DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 25655--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: DOK
Date: June 26, 2019, 11:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
An overhead camera can show whether a ball goes forward relative
to the passer, but it still won't know the momentum to allow for
(esp if the player isn't running directly at the touch line). It
may be lucky enough to see the player's hands. If it's not
directly overhead, then you have to allow for parallax error.
I just don't see a reliable, scientific, repeatable method of
measuring whether a pass is forward that the referee can apply
every time and know he is right. I see the attraction of the
argument "if the ball goes forward of the passer then it's a
forward pass" , it meets the those requirements and just relies
on the ref/AR/TMO being in the right position to judge.
In the "old days" (pre-professionalism?), I don't believe
referees applied any allowance for momentum?
#Post#: 25657--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: Brown Bottle
Date: June 26, 2019, 12:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Blucherquin link ---
>
> On a small point of order - what overhead camera?
>
--- End Quote ---
Sorry - I should have said "an" not "the".
Or some other sort of camera. :)
#Post#: 25659--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: Quinten Poulsen
Date: June 26, 2019, 12:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> In the "old days" (pre-professionalism?), I don't believe
referees applied any allowance for momentum?
--- End Quote ---
They did.
#Post#: 25660--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: never sleep
Date: June 26, 2019, 1:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Can I go back to my offside argument.
If a player kicks and the receiving catcher is in front of the
kicker, then this is offside. It is very easy for a tmo to judge
(but quite hard for the on field officials at the time). But, it
is scientific and consistent when referred to the tmo.
If a player knocks on and another player who was in front
touches it next, then it is an offside rather than a knock on.
It is scientific to prove for a tmo.
I think that if a player passed the ball to a player who was in
front at the time of the pass, then this is actually offside
rather than a forward pass and is easy for a tmo to judge
#Post#: 25664--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: DOK
Date: June 26, 2019, 2:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Quinten Poulsen link ---
>
> They did.
>
--- End Quote ---
Well if they did, why did we have all that hoo ha about 5 years
ago with the Australians trying to prove momentum existed and
other countries not believing/buying it?
#Post#: 25666--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: Brown Bottle
Date: June 26, 2019, 5:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DOK link ---
>
> Well if they did, why did we have all that hoo ha about 5
years ago with the Australians trying to prove momentum existed
and other countries not believing/buying it?
>
--- End Quote ---
We didn’t. There’s never been any "hoo ha" except that from old
gits who simply don’t get it.
Name a professional rugby player who’s made a fuss about it (not
a fat one!). Or an amateur from 40 years ago, if you like.
#Post#: 25669--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: DOK
Date: June 27, 2019, 3:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
No you're wrong. Big discussion some years ago between the NH
and SH nations over what could be allowed for a forward pass.
The Oz lot even made a youtube video (Or was it powerpoint?) to
illustrate the issue which was shared round the internet.
#Post#: 25672--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: June 27, 2019, 4:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: never sleep link ---
>
> Can I go back to my offside argument.
> If a player kicks and the receiving catcher is in front of the
kicker, then this is offside. It is very easy for a tmo to judge
(but quite hard for the on field officials at the time). But, it
is scientific and consistent when referred to the tmo.
> If a player knocks on and another player who was in front
touches it next, then it is an offside rather than a knock on.
It is scientific to prove for a tmo.
> I think that if a player passed the ball to a player who was
in front at the time of the pass, then this is actually offside
rather than a forward pass and is easy for a tmo to judge
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes but its not just about whether the recipient is behind the
passer at the moment the pass is made, its about where the
recipient receives the ball in relation to where the ball was
passed from...this I am told is allowable due to momentum.
#Post#: 25673--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: June 27, 2019, 4:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg
#Post#: 25674--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Wish List
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: June 27, 2019, 4:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Some very flat passes in that clip!
*****************************************************
Page 7 of 13
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page