This has got to be the worst rule in Rugby League. Its impossible to referee and causes the most confusion and resentment amongst supporters. Like all subjective rules it belongs to Union.

Why cant we have a simple rule which states a forward pass is any pass that goes forward from the the position it was thrown.

There is no momentum rule. Stevo made it up.

There is no problem with the forward pass ruling in rugby league. As mentioned the momentum rule isn't actually used, they look for the direction the ball leaves the hands, ignoring the momentum of the player.

Obviously there is an adjustment for the minor axis difference at Headingly, meaning they add an extra 45 degrees of acceptable angle when a Leeds player is involved.

Firstly there is a momentum rule(I also assumed Stevo had made it up til I read the rulebook)
Secondly, dont you think the referee looking at the direction of the hands is a rubbish way of determining it. The best placed guy to check forward passes is the linesman-why dont they give him the job of calling it.

The number of tries being scored from forward passes and the acceptable angle appears to be increasing year on year. Its getting like American football.
p.s. Saints are the worst culprit

Because nearly every pass on the run would be then classed as a forward pass due to the laws of physics.

There is no 'momentum rule'. However, it is accepted that due to player momentum, the ball might travel forwards in relation the the ground, even though a running player has passed it backwards in relation to himself and the receiving player.

If you were sprinting flat out and tried to pass it backwards in relation to the point on the ground the ball leaves your hands, you'd literally have to hurl it behind you.

Except at Leeds, where they seem to forget the 'backwards' element of the rules.

The International Laws state:

Brilliant.

....we want to see players running forward at full speed be able to pass to a supporting team mate your "rule" would prevent this ever happening. I prefer the rules as they have always been (and currently are).

How would this prevent this ever happening? Not every pass made on the run is forward'"

yes it is...that's physics.

Because we live in a universe governed by the laws of physics and the RFL doesn't have the power to repeal them.

Plus it would be stupid to have a player pass to another player behind him, but have it ruled a forward pass.

If you've not noticed a ball passed backwards can float forward if a player is running fast. The ref only has to look at the players hands when the pass is made to decide whether it went backwards or not. Its probably easier to ref than deciding whether a ball has gone forward.

The problem may be partly caused by mis-use of the word 'momentum'. The momentum of the running player (mass multiplied by velocity) has nothing to do with it. To be excessively pedantic, whether a pass is forward or not should be judged in a Lagrangian frame of reference. A spectator on the touchline sees things in an Eulerian frame of reference (Google either term for a full explanation). Think of two boats floating down a river one of them slightly in front of the other. If you throw a ball from the first boat to the second boat then from the point of view of people in the boats the ball always goes backwards. From the point of view of an observer on the river bank the ball may go either forwards or backwards depending on the speed at which the river is flowing. The best independent judge is someone in a third boat travelling at the same velocity as the first two. On the rugby field the best judge is the referee who ought to be running at the same velocity as the two players involved.

That's ridiculous. I knew the RFL shouldn't have let Rod Findlay go to Gateshead.

£5 says that if they could, they would, in order to be 'innovative'

Spot on, which is why so many fans at various games yell 'forward' for passes that are perfectly fine.

Well, that and the fact that it's traditional

And fun.

The physics argument is a complete red herring because it is perfectly possible to pass a ball backwards relative to the ground, and it happens regularly in all games, yes it takes more effort and skill to do it whilst running than it does to throw the ball forward relative to the ground but backwards relative to where the momentum of players may take them in the future (i.e. where the players will be at some point in future relative to where the position on the ground the pass was actually initiated), but then we reward players precisely because of they have certain skills.



Not if the player who completes the pass is stood in front of the position where the player who initiated the pass was stood when he initiated that pass. Under the current interpretation we are judging the start of the pass not from where it actually started, but from where the person who started it happens to be at a point in the future.

In all other instances direction on a rugby pitch is determined primarily relative to the ground, where the relative position of the players is used it is always in the context of their position relative to the ground i.e. offside at a kick, or being played onside by a kicker. Passing is the only part of the game where movement relative to the gound can be ignored, and it is only done for the convenience of throwing "flat" (i.e. forward relative to the ground) passes.

No we're not. Stevo may be, and those who believe him may also be. But the rest of us (including the officials) aren't.

We are judging the pass at the time it is made - at the instant in which the ball is thrown. Is it thrown towards someone who is (at this instant in time) level or behind the player passing the ball. If so then it is not a forward pass.

It doesn't matter what happens to the passer, the ball or the receiver after this instant. If it wasn't thrown forward it isn't a forward pass.

couldn't resist

That's Stevo's invented Momentum Rule, not the actual rule being used.

The actual rule simply states that the ball must be propelled backwards relative to the player making the pass at the instant he makes the pass, regardless of whether or not it travels backwards relative to the ground.

That doesn't make any sense at all, under such an explanation the direction of the pass itself is totally irrelevant, which means a pass could be thrown (lobbed) clearly forward (relative to the ground), so long as the reciever made sure they stood behind the initiator of the pass, yet such a move would obviously be pulled up as a forward pass.

Every explanation given appears to involve some form of contradiction or plain fallacy, and the only thing that seems certain is that the direction of pass does not necessarily need to be judged in some way relative to the ground, which makes it different from the determination of direction in every other aspect of the sport I can think of.

The problem is the direction of a pass can only accurately be judged in flight, not by second guessing the body language of the person making the pass.

In that case it wasn't passed towards the receiver. It was passed towards a point in front of the passer, which is clearly a forward pass.

The direction of the pass is not the same as the direction the ball travels in. The direction of the pass is only one factor in the resultant path of the ball. The forward pass is judged on the direction of the throw.