Why Can't the Video Ref Rule On a Forward Pass?

[Renowned League Expert]

We'd never score a try!

lol - you got that right!

I agree with Adam -- it's yet another blight on the game.

 

[thorson1987]

Or maybe, touchies should do their job.

How they didn't pick up on Sandows gridiron pass has got me stumped

 

[adamkungl]

Or maybe, touchies should do their job.

How they didn't pick up on Sandows gridiron pass has got me stumped

No ambiguity there... and yet here we are.

 

[TheDalek079]

No.

But if they did, I'd like them to have it that they must be 100% confident that it was passed forward for it to be ruled a forward pass. Any doubt, and it must be considered legal

 

[Grapple]

If you can't rule on a simple forward pass with two refs and sideline officials on/off the field then there's something wrong. Simply no need to slow the game down more on something that can be easily ruled on the field with competent officials.

 

[bluey]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

Lmao

Last night was so bad he should've been penalized for being offside

 

[adamkungl]

If you can't rule on a simple forward pass with two refs and sideline officials on/off the field then there's something wrong.

This applies to any rule, yet forward pass is the only one the video doesn't rule on.

Simply no need to slow the game down more on something that can be easily ruled on the field with competent officials.

Clearly there is, using last night as an example. The game wouldn't be slowed down more, the try was already looked at about 19 times.

 

[DC_fan]

Its all about camera angles. Sometimes, actually a lot of times what can look a forward pass on camera in reality is not.

Are we going to return to the horrid days of benefit of the doubt with tries.

 

[Jason Maher]

For once TT has a point. If the receiver is clearly in front of the passer prior to the ball being thrown, it should be called an offside play, as it would be if the passer propelled the ball in some other fashion (e.g. a kick or a knock on).

 

[eozsmiles]

I can't begin to contemplate how much of a sh**fight that would be.

 

[Alsmug]

No ambiguity there... and yet here we are.

yes here we are, listening to dribble, the video refs would just stuff this one up as well , touch judges should have the call , if they keep failing replace them, over the video ref slows the game up

 

[eozsmiles]

The idea that forward passes are somehow harder to judge on video than any other ruling is f**king nonsense.

That aside, the changes to BOTD remove most of the (imaginary) ambiguity anyway.

In other sports they have fixed cameras to work out this stuff. Horse racing has a camera on the line, cricket has a camera square with the crease, etc. These aren't the standard cameras for coverage of the game, they are placed in certain places for a reason. Footy can't do this because you never know where the action will be.

They can bring in the rule and judge forward passes on the camera from any angle they like but they won't have conclusive evidence very often. It will just p!ss people off more than they are now.

 

[Diesel]

When they could rule on it, it was a mess. They normally got it wrong and there were so many angles they kept looking at.

Like Gould said last night, should've ruled as off side

 

[WaznTheGreat]

Play would be stopped every single min for a Storm game to check how many forward passes the overrated Cam Smith threw

 

[The Engineers Room]

I wish they would get other things right first like Jennings in not allowed to hold back defenders!

 

[Card Shark]

It's so subjective forward passes, it would never work - well it's been tried & we know it doesn't work .

I reckon lots of long passes are ruled forward but aren't... They just float forward after being passed back. Others will differ in their opinion on this. Hence the video ref ruling on them will still cause uproar.

If they had high cameras on the 20m line it would help I suppose.

 

[The Engineers Room]

When they could rule on it, it was a mess. They normally got it wrong and there were so many angles they kept looking at.

Like Gould said last night, should've ruled as off side

But Lussick got back onside before he touched it, that is what they were trying to rule. No doubt it wasn't a try but it was one of only maybe two decent calls Parra got all night. There were a lot of refereeing errors that turned the game the Roosters way and they didn't need the help.

 

[neutralsupporter]

I wish they would get other things right first like Jennings in not allowed to hold back defenders!

:lol:

 

[The Engineers Room]

The only way to determine it would be an accelerometer (sp?) in the actual ball or a hawkeye type of camera network that determines the forward speed of the ball at all times.