QF2: New Zealand v France

[Phantom]

When my wife got to work, the guy that had been winding her up since before the start of the comp was strangely reticent. Doubly odd when you consider he's a rabid supporter of England (flags up all over the show, etc)

Turns out her manager had forewarned the team to give her a break

What a nice guy eh?

[JAYJAY]

Excuse my lack of rugby rule knowledge but why is it that a in league the ref can go upstairs to confirm a try, and in the instance where a forward pass was completed, the try would be disallowed, but in rugby the video ref can't make that call?

I watched a replay and it confirmed for me that the ref was around 10 meters behind the play when the forward pass happened. There's no way he would have seen it.

Change the rules. I'm a league fan personally and you can rely on the video ref (most of the time) to make a good decision based on what he can see and here, the try wouldn't have been given.

[-Dr.J-]

Originally Posted by JAYJAY

Excuse my lack of rugby rule knowledge but why is it that a in league the ref can go upstairs to confirm a try, and in the instance where a forward pass was completed, the try would be disallowed, but in rugby the video ref can't make that call?

I watched a replay and it confirmed for me that the ref was around 10 meters behind the play when the forward pass happened. There's no way he would have seen it.

Change the rules. I'm a league fan personally and you can rely on the video ref (most of the time) to make a good decision based on what he can see and here, the try wouldn't have been given.

You can't rule on a forward pass in either code

A good rule really, even though sometimes it's glaringly obvious

[pig]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/4/...ectid=10468757

No surprises there.

[JAYJAY]

Originally Posted by -Dr.J-

You can't rule on a forward pass in either code

A good rule really, even though sometimes it's glaringly obvious

Hmm... my bad then. After watching many games I was under the impression that if the last play the led to the try was scored with a forward pass and it went upstairs the try wasn't given.

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by JAYJAY

Hmm... my bad then. After watching many games I was under the impression that if the last play the led to the try was scored with a forward pass and it went upstairs the try wasn't given.

Nah, in League the video ref cannot rule on a forward pass, supposedly because the camera angles involved can be deceptive..

Yet strangely he can rule on whether a ball that touches the ground went forward or back off the players hands, which to me would be pretty much the same thing?

[JAYJAY]

Originally Posted by Saladin

Yet strangely he can rule on whether a ball that touches the ground went forward or back off the players hands, which to me would be pretty much the same thing?

Ahhh that'd be where I was confused.

[Griven]

Apparently Ford are taking back all the All Blacks cars, when Ford management was asked why they responded with "they can drive holdens like all the other losers".

Had to share, best crack at them ive seen so far =).

[a-tech]

Originally Posted by Saladin

Nah, in League the video ref cannot rule on a forward pass, supposedly because the camera angles involved can be deceptive..

you would think with the available technology they have to put perfect perspective on cgi ground advertising (as i saw in the UK league) and cgi yardage lines (NFL) they could work out a line to draw whether the pass is forward or not.

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by a-tech

you would think with the available technology they have to put perfect perspective on cgi ground advertising (as i saw in the UK league) and cgi yardage lines (NFL) they could work out a line to draw whether the pass is forward or not.

Well with a forward pass it's a little more difficult than just drawing a line, because it can still be a legal pass if it's caught in front of where it was passed, provided that it was propelled behind the player and only traveled forward due to inertia.

Anyway, it's a bit rich for people to be complaining so much that the forward pass costing the AB's the game - the players were in such a position that even if it had been a valid pass the guy still would have scored. The fault lies more with the AB players who let themselves get beaten for position in the first place.

[ZoSo]

I'd like to see both League & Rugby have 3 _separate_ video refs who all push a red/green button to confirm a call and possibly even an orange on the fly to halt a play and make a call on it.
It's obvious most sideline refs are fucking useless and a waste of time, let alone the guy in the middle.

[Macca@Work]

Originally Posted by Ab

One forward pass and one try shouldn't have made any difference, because the All Blacks should have won that game by 30 points.

Let there be no griping about the ref, or dirty play, or the jerseys, or anything.

We choked. That's all there is to it. We should have won by a landslide and we didn't and it's all our fault. The end.

disagree.we always assume that the all blacks should thrash everyone and anyone continuously.The standard of world rugby is improving all the time (unless your england) .ok so we did choke to a degree..I've noticed successive AB teams fail to make dynamic game changes on the fly when required..they fail to assess pressure situations and make adjustments to counter it.But to say we should have thrashed the french isn't fair to the ABs or the French for that matter.

[surreal]

Originally Posted by Saladin

a legal pass if it's caught in front of where it was passed, provided that it was propelled behind the player and only traveled forward due to inertia.

Waaa inertia? - whether this is true or not, that would mean a player running at a casual 5m/s who threw a decent long pass and propelled it perfectly flat, and if the pass took 1 second to travel - it would travel 5m forward.


I can still blame that pass up until I recall that the AB's do score tries off slight forward passes. After that I just move on to the complete lack of offside & ruck penalties awarded against the french. I have yet to see an actual count of them, but I have a feeling it was a total of 1?

