"That's not a forward pass you clown!"

[nick87]

Not as dumb as all your raiders fans complaining about Wighton getting sent to the bin.

Proctor was never getting the ball from Cronk. He was a decoy that Croker hit without the ball

Honestly it's ridiculous, if you stop players from putting a body on hole runner off a play makers hip, then you'd best prepare for 80-88 games, because every time someone gets inside the 10, it'll be a try

 

[GAZF]

No I get the momentum and drifting forward and all that shit. I get it. That's not what I'm arguing but everybody seems to think it is. Like I said before maybe I've worded it all wrong

What I mean is if the ball is caught in front of where it was thrown from it should be a forward pass, but I it's thrown back and drifts forward a little bit is still behind where it was thrown then that's fine.

Example. 1m back but 2m forward, forward pass
2m back and 1m forward, fine play on

I'd say everyone arguing with you very clearly understands your point of view. You're still proposing something very restrictive to a running game.

What about if the touchie is running at the same speed as the ball runner? A forward pass by your definition looks flat to them. How it comes out of the hands takes the issue of frames of reference out of the equation.

 

[dannyt]

No I get the momentum and drifting forward and all that shit. I get it. That's not what I'm arguing but everybody seems to think it is. Like I said before maybe I've worded it all wrong

You concede that the ball can travel forward due to forward momentum as it leaves the player's hands backward, but you do not want the receiver to catch the ball in front of where the ball is passed.

Correct?

If so, you don't get it!!

Think of this way- if I run at 5 m/s, throw the ball backward at 3 m/s, then the ball is actually travelling in the same direction as me at 2 m/s.

So, if I throw the ball long and it stays in the air for 2 s, it actually travels forward 4 m from where I threw it.

As I said, look at the video. It is a very simple explanation with visual footage.

 

[_Johnsy]

You concede that the ball can travel forward due to forward momentum as it leaves the player's hands backward, but you do not want the receiver to catch the ball in front of where the ball is passed.

Correct?

If so, you don't get it!!

Think of this way- if I run at 5 m/s, throw the ball backward at 3 m/s, then the ball is actually travelling in the same direction as me at 2 m/s.

So, if I throw the ball long and it stays in the air for 2 s, it actually travels forward 4 m from where I threw it.

As I said, look at the video. It is a very simple explanation with visual footage.

Correct, however the angle at which the ball was thrown backwards would effect how many m's it travels forward, if at all. The premise is 100% correct though, how anyone can argue against it is beyond me.

 

[The_Shield]

The premise is 100% correct though, how anyone can argue against it is beyond me.

That's the thing tho, I'm not arguing that. But that's what everybody is jumping all over

 

[Pete Cash]

You are making it effectively impossible to pass at the line. I think thats my problem mostly.

 

[GAZF]

That's the thing tho, I'm not arguing that. But that's what everybody is jumping all over

What I mean is if the ball is caught in front of where it was thrown from it should be a forward pass, but I it's thrown back and drifts forward a little bit is still behind where it was thrown then that's fine.
Example. 1m back but 2m forward, forward pass
2m back and 1m forward, fine play on

This viewpoint is in diametric opposition to everyone else's here. And you want this to be the definition.

You are not only struggling with the definition of a forward pass but also the definition of an argument.

 

[dannyt]

Correct, however the angle at which the ball was thrown backwards would effect how many m's it travels forward, if at all. The premise is 100% correct though, how anyone can argue against it is beyond me.

Not in the example I mentioned.

I kept it very simple and only included the forward (direction I'm travelling) and backwards (direction the ball is thrown) components without mentioning the sideways component, hence no angle.

But irrespective of the angle the ball is thrown, if the forwards / backwards component of ball velocity = 2 m/s forwards, then the above examples hold true.

Sideways component does not affect the forward / backward motion but only tells you the speed at which the ball travels to the player.

I don't feel like further explaining projectile motion or vector theory in this thread. Seems complicated enough without!

 

[betcats]

The way see it is a pass can either go forward or backwards, so its 50-50 not that hard really, Capish?

 

[SBD82]

hahahahahha

seriously ?
so if theres a strong breeze behind a side with the ball
they throw a pass 1 metre backward & the breeze blows it 2 metres forward

its their fault theres a breeze ? LOL

what is it with you complete idiots who know nothing about the game

Maybe.

How do you feel about kicks that get taken by the wind?

 

[Just Visiting]

I thought that video would be enough to end any debate, but if you are running 8ms and pass the ball 45 degrees backwards at 3ms over 3m it would still travel 6.5m forwards relative to the ground, and a 45d pass is ridiculously backwards.

 

[no name]

The touchie has been given a gig in the GF.
Way to go Archer!

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

The touchie has been given a gig in the GF.
Way to go Archer!

I am sure Archer makes his decision like this..

Archer: Was Morris in?
Merkin Touch judge: Yes
Archer: You got the job.

 

[dannyt]

I am sure Archer makes his decision like this..

Archer: Was Morris in?
Merkin Touch judge: Yes
Archer: You got the job.

OK- so the final score should've been 28-6.

Feel better?

 

[dannyt]

I thought that video would be enough to end any debate, but if you are running 8ms and pass the ball 45 degrees backwards at 3ms over 3m it would still travel 6.5m forwards relative to the ground, and a 45d pass is ridiculously backwards.

The gist is right, but whoever put that diagram together got their calculations slightly wrong, and used a % instead of a ° sign.

Anyway- If a ball is thrown at 45° at 3 m/s as per the diagram, then the ball is travelling opposite to the player at a relative speed of ~2.1 m/s (vector analysis), so it is travelling in the same direction as the player at 5.9 m/s. As an aside, the ball also travels at the same speed sideways because of the 45° angle.

Assuming the ball travels for 3 m along the 45° path at the initial 3 m/s, then time-of-flight = 1 s, meaning the ball travels forward 5.9 m (not 6.5 m) relative to where it was passed.

As you say- 45° is ridiculously backward.

 

[big hit!]

WRONG THREAD