post is.
-
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan thats not true, basic physics mean you just have to pass it further backwards to offset the the running players momentum, so support players cant run as flat
personally i think id rather that was the case then continued arguing over "cleary forward out of the hand" or "clearly backwards out of the hand"...when in reality neither is clear, and the refs having to make subjective decisions which is going to put people off watching
Watch the video posted above to see how wrong your post is.
@kirwan i did, so you're saying its impossible for them to pass it ruther backwards?
-
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
or they make it less subjective and just say it cant go forward at all, so yes, people will have to pass a long way behind them when they are running at speed...but less argument
Pretty much every pass where a player is running will be forward if that's the standard. Will only be able to pass the ball when pretty much standing still.
@kirwan said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
or they make it less subjective and just say it cant go forward at all, so yes, people will have to pass a long way behind them when they are running at speed...but less argument
Pretty much every pass where a player is running will be forward if that's the standard. Will only be able to pass the ball when pretty much standing still.
Or you won’t be allowed to make long passes because they appear worse.
One way of judging is whether you would call the pass forward if caught by a player behind you but close by.
The thing that annoys me most about that call is that the understanding of why the ball can be passed legally but forward relative to the ground is 101 stuff for refs. WR even went as far as to make that video for spectators so they could understand the refs call. Apparently NZs best ref (judging by RWC appointments) doesn’t understand.
Apart from that we had the spectacle of a fantastic try of great skill and speed wiped off the record. -
@kirwan thats not true, basic physics mean you just have to pass it further backwards to offset the the running players momentum, so support players cant run as flat
personally i think id rather that was the case then continued arguing over "cleary forward out of the hand" or "clearly backwards out of the hand"...when in reality neither is clear, and the refs having to make subjective decisions which is going to put people off watching
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
personally i think id rather that was the case then continued arguing over "cleary forward out of the hand" or "clearly backwards out of the hand"...when in reality neither is clear, and the refs having to make subjective decisions which is going to put people off watching
mate, if you think that'll take out the controversy you're completely wrong. All it will do is shift to a TMO trying to figure out if a parallax skewed pass travelled forward over the ground. It'll be a disaster.
also, you'll have the deepest backlines you've ever seen. Flat support will be gone, it'll be all so deep it's not funny. Defenses will love it - and the last thing we need in modern rugby is more defensive advantages.
Edit: the concept that you can give the ball to a player behind you is spot on, and should be maintained.
@winger - have a look at where Akira is when Rieko catches the ball. The ball has gone backwards a long way relative to him, unless he turned on the gas after throwing it
-
@kirwan i did, so you're saying its impossible for them to pass it ruther backwards?
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan i did, so you're saying its impossible for them to pass it ruther backwards?
Players could do. But it would totally change rugby as we know it. I prefer a few debatable calls. And even if the rules were changed we would still have contentious decisions
I just accept now that refs make (wrong?) decisions I strongly disagree with. A fact of life
-
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
personally i think id rather that was the case then continued arguing over "cleary forward out of the hand" or "clearly backwards out of the hand"...when in reality neither is clear, and the refs having to make subjective decisions which is going to put people off watching
mate, if you think that'll take out the controversy you're completely wrong. All it will do is shift to a TMO trying to figure out if a parallax skewed pass travelled forward over the ground. It'll be a disaster.
also, you'll have the deepest backlines you've ever seen. Flat support will be gone, it'll be all so deep it's not funny. Defenses will love it - and the last thing we need in modern rugby is more defensive advantages.
Edit: the concept that you can give the ball to a player behind you is spot on, and should be maintained.
@winger - have a look at where Akira is when Rieko catches the ball. The ball has gone backwards a long way relative to him, unless he turned on the gas after throwing it
@nzzp said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
personally i think id rather that was the case then continued arguing over "cleary forward out of the hand" or "clearly backwards out of the hand"...when in reality neither is clear, and the refs having to make subjective decisions which is going to put people off watching
mate, if you think that'll take out the controversy you're completely wrong. All it will do is shift to a TMO trying to figure out if a parallax skewed pass travelled forward over the ground. It'll be a disaster.
and everyone is really enjoying this shit, at least there are graphics for a straight line across the field the could use
@winger said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan i did, so you're saying its impossible for them to pass it ruther backwards?
Players could do. But it would totally change rugby as we know it. I prefer a few debatable calls. And even if the rules were changed we would still have contentious decisions
I just accept now that refs make (wrong?) decisions I strongly disagree with. A fact of life
fair enough, thought there was just some chat about alternatives
I'll move on, just glad it didn;t effect the result
-
@kirwan i did, so you're saying its impossible for them to pass it ruther backwards?
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan i did, so you're saying its impossible for them to pass it ruther backwards?
