Hawkeye for forward passes?

[happy_tiger]

We had short guys passing to tall guys and vv since the game started - nothing new Hap.

Think if they went back to the old rule - if it goes forward - it's forward. Never mind the but it floated forward - the current players need to take that into account, the same as the old guys did.

Check your sarcasm meter Russ .....needs charging

 

[WT2K]

I get sports need to stick with the times but seriously how will they work out a pass that has floated forward to an intentional one.

The only way this could work is to not allow a ball to travel forward at all.

You mean the way it was for about 100 years.

But its too hard now , plus now you have short guys passing to tall guys , tall guys passing to short guys

Reckon if we went back to a ball being passed forward as a penalty things would change overnight

What about players not passing to the redhead! Need more rangas in the comp.

 

[happy_tiger]

I get sports need to stick with the times but seriously how will they work out a pass that has floated forward to an intentional one.

The only way this could work is to not allow a ball to travel forward at all.

You mean the way it was for about 100 years.

But its too hard now , plus now you have short guys passing to tall guys , tall guys passing to short guys

Reckon if we went back to a ball being passed forward as a penalty things would change overnight

What about players not passing to the redhead! Need more rangas in the comp.

On a serious note though , the current balls react horribly at times when affected by the elements

If the ball was slightly heavier we'd have far less issues

Must admit I preferred passing the older heavier balls ,...

 

[Tim Sheens]

Reckon if we went back to a ball being passed forward as a penalty things would change overnight

But that would be too simple and nobody can make money out of it.

 

[TigerSJ]

Just a suggestion....I think a simpler interpretation of a forward pass would be easier to adjudicate without involving further technology or slowing down the game. If the guy catching the ball is in front of the guy throwing it then the pass is ruled forward. That's it - simples!! You have to be behind or in line with the player that throws the pass when you catch it (or first touch it in the act of completing the catch). This shouldn't be any more difficult to the way we normally adjudicate off side calls in kicks.

 

[rustycage]

After 110 years we need technology to rule on forward passes? Please. Let's clear up stuff that matters. This whole ruck speed slow down alleged crushers, the shoulder charge fiasco, eye gouging and niggle is what spoils the spectacle. Forward passes we can live with. No matter the technology, it'll never work all of the time and the game will stop again, for longer. Sigh.😛ensive:

 

[TIGER]

NO................

 

[TIGER]

Just a suggestion....I think a simpler interpretation of a forward pass would be easier to adjudicate without involving further technology or slowing down the game. If the guy catching the ball is in front of the guy throwing it then the pass is ruled forward. That's it - simples!! You have to be behind or in line with the player that throws the pass when you catch it (or first touch it in the act of completing the catch). This shouldn't be any more difficult to the way we normally adjudicate off side calls in kicks.

I like this idea, take away judging if the ball travels forward and just adjudicate on the player being in line or behind the ball when it is passed.

Do we only use it in try scoring plays, the play leading to the try or the whole set of all the time?

Whatever system they go with it will have to be relayed to the ref on the run so he can pull it up within a few seconds.

 

[jirskyr]

Just a suggestion....I think a simpler interpretation of a forward pass would be easier to adjudicate without involving further technology or slowing down the game. If the guy catching the ball is in front of the guy throwing it then the pass is ruled forward. That's it - simples!! You have to be behind or in line with the player that throws the pass when you catch it (or first touch it in the act of completing the catch). This shouldn't be any more difficult to the way we normally adjudicate off side calls in kicks.

I like this idea, take away judging if the ball travels forward and just adjudicate on the player being in line or behind the ball when it is passed.

Do we only use it in try scoring plays, the play leading to the try or the whole set of all the time?

Whatever system they go with it will have to be related to the ref on the run so he can pull it up within a few seconds.

I assume you are both aware that a ball can travel forward even when being passed backwards, and you intend to remove this as an acceptable. Examples here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg

If we were to simplify forward passes to this level, i.e. based entirely on where their feet are on the ground, then we are going to potentially have A LOT more forward passes called every game.

In the video I linked, you would be calling back Example #1 as a forward pass, though I don't think anyone would call that forward in live play.

 

[Geo]

Good ole Newt's Law...

 

[TigerSJ]

@jirskyr

Hey J, liked the video - thanks for that!

My suggestion was an attempt to simplify the decision process with the debate over introducing “hawkeye” or other technology. As much as I understand the ball can travel forward even though the passing motion was backwards when initiated, it seems these cases are too difficult to judge in the context of our free flowing game. Simplifying the rule could be, that when a player throws a pass the catcher must be behind or in line with him to catch it. If he catches it in front he’s offside and should be penalised - hopefully that would stop there being too many thrown in games. As I remember it, a fundamental rule of the game growing up was simply that your team mate needed to be behind you and you threw the ball backwards - otherwise it may as well be gridiron!