I'm likening it to the memorable wellington ranfurly shield challenge against canterbury of a few years back, where tana's boys were penalised 20+ times to Canterbury's 3 or 4...

I think that 99, 03, didn't end with the ref being such a major culprit..

[blynk]

Originally Posted by surreal

Waaa inertia? - whether this is true or not, that would mean a player running at a casual 5m/s who threw a decent long pass and propelled it perfectly flat, and if the pass took 1 second to travel - it would travel 5m forward.

Yes, but I don't think the physics are quite right. The person passing the ball is propelling it to the side, so it should lose some of its forward momentum. The ball would also loss momentum once it was let go of etc etc.

If you watch someone at full speed, you will often see it go forward (they even pass it back and it ends up in line. As long as you don't propel the ball forward.

[caffiend]

Originally Posted by IRB

DEFINITION THROW FORWARD
A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line.
EXCEPTION
Bounce forward. If the ball is not thrown forward but it hits a player or the ground and bounces forward, this is not a throw forward.

Don't know where you guys get your info from about forward passes. Bottom line is, if it moves towards the opposing line after leaving a player's hands it's a forward pass.

Nothing in there about inertia or whatever.

[blynk]

Originally Posted by caffiend

Don't know where you guys get your info from about forward passes. Bottom line is, if it moves towards the opposing line after leaving a player's hands it's a forward pass.

Nothing in there about inertia or whatever.

I think the part you need to take note of is
DEFINITION THROW FORWARD
A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward.
The player is not passing the ball forward. They are actually passing it back.
This may just be the interpretation that has been taken by refs to allow it to happen.

[EvilLumpy]

Originally Posted by Saladin

The fault lies more with the AB players who let themselves get beaten for position in the first place.

You mean like, only have 14 fella's on the field? Of course! That had nothing to do with the ref being a total plonker at all!



Caffiend, you've obviously never ran and tried to pass a ball then

seriously, what you're implying is ridiculous

it's obvious to everyone who plays and follows rugby what a forward pass is so really there's no argument there

[caffiend]

blynk: I think the part you need to take note of is: "'Forward' means towards the opponent's dead ball line".

If you pass it 'behind you' while running, yet it moves in a 'forward' direction (ie: in any way towards the opposing goal line, for whatever reason) it's a forward pass.

Eg: If I am on the opponents' 22 line and you are behind me on my left, and I pass the ball to you and it travels inside their 22 and you catch it inside their 22, it's a forward pass. It doesn't matter if we're both running and I am still 3 metres ahead of you.

EvilLumpy: It's not what I'm implying, it's what's on the IRB website under 'rules and regulations' of Rugby Union. Unless you're just taking the piss?

[caffiend]

Tell you what; I'll go ahead and shut the fuck up now, eh.

[blynk]

Originally Posted by caffiend

Tell you what; I'll go ahead and shut the fuck up now, eh.

Can't watch this as I am at work, but the interpretation of the rule is that it is passed behind, but momentum is allowed it to travel forward. Some refs may consider this as forward, but there are also many that allow it, and that been the case for a number of years

[EvilLumpy]

Originally Posted by caffiend

Eg: If I am on the opponents' 22 line and you are behind me on my left, and I pass the ball to you and it travels inside their 22 and you catch it inside their 22, it's a forward pass. It doesn't matter if we're both running and I am still 3 metres ahead of you.

Do you even watch rugby?

_Every_ back line play involves the ball traveling like this because of the speed at which they run.

If the ball is thrown forward relative to the players then yes it's a forward pass.

Seriously, I'm not taking the piss, but what you're implying is that 90% of the passes in all rugby games a forward and now you're just being facetious.

[Rince]

Originally Posted by EvilLumpy

facetious.

caffiend?????


surely not.

[caffiend]

Originally Posted by EvilLumpy

Do you even watch rugby?

_Every_ back line play involves the ball traveling like this because of the speed at which they run.

If the ball is thrown forward relative to the players then yes it's a forward pass.

Seriously, I'm not taking the piss, but what you're implying is that 90% of the passes in all rugby games a forward and now you're just being facetious.

Did you even watch the video I posted?

I effectively admitted I was wrong dude. Settle down.

Although, a little more reading on the web reveals that Southern Hemisphere (paricularly NZ) rugby is a lot more tolerant of the "backwards but really forwards due to inertia" pass. In England they talk about something called 'Kiwi Lateral', which is a sardonic way of saying 'forward but not called forward'.

So, in a nutshell - yes, you're right: balls thrown "backwards" that actually travel "towards the opponents goal line" are not forward so long as it's "backwards relative to the passer and receiver". But technically, it's moving towards the opponents dead ball line, and according to a pedantic interpretation of the actual rules that would make it an illegal forward pass.

It's just that it won't be blown up by the ref, who's using his judgment because that's just accepted practice.

I say we get a set square and compass, a GPS tracking device and some dudes in white lab coats, go down to the stadium and spend all weekend working shit out.