In the case of throwing the ball over your head while running forward just how far back would you like the receiver to be or the pass to be?
Rieko was a long way behind his brother when the pass was made anyway.
The law is simple. You can’t pass the ball toward the opponents line. Nothing about whether the ball can’t land or be caught closer. Judge the pass and only the pass. If it isn’t obviously being passed forward then it gets the benefit of the doubt. -
@nzzp said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
personally i think id rather that was the case then continued arguing over "cleary forward out of the hand" or "clearly backwards out of the hand"...when in reality neither is clear, and the refs having to make subjective decisions which is going to put people off watching
mate, if you think that'll take out the controversy you're completely wrong. All it will do is shift to a TMO trying to figure out if a parallax skewed pass travelled forward over the ground. It'll be a disaster.
and everyone is really enjoying this shit, at least there are graphics for a straight line across the field the could use
@winger said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan i did, so you're saying its impossible for them to pass it ruther backwards?
Players could do. But it would totally change rugby as we know it. I prefer a few debatable calls. And even if the rules were changed we would still have contentious decisions
I just accept now that refs make (wrong?) decisions I strongly disagree with. A fact of life
fair enough, thought there was just some chat about alternatives
I'll move on, just glad it didn;t effect the result
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
and everyone is really enjoying this shit, at least there are graphics for a straight line across the field the could use
This is blowing up because the call was so badly wrong. The controversial ones to referee are where the pass gets thrown in or immediately before contact, and that's where 'backwards out of the hands' is so important. Someone decelerating makes it look way way worse (even if it is technically correct).
This is just a howler. Player running, throws a big spiral pass backwards, keeps running, gets hit and the ball is still always behind him. It's just a no brainer.
-
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan i did, so you're saying its impossible for them to pass it ruther backwards?
In the case of throwing the ball over your head while running forward just how far back would you like the receiver to be or the pass to be?
Rieko was a long way behind his brother when the pass was made anyway.
The law is simple. You can’t pass the ball toward the opponents line. Nothing about whether the ball can’t land or be caught closer. Judge the pass and only the pass. If it isn’t obviously being passed forward then it gets the benefit of the doubt.@crucial there is somewhere between directly over your head and flat
I understand the rules, its the subjective aspect of "out of the hands" that annoys me like all the subjective rules, we've all probably watched it loads of times each and there is still disagreement of if it was clearly backwards out of the hands or not
I'm just tired of the solution to reffing mistakes being for them to get better, too much human error and subjective decisions, i imagine the field had lines in the first place take decisions clear, in or out
maybe i should just be happy i got everyone agreeing to disagree with me
@nzzp said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
and everyone is really enjoying this shit, at least there are graphics for a straight line across the field the could use
This is blowing up because the call was so badly wrong. The controversial ones to referee are where the pass gets thrown in or immediately before contact, and that's where 'backwards out of the hands' is so important. Someone decelerating makes it look way way worse (even if it is technically correct).
This is just a howler. Player running, throws a big spiral pass backwards, keeps running, gets hit and the ball is still always behind him. It's just a no brainer.
i agree but other dont so it cant be so clear and obvious
-
@crucial there is somewhere between directly over your head and flat
I understand the rules, its the subjective aspect of "out of the hands" that annoys me like all the subjective rules, we've all probably watched it loads of times each and there is still disagreement of if it was clearly backwards out of the hands or not
I'm just tired of the solution to reffing mistakes being for them to get better, too much human error and subjective decisions, i imagine the field had lines in the first place take decisions clear, in or out
maybe i should just be happy i got everyone agreeing to disagree with me
@nzzp said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
and everyone is really enjoying this shit, at least there are graphics for a straight line across the field the could use
This is blowing up because the call was so badly wrong. The controversial ones to referee are where the pass gets thrown in or immediately before contact, and that's where 'backwards out of the hands' is so important. Someone decelerating makes it look way way worse (even if it is technically correct).
This is just a howler. Player running, throws a big spiral pass backwards, keeps running, gets hit and the ball is still always behind him. It's just a no brainer.
i agree but other dont so it cant be so clear and obvious
@kiwiwomble The backwards out of the hand directive was an effort to simplify these sorts of ruling (mainly for the impossibility of the physics involved).
That's how it's ruled now, and they even got that part wrong. As said above, a howler.
If you watch the video you'll see that what tyou asking for is basically netball, you'd have to stop in order to pass.
-
@crucial there is somewhere between directly over your head and flat
I understand the rules, its the subjective aspect of "out of the hands" that annoys me like all the subjective rules, we've all probably watched it loads of times each and there is still disagreement of if it was clearly backwards out of the hands or not
I'm just tired of the solution to reffing mistakes being for them to get better, too much human error and subjective decisions, i imagine the field had lines in the first place take decisions clear, in or out
maybe i should just be happy i got everyone agreeing to disagree with me
@nzzp said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
and everyone is really enjoying this shit, at least there are graphics for a straight line across the field the could use
This is blowing up because the call was so badly wrong. The controversial ones to referee are where the pass gets thrown in or immediately before contact, and that's where 'backwards out of the hands' is so important. Someone decelerating makes it look way way worse (even if it is technically correct).
