1. Standard practice is that the Turbo pass is ruled forward. He let go and stopped 1 metre before the line and the ball was caught on the line. Whenever there is a line to make the ball going forward obvious it is ruled a forward pass regardless of it going backwards out of the hands and/or travelling backwards relative to the frame of reference of the player moving as he passed it. Same as Gutho pass on the line that went backwards out of his hands but was caught by Sivo 1 metre in front of the line. Should have been a try against the Bronos but called forward. Happens in all the games. I am sure we could put together a video of 10 Parra passes that were similarly incorrectly ruled over the last year or so.
2. Refs are human and the media/public perception affects their decisions. BA needed to get on the front foot and set the narrative on this. He can still be a nice guy/ gentleman about the way he does it but he owes it to his players to set it straight in the pressers
Replies
To answer your last question, if a car is traveling at 60kph, you have to throw it backwards with a reverse velocity of at least 60kph for it to never progress past the point of release.
If it's traveling at 100kph, then the answer is 100kph.
And this all assumes you're throwing it at the exact opposite direction to which the car is traveling. If you threw it out the drivers window, the reverse velocity would have to be much higher because of the angle change.
Now footy players are throwing the ball at very acute transverse angles, so the reverse velocity required is multiples greater than its forward velocity.
You might have to give me some golf tuiton Monts to help me get rid of my slice.
I get a bit teed off with Golf Adam but there sure are some nice looking female golfers on the course these days.
Wile, really good blog, good points.
However, IMO replies show it wasn't a forward pass: the ball clearly did not come out of his "hand" forward. It was lucky for us, but it also meant the better team on the day, rightfully won.
It did "float forward", relative to the ground, by the laws of physics, but not an unexpected amount (not like say RTS's last year). Sivo's abrupt stop of Tom also exaggerated the float forward.
I really don't understand for the life of me, how we can ever expect to get these rulings right, without referring to replays like they do in other sports. Maybe our dislike of the bunker is holding us back on this one.
It would be tragic if long cut-out passes are stamped out of the game, due to the laws of physics bettering our eyesight. Hayne often got pinged for forward passes (which often were flat). Last week, we got denied a try as well.
See I actually think the pass in that clip was forward haha. The player passing was hardly moving and was essentially stationary so inertia wouldn't have come into it. The commentator saying it 'rolled backwards off the right wrist' is also slightly misleading. If your hands and body angle are forward then it doesn't matter if the ball rolls back off the wrists you can still project the ball forward.
it's amazing how confusing it can get! The pass last night was defenitely back out of the hands and inertia as well as the player being knocked back after psssing confused the touchie.
Hi ME
Maybe there has a tail wind. Gets a bit complicated taking wind speed and player velocity frame of reference into account.
In the end it is highly subjective, and the more we try to micromanage that part of the game the more problems we get. With calls like forward passes, knock ons & obstructions, we actually need to take a step back and judge it on a macro level.
Is the pass 50/50 ?
Yes. Did the offending team gain an unearned advantage BECAUSE of the pass, or was the advantage already earned ?
If the answer is yes, then penalise it.
If the answer is no, then let it go.
It's a shame really because it was a really good game and for it to be remembered off of a dubious call is as mentioned a shame.
I got no problem with the call because like the OP mentions it's rings and round abouts.I have no doubts this will go against many a team even us going foward.
Yeah, Coryn, that's right.
I just watched Des' pressor where he casually noted in his inimitable style, tie hanging half way down his shirt, he was proud of their never-say-die attitude, coming back from 18-2 to "win" the game. Love Des & his pressors, lol. Gold.
It's interesting he also added his team probably shouldn't have been in that position to win the game. Meaning he thought we weren't clinical in closing up shop and taking advantage of our position, which is true.
Just a couple of things:
1 - I think it was a fair pass. But it was close and the touchy was right in line with it. It wasnt one of those absolute howlers we often see. Anyone that suggests otherwise and/or insinuates it's some sort of manly hating conspiracy should be wearing a tin hat.
2 - Parramatta were the better side for most of the match. Although manly were awesome for staying in it. Their fans should be proud.
3 - Id have to see it again but it also looked like parra players played to the whistle and didnt contest the play after the incorrect forward pass call. If this is the case Manly fans need to watch the buttetfly effect and shut up.
4 - Id have to watch them again but i thought Evans try was a 50/50 call, and for what it's worth Kaufusi's try and Taufua's first were also 50/50 calls. But walker's was 100% not a try.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 6 Next