I don't think it should be used for every possible forward pass, just for those in a lead-up to a try. otherwise, matches at Headingley would last 3 hours.....!!





There are some pretty obvious ones that get missed by the on-field officials, and I'd love to be able to eradicate these. Mind you, video refs don't always get it right, do they Mr Ganson?

Some are easy to detect.
The HKR forward pass at Wigan was very easy to spot.
The soccer markings of the 6 yard area were there and the passer passed the ball outside the 6 yard area and the guy who caught it was well inside the six yard area.
Anywhere on the field where there is a line across the field of which there are plenty would be a good indicater if a pass is forward or not.

Forward passes are not judged in that way. It's all to do with the hands.

Argggggghhh why is it that the idea of a "forward pass" is still misunderstood by so many people. THE LINES ON THE PITCH CAN NOT BE USED TO DETERMINE IF A PASS IS FORWARD!
If a player is running forward quickly then the ball leaving his hands will always land in front of the place it was passed- momentum-it's a rule of physics not the RFL or stevo.

I hope you know more about religion than you do about physics or the rules of RL.
Type 'Rugby Union Forward Pass Video' into YouTube. Other video sharing sites are available.

You're wasting your breath. Some people will never get it.

How cum ref can judge if a kick has gon forward but knot a pass?

So basically what you are all saying is that a forward pass is actually not a forward pass anymore? So everything I was taught when playing rugby about the ball having to go backwards is actually not true?
It's like an episode of QI!

I think the rule needs amending to make players stop before passing the ball,
then we could go to the video ref for forward passes.

I don't get the love in with VRs one bit. Do we really need them?

I totally get that the momentum rule makes line markings invalid but I still don't see how having one view of the action at full speed is preferable to multiple angles slowed down if you want to see how the ball left the player's hands.

I'm not advocating an increase in the use of VR per se, but I've never understood this aspect

Long standing extract from Laws of the game:

" The direction of a pass is relative to the player making it and not to the actual path relative to the ground.

A player running towards his opponents’ goal line may throw the ball towards a colleague who is behind him but because of the thrower’s own [imomentum[/i the ball travels forward relative to the ground. This is not a forward pass as the thrower has not passed the ball forward in relation to himself.

This is particularly noticeable when a running player makes a high, lobbed pass. "

Hence why referees look to see that the ball comes out of the passing player's hands backwards - even if the ball subsequently travels forward relative to the ground.

(Good job Dutoni is no longer with us!)

the problem for me with slowing things down is the frame-flicking which makes all ball groundings look dubious - for example the saint "no try" v salford last thursday.

Whatever the arguments for/against forward passes, I hate the VR in general.

I hate watching my team on TV cause you can't celebrate scoring!! Each time your team puts the ball down over the line you've to hold your breath and wait 3 minutes to see if the VR can find any possible reason to turn it down.

I want to see teams scoring tries playing good rugby league (like on a sunday) not watching the back of two wally's heads as they painstakingly look for any reason to chalk tries off.

They should be at every game or no game, for fairness. Since they can't be, they shouldn't be.

The VR is over-used as it is. The last thing we need is more things referring up.

I think there should be a VR of Ganson & that other bloke poncing around with their knobs to make the decisions, just to ensure they give each referral exactly the same scrutiny. They are looking for any excuse to chalk of my teams tries.

The Forward pass Rule is very simple. Imagine the field was a graph of numbered whitewashed lines a foot apart. The groundkeeper would love that job!

If player A throws out a pass and releases the ball exactly on line 60 say, and the receiving player catches it either exactly on line 60 or behind it on line 59....no probs. Catch it on line 61, and it's a forward pass, clear as day. You say momentum....I say forward pass!

RL is a simple game, and amazingly, Stevo and the RFL's interpretation have it right. Of course, a proper winger should time his run nicely......

VR for matters of Fact, Ref for everything else.

...like the Withers knock on.

kind of.

We used to have a wonderful system. There was a bloke, invariably in black, who right or wrong, came up with a decision about all aspects of the game which required one. Players, whether in agreement or not, accepted his decision and got on with the game. Fans, naturally, tended to disagree with all his decisions which went against their favourites and argued, in the pubs and clubs until long into the night, but this mattered not a jot.

We now have the VR. Players, whether in agreement or not, accept this decision and get on with the game. Fans, naturally, tend to disagree with all his decisions which go against their favourites and argue, in the pubs and clubs until long into the night, but this matters not a jot.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose..

In the NRL the video ref chips in for foul play too. For example if a bloke is the victim of a high shot that is missed the video ref gets in the ear of the on field refs.

I don’t have too much problem with this.

However when it comes to tries the on field refs seem to send more decisions upstairs than ever, even when the decision is clear. Is it down to a fear of responsibility? Are modern refs not getting into position to make decisions well enough as they know they can just send it upstairs?

Once it’s up there the video ref often wants a million looks at it too which causes further delay and often proves contentious in the end anyway.

I do wonder if it’s worth all the hassle. It’s not foolproof, refs can’t win either way. If they got rid of it I’d not be bothered.

one thing i would like to see is that 'the grounding' (i.e whether the player had control or not, not whether it was in out of play or whether it was held up) should be decided at normal speed, slowing it down and down and down only seems to create more doubt rather than help anyone. The saints one a couple of weeks back was an absolutely appalling decision that was 100% a try in full speed, and 99.9% in super slow-mo.

The HKR man was in front of the man when he passed the ball and the ball was passed forward from one player to the other.
If he had been level with the passer and caught the ball it would not have been judged as forward although as we all know very well the ball would have travelled forward. We all know about the physics of the debate it's been going on for decades.
What is indisputable is that if a ball is passed in a forward direction it will be judged as that. The HKR/Wigan incident was one such case. The line markings just emphasised it.
There is a very good case for having a VR at each SL game from 2016 or before, the clubs cannot now claim they haven't the money as they did in the past!

Unlike the one given last night which was never a try in a month of Sundays.

Well, you [and I might think so, but as they used to say in days gone by," take a look in the morning paper"..