 

[barra]

@jirskyr I think we're pretty much on the same page with it. Just that my explanation was basic. In my mind, the ball speed would be continually being monitored and any time the ball went forward after leaving the hand (except kicking of course) by way of acceleration the bunker would immediately be alerted.
But back to your original question I just can't see how hawk-eye type technology can even adjudicate on this...? So with that in mind it would be a no from me, and failing implementation of accurate, quick (ie immediate) ball momentum based technological assistance, something like @TigerSJ suggests might be an option.
All I know is I'm sick of all the forward passes out of dummy half (which hasn't been an issue for 100yrs, only relatively recently) and there seems to be more and more inconsistency with this 'backwards out of the hands' adjudication by the naked eye.

Good discussion though.

 

[happy_tiger]

Good ole Newt's Law...

Jack is a legend , golf champion , scientist , genes produced Clint ....

Maybe we should have a close enough if good enough rule

 

[jirskyr]

went forward after leaving the hand (except kicking of course) by way of acceleration

Acceleration doesn't tell you if it went forward or not, that was my point. You can accelerate the ball equally backwards, up, down or forwards. It depends on how hard you throw the pass.

 

[jirskyr]

As I remember it, a fundamental rule of the game growing up was simply that your team mate needed to be behind you and you threw the ball backwards

I'm not saying this would not work, however I think you mis-remember the rule. I am pretty sure that it's always been about throwing the ball in a backwards motion, not whether or not the catcher is strictly standing behind the line where you threw it from.

I am of the opinion that introducing a strict definition of a forward pass as you suggest, albeit easy to understand and theoretically reasonable to adjudicate on video, will drastically increase the number of passes that are called forward.

For instance, I would imagine that pretty much every line break that results in a try will be called back, because sprinting players who throw backwards passes are still travelling at such a velocity that the ball will technically move forwards relative to the flat plane of the ground.

Case in point - you only need to go back to last round, the Luke Brooks break to set up Corey Thompson. Both frames are taken from the same camera angle and same replay, so there's no change in scale. First frame I took a distance measurement in red, second frame I copied that distance measurement down to the line that Corey is running.

Before:

After:

By your rule that is a forward pass by about one metre. However watch the replay and there is absolutely no suggestion of a forward pass.

 

[Geo]

Obviously Brooks threw that one too hard..

 

[happy_tiger]

Obviously Brooks threw that one too hard..

And to someone taller

Still the worst forward pass I've ever seen we were the beneficiary of

2006 Suncorp Stadium ....Prince threw a pass to either Collis or Elford that was so forward .....NFL anyone

 

[barra]

went forward after leaving the hand (except kicking of course) by way of acceleration

Acceleration doesn't tell you if it went forward or not, that was my point. You can accelerate the ball equally backwards, up, down or forwards. It depends on how hard you throw the pass.

Ah sorry mate, I'm not describing this well enough!
The only speed that is being monitored is 'lengthwise' movement - that is, from try to try line. The sideways, or lateral ball speed is ignored. So we only see 'forward' acceleration (forward pass), no change in speed (flat pass) or reduction in speed 'backward' pass out of the hands.
Such technology would also determine if a ball was knocked on or not.

 

[TIGER]

Just a suggestion....I think a simpler interpretation of a forward pass would be easier to adjudicate without involving further technology or slowing down the game. If the guy catching the ball is in front of the guy throwing it then the pass is ruled forward. That's it - simples!! You have to be behind or in line with the player that throws the pass when you catch it (or first touch it in the act of completing the catch). This shouldn't be any more difficult to the way we normally adjudicate off side calls in kicks.

I like this idea, take away judging if the ball travels forward and just adjudicate on the player being in line or behind the ball when it is passed.

Do we only use it in try scoring plays, the play leading to the try or the whole set of all the time?

Whatever system they go with it will have to be related to the ref on the run so he can pull it up within a few seconds.

I assume you are both aware that a ball can travel forward even when being passed backwards, and you intend to remove this as an acceptable. Examples here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg

If we were to simplify forward passes to this level, i.e. based entirely on where their feet are on the ground, then we are going to potentially have A LOT more forward passes called every game.

In the video I linked, you would be calling back Example #1 as a forward pass, though I don't think anyone would call that forward in live play.

No, example #1 would not be called forward because I said let's "take out" whether or not the ball travels forward and just rule on whether the player receiving the ball was behind or in line with the passer when it left his hands, that way you don't have to have a computer doing complex calculations on wind speed, direction, speed of player, angle of pass, and laws of physics.
This is why a sensor in the ball wouldn't work because even passes thrown backwards out of the hand still travel forwards if measured from point of release to point the ball is caught (as seen in the video) so let's do away with this optical illusion and just line up the players.

 

[Newtown]

With the number of forward passes that are thrown in NRL there is a likelihood that the device may not be able to cope.