Referees Making Up the Rules on the Spot Thread

[The_Frog]

The more replays I see of the Sutton/Cook one the more annoyed I get. Cook is sliding out to follow the ball, then just pauses and let's Sutton run into his inside shoulder. Surely it is a defensive decision.

What surprises me is that decoys continue to run into the line in situations like this, rather than stopping well short.

 

[T-Boon]

fine- but we’re not expecting perfection. Just a higher standard. Not too much to ask.

what is needed is less tv replays and angles and commentators input. In the 80s refereeing was way worse than now and nobody cared because they just accepted the decision without analysing it for 5 minutes.

 

[Quicksilver]

what is needed is less tv replays and angles and commentators input. In the 80s refereeing was way worse than now and nobody cared because they just accepted the decision without analysing it for 5 minutes.

Rex Mossip would often have a dig at the refs.

 

[T-Boon]

With respect to forward passes (forward out of hand float forward etc) people have to accept this as the rule, "if it goes backwards it IS a legal pass, if it travels forward it is presumed to be a forward pass and the ref needs to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that it travelled backwards out of the hand before floating forward before he can rule it a legal pass".
If that is the rule then we could all agree that if it travels forwards no matter how it travels forwards it is too bad to the passer of the ball what call is made. In other words it is still an error if it floats forwards and the passer has put it in the lap of the referee to decide. I would think of a ball that floats forward as a handling error that could go either way.

 

[Vee]

With respect to forward passes (forward out of hand float forward etc) people have to accept this as the rule, "if it goes backwards it IS a legal pass, if it travels forward it is presumed to be a forward pass and the ref needs to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that it travelled backwards out of the hand before floating forward before he can rule it a legal pass".
If that is the rule then we could all agree that if it travels forwards no matter how it travels forwards it is too bad to the passer of the ball what call is made. In other words it is still an error if it floats forwards and the passer has put it in the lap of the referee to decide. I would think of a ball that floats forward as a handling error that could go either way.

No. Out of the hands is the only measure.

 

[Saxon]

With respect to forward passes (forward out of hand float forward etc) people have to accept this as the rule, "if it goes backwards it IS a legal pass, if it travels forward it is presumed to be a forward pass and the ref needs to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that it travelled backwards out of the hand before floating forward before he can rule it a legal pass".
If that is the rule then we could all agree that if it travels forwards no matter how it travels forwards it is too bad to the passer of the ball what call is made. In other words it is still an error if it floats forwards and the passer has put it in the lap of the referee to decide. I would think of a ball that floats forward as a handling error that could go either way.

f**k me. STEM obviously passed you by in school.
Go and learn some physics.

 

[T-Boon]

No. Out of the hands is the only measures.

Nah, if it floats forward it is a garbage pass and should be assumed to be forward. It is extremely easy to pass the ball properly so it goes backwards. That is why greater than 90% of passes do in fact go backwards. The only exception is when a ball carrier is on a break and is running flat out straight ahead and has to pass. That is when the benefit of the doubt should go to the pass being backwards. Apart from that so solly, that pass from Manly against Parra that went forward (but was said to have gone backwards out of the hands) was a garbage pass. He had no control over it. Hence it spewed out and drifted.

 

[skeepe]

Nah, if it floats forward it is a garbage pass and should be assumed to be forward. It is extremely easy to pass the ball properly so it goes backwards. That is why greater than 90% of passes do in fact go backwards. The only exception is when a ball carrier is on a break and is running flat out straight ahead and has to pass. That is when the benefit of the doubt should go to the pass being backwards. Apart from that so solly, that pass from Manly against Parra that went forward (but was said to have gone backwards out of the hands) was a garbage pass. He had no control over it. Hence it spewed out and drifted.

The English language does not have enough words to describe the sheer amount of stupidity in this post.

 

[T-Boon]

The English language does not have enough words to describe the sheer amount of stupidity in this post.

Instead of being a twit give it a go. Ha?
You cant because the post is supremely logical.
So you resort to being a twit.

 

[T-Boon]

The English language does not have enough words to describe the sheer amount of stupidity in this post.

I mean have a cry you dumb merkin. Oh the refs should get every decision right. They should be able to tell when a passer floats the ball forward as if they meant to do that. Its a f**king error you genius.

 

[Canard]

I mean have a cry you dumb merkin. Oh the refs should get every decision right. They should be able to tell when a passer floats the ball forward as if they meant to do that. Its a f**king error you genius.

Watch this for a simple demonstration of physics and passing in the Rugby codes:

 

[T-Boon]

Watch this for a simple demonstration of physics and passing in the Rugby codes:

I am not arguing against the physics of it.

I am saying if the ball is passed and is caught in front of where the passer threw it, it has traveled forward (like the Trbojovic one against Parra) it should still be considered an error and the assumption should be that it is forward unless the ref is certain it has gone backwards out of the hand.
So most of the ones that travel forward (that is, are caught in front of where it is thrown) should be called forward. There are way too many forward passes being let go atm. Especially from the area of the nine.

 

[Canard]

I am saying if the ball is passed and is caught in front of where the passer threw it

That's every single pass thrown by a playing moving towards an opponents goal line then.

 

[T-Boon]

By the way, I don't even agree with that Total Rugby Youtube video.
The guy is always throwing it flat - I still cant see how they are saying he is clearly throwing it legally, they should have added footage of the guy actually trying to throw it backwards to show it can be done in a way that it goes backwards.

 

[T-Boon]

That's every single pass thrown by a playing moving towards an opponents goal line then.

No way.
I agree that if they are running at close to full throttle straight towards the try-line (such as centre to winger or anytime they are on a long break and draw and pass) then it is close to impossible to pass it backwards and the benefit of doubt absolutely should be that it has gone backwards out of hand, but otherwise it is easy to pass it so it get caught behind where it is thrown.
The bottom line is anyone who thinks they can tell live that a ball caught 1 metre or more in front of where it was passed was actually thrown backwards out of the hands is having themselves on. At best they want to have a look at the replay before they get irrate, and the refs don't have the luxury of doing that.
So we should accept that if it is caught a metre or more in front of were it was thrown the refs have to make a nearly impossible call on how it left the hands even though it looks to the naked eye like a forward pass. Its just a refs call.
That Trbojovic one was the right call because it looked like a crap pass and it went at least a metre forward when it didnt have to.

 

[T-Boon]

Also with that Total Rugby video I disagree with their demonstration of throwing the ball up over the head meaning it has to have been passed backwards. It looks to me like he is throwing it straight up - which isn't backwards.
That's more of a demonstration of the Rugby rule that if the player who passed it stays in front of it then it is not forward.

Also the match demonstration at the end is a flat pass at best and I am happy for it to be called forward pass. Look at the winger needing to accelerate and reach out in front of him to catch it.

I don't think the Total Rugby guy is a scientist.

 

[mongoose]

By the way, I don't even agree with that Total Rugby Youtube video.
The guy is always throwing it flat - I still cant see how they are saying he is clearly throwing it legally, they should have added footage of the guy actually trying to throw it backwards to show it can be done in a way that it goes backwards.

wow lol

 

[T-Boon]

wow lol

So you just accept a total rugby study as a scientific study. I don't.

 

[GreenMachine121]

Watch this for a simple demonstration of physics and passing in the Rugby codes:

And that’s the game

 

[Canard]