Rince: Me? Facetious? I'm only 25% as facetious as CCS. Which basically means I'm incredibly fucking facetious 99% of the time. Like now.

[surreal]

Okay the video is useful, but shows that the rule means the ball can float forward 10m (if the passer is running full speed and the pass is big) and still be legal.
Also of interest is when the receiver is stationary (e.g. standing 5m in front of the passer).

And in the cases where the pass clearly floats over the 22m line etc, refs are quite likely to screw that up.


The same thing does of course happen in the NRL, usually with me and crowd baying for blood when it floats forward and the referee lets it go. the rule is confusing huh...

[Wibble]

So did New Zealand lose the rugby, or something?

[Rince]

Originally Posted by caffiend

Rince: Me? Facetious? I'm only 25% as facetious as CCS. Which basically means I'm incredibly fucking facetious 99% of the time. Like now.

that's ok dude, that's why scummy loves ya......

[EvilLumpy]

Originally Posted by caffiend

Did you even watch the video I posted?

I effectively admitted I was wrong dude. Settle down.

Can't watch vids at work and it _could've_ been sarcasm.

S'all good dude, I'll still give yer a hug at Galbraiths (or whatever the Wellington equivalent is)

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by surreal

The same thing does of course happen in the NRL, usually with me and crowd baying for blood when it floats forward and the referee lets it go. the rule is confusing huh...

The rules are actually a lot clearer in League (unlike the Union rule that Caffiend posted), as they refer to the direction of the throw, not the direction the ball travels.

http://www.therfl.co.uk/~therflc/cli...book_2004_.pdf

Direction of the Pass 1. The direction of the pass is relative to the player making it and not the actual path relative the the ground. A player who is running towards his opponents' goal line may throw the ball towards a colleague who is behind him but because of the thrower's own momentum 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

[caffiend]

Originally Posted by EvilLumpy

Can't watch vids at work and it _could've_ been sarcasm.

S'all good dude, I'll still give yer a hug at Galbraiths (or whatever the Wellington equivalent is)

Oh yeah? Well it's on motherfucker. I'll see you down at Hummingbird for a full-on brawl. I'll be the one wearing leadinjector's kickboxing pants and with bandages on my hands dipped in tar with broken glass on the knuckles.

In a crane-kick position.

[Savage]

http://stuff.co.nz/4242225a10.html

Brave man - Barnes might be coming to NZ in the future, to ref some more rugby

[xor]

Time to get 24/7 watch at the airport for that limey little fuck

[Ab]

Good on him. He will learn a lot by refereeing here.

I hold no ill-will towards the guy.

[TnT]

Unfortunately there are a lot of dickheads in NZ that do.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by TnT

Unfortunately there are a lot of dickheads in NZ that do.

Which is what I was thinking about when I posted the link. I was blown away by some of the death threats and stupid comments posted on the net after the loss to France

[pig]

I wish Paddy would just admit they cocked up in appointing him to that game, there is no way he had enough experience to be there & his performance bears that out.
Obviously there's no way they will admit that they didn't want to give us a Southern hemisphere ref cos the french coach would have done his nut & they couldn't have that. If they are smart ( lol ) they won't send Barnes here any time soon.
While i wouldn't mind him getting a loud reception at a game i could quite easily see something more than that happening & that would be regrettable.

[surreal]

The comment (here? or in some news site?) about how Laporte pulled a master stroke by freaking out at the ref (Stuart Dickinson?) of france's games in NZ earlier, is so true. Laporte didn't give a shit about those games at all (rotation/resting policy anyone?) and after freaking out so bad the IRB referees sweetened him up with a NH ref for the game that mattered.

(count of reasons to justify not blaming the AB's as much++)

[SpaceCowboy]

Originally Posted by IRB

DEFINITION THROW FORWARD
A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line.
EXCEPTION
Bounce forward. If the ball is not thrown forward but it hits a player or the ground and bounces forward, this is not a throw forward.

it would be funny to specialize in the bounce-forward to score tries.

[CCS]

Originally Posted by Savage

Brave man - Barnes might be coming to NZ in the future, to ref some more rugby

Is that like the IRB version of being sent to the Eastern Front?

[blynk]

Was talking about the game over the weekend. Can anyone tell me whether when McAlistar took the drop goal at the end, the ref was
a) playing a penalty advantage
b) playing a scrum advantage
c) not actually playing advantage

[DeskJet]

Originally Posted by blynk

Was talking about the game over the weekend. Can anyone tell me whether when McAlistar took the drop goal at the end, the ref was
a) playing a penalty advantage
b) playing a scrum advantage
c) not actually playing advantage

yeah been trying to block the whole world cup out since the QF but this is one thing that still bugged me. As McAlistar took the drop goal there was an NZ advantage graphic on the screen. Still unsure as to whether it was a broadcasting error, or if they did in fact have an advantage. If it was the later, surely we should have had a penalty after the failed drop goal? bla.