This is just a howler. Player running, throws a big spiral pass backwards, keeps running, gets hit and the ball is still always behind him. It's just a no brainer.
i agree but other dont so it cant be so clear and obvious
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@crucial there is somewhere between directly over your head and flat
I understand the rules, its the subjective aspect of "out of the hands" that annoys me like all the subjective rules, we've all probably watched it loads of times each and there is still disagreement of if it was clearly backwards out of the hands or not
I'm just tired of the solution to reffing mistakes being for them to get better, too much human error and subjective decisions, i imagine the field had lines in the first place take decisions clear, in or out
maybe i should just be happy i got everyone agreeing to disagree with me
We’ve had these discussions before but the easiest way to judge this particular instance is the velocity of the passing and catching players. If they remained relatively constant and the catcher was the same distance behind the passer through the travel then quite obviously the ball was passed back. Physically impossible for that ball to have been passed forward unless Rieko put 15 metres on his brother in three steps.
-
@crucial there is somewhere between directly over your head and flat
I understand the rules, its the subjective aspect of "out of the hands" that annoys me like all the subjective rules, we've all probably watched it loads of times each and there is still disagreement of if it was clearly backwards out of the hands or not
I'm just tired of the solution to reffing mistakes being for them to get better, too much human error and subjective decisions, i imagine the field had lines in the first place take decisions clear, in or out
maybe i should just be happy i got everyone agreeing to disagree with me
@nzzp said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
and everyone is really enjoying this shit, at least there are graphics for a straight line across the field the could use
This is blowing up because the call was so badly wrong. The controversial ones to referee are where the pass gets thrown in or immediately before contact, and that's where 'backwards out of the hands' is so important. Someone decelerating makes it look way way worse (even if it is technically correct).
This is just a howler. Player running, throws a big spiral pass backwards, keeps running, gets hit and the ball is still always behind him. It's just a no brainer.
i agree but other dont so it cant be so clear and obvious
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
i agree but other dont so it cant be so clear and obvious
Fern's gonna Fern right?
People tend to be very one eyed when it comes to interpretation. This one surprises me because after watching the world rugby video, the only people who think that was the correct call are the TMO and people being wilfully obtuse.
-
@kiwiwomble The backwards out of the hand directive was an effort to simplify these sorts of ruling (mainly for the impossibility of the physics involved).
That's how it's ruled now, and they even got that part wrong. As said above, a howler.
If you watch the video you'll see that what tyou asking for is basically netball, you'd have to stop in order to pass.
@kirwan i was with you until the last line, thats just not true, as @Crucial said, you can throw it over your head and it wont go forward...and there is every angle between that and lateral/90 degrees, its not a case of a single degree off directly behind you and if will fly forward
@winger is right though, it would be a big change, maybe too big, too much to ask for player to run so much deeper
-
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@crucial there is somewhere between directly over your head and flat
I understand the rules, its the subjective aspect of "out of the hands" that annoys me like all the subjective rules, we've all probably watched it loads of times each and there is still disagreement of if it was clearly backwards out of the hands or not
I'm just tired of the solution to reffing mistakes being for them to get better, too much human error and subjective decisions, i imagine the field had lines in the first place take decisions clear, in or out
maybe i should just be happy i got everyone agreeing to disagree with me
We’ve had these discussions before but the easiest way to judge this particular instance is the velocity of the passing and catching players. If they remained relatively constant and the catcher was the same distance behind the passer through the travel then quite obviously the ball was passed back. Physically impossible for that ball to have been passed forward unless Rieko put 15 metres on his brother in three steps.
@crucial said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@crucial there is somewhere between directly over your head and flat
I understand the rules, its the subjective aspect of "out of the hands" that annoys me like all the subjective rules, we've all probably watched it loads of times each and there is still disagreement of if it was clearly backwards out of the hands or not
I'm just tired of the solution to reffing mistakes being for them to get better, too much human error and subjective decisions, i imagine the field had lines in the first place take decisions clear, in or out
maybe i should just be happy i got everyone agreeing to disagree with me
We’ve had these discussions before but the easiest way to judge this particular instance is the velocity of the passing and catching players. If they remained relatively constant and the catcher was the same distance behind the passer through the travel then quite obviously the ball was passed back. Physically impossible for that ball to have been passed forward unless Rieko put 15 metres on his brother in three steps.
that make sense, but surely we can see how our game has got too complicated when decisions have to be made on relative velocities
@nzzp said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
i agree but other dont so it cant be so clear and obvious
Fern's gonna Fern right?
People tend to be very one eyed when it comes to interpretation. This one surprises me because after watching the world rugby video, the only people who think that was the correct call are the TMO and people being wilfully obtuse.
does no one start to doubt themselves when someone trained and paid to do a job and comes up with a different answer?
-
@kirwan i was with you until the last line, thats just not true, as @Crucial said, you can throw it over your head and it wont go forward...and there is every angle between that and lateral/90 degrees, its not a case of a single degree off directly behind you and if will fly forward
@winger is right though, it would be a big change, maybe too big, too much to ask for player to run so much deeper
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan i was with you until the last line, thats just not true, as @Crucial said, you can throw it over your head and it wont go forward...and there is every angle between that and lateral/90 degrees, its not a case of a single degree off directly behind you and if will fly forward
@winger is right though, it would be a big change, maybe too big, too much to ask for player to run so much deeper
From memory, the video actually shows someone throwing it over their head and it travelling forward relative to the ground.
It's simple physics, the momentum of the player doesn't disappear from the ball when the player releases it.
-
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan i was with you until the last line, thats just not true, as @Crucial said, you can throw it over your head and it wont go forward...and there is every angle between that and lateral/90 degrees, its not a case of a single degree off directly behind you and if will fly forward
@winger is right though, it would be a big change, maybe too big, too much to ask for player to run so much deeper
From memory, the video actually shows someone throwing it over their head and it travelling forward relative to the ground.
It's simple physics, the momentum of the player doesn't disappear from the ball when the player releases it.
-
@crucial said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@crucial there is somewhere between directly over your head and flat
I understand the rules, its the subjective aspect of "out of the hands" that annoys me like all the subjective rules, we've all probably watched it loads of times each and there is still disagreement of if it was clearly backwards out of the hands or not
I'm just tired of the solution to reffing mistakes being for them to get better, too much human error and subjective decisions, i imagine the field had lines in the first place take decisions clear, in or out
maybe i should just be happy i got everyone agreeing to disagree with me
We’ve had these discussions before but the easiest way to judge this particular instance is the velocity of the passing and catching players. If they remained relatively constant and the catcher was the same distance behind the passer through the travel then quite obviously the ball was passed back. Physically impossible for that ball to have been passed forward unless Rieko put 15 metres on his brother in three steps.
that make sense, but surely we can see how our game has got too complicated when decisions have to be made on relative velocities
@nzzp said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
i agree but other dont so it cant be so clear and obvious
Fern's gonna Fern right?
People tend to be very one eyed when it comes to interpretation. This one surprises me because after watching the world rugby video, the only people who think that was the correct call are the TMO and people being wilfully obtuse.
does no one start to doubt themselves when someone trained and paid to do a job and comes up with a different answer?
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@crucial said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@crucial there is somewhere between directly over your head and flat
I understand the rules, its the subjective aspect of "out of the hands" that annoys me like all the subjective rules, we've all probably watched it loads of times each and there is still disagreement of if it was clearly backwards out of the hands or not
I'm just tired of the solution to reffing mistakes being for them to get better, too much human error and subjective decisions, i imagine the field had lines in the first place take decisions clear, in or out
maybe i should just be happy i got everyone agreeing to disagree with me
We’ve had these discussions before but the easiest way to judge this particular instance is the velocity of the passing and catching players. If they remained relatively constant and the catcher was the same distance behind the passer through the travel then quite obviously the ball was passed back. Physically impossible for that ball to have been passed forward unless Rieko put 15 metres on his brother in three steps.
that make sense, but surely we can see how our game has got too complicated when decisions have to be made on relative velocities
If, a second after the ball left the hand - the ball is behind the player's hands... it's a legal pass. Simple.
As somebody mentioned above - the only problems which should arise - is when the player hits another immediately after/during the act of passing... so they come to a standstill, or backwards, or just slower.I've always wondered about how it might work going the same path as cricket... use technology to resolve this. A GPS-or-similar tracker on the ball, and the player... compare relative velocities at the point of the ball leaving hands.
And I'm not seriously suggesting this - just raising it as a possibility, buying some chips, and sitting back to watch the shitstorm. -
@kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@kirwan i was with you until the last line, thats just not true, as @Crucial said, you can throw it over your head and it wont go forward...and there is every angle between that and lateral/90 degrees, its not a case of a single degree off directly behind you and if will fly forward
@winger is right though, it would be a big change, maybe too big, too much to ask for player to run so much deeper
From memory, the video actually shows someone throwing it over their head and it travelling forward relative to the ground.
It's simple physics, the momentum of the player doesn't disappear from the ball when the player releases it.
@kirwan i agree, its simple physics
