: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:39 pm  

All this talk of 'momentum' v forward passing reminds me of Bradfords disallowed try against Wigan in the play offs last year.

Went forward but clearly was hit backwards by the bulls player .. That caused all kinds of arguments with me and my mates.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:45 pm  

RL13 wrote:

Not all. It depends on the circumstance in regards to why he's not certain it's a try. That could be dependent on numerous factors such as being held-up, knock-on, or short of the line, etc...

I see, so you think a try shouldn't be awarded if there referee thinks there is the possibility (however small) that there was something wrong. Instead he should make a decision that something incredibly unlikely happened that none of the officials actually saw?

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:50 pm  

SBR wrote:

I see, so you think a try shouldn't be awarded if there referee thinks there is the possibility (however small) that there was something wrong. Instead he should make a decision that something incredibly unlikely happened that none of the officials actually saw?

That's hardly a benefit of the doubt scenario then. Perhaps I'm taking it too literally, when benefit of the doubt, played out realistically means 'quite certain'?

Re: Things I don't agree with... : Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:09 am  

chubbs1981 wrote:

you didn't explicity say momentum however your explanation of a forward pass was on the momentum rules. as players are traveling. when i stated the ball could be passed in any manner and directions as it is not in a direction closer to the opposing goal line you said i was completely wrong. and went on to give the senario of a player traveling at 15mph. however in my statement i don't recall actually mentioning the players moving so i stand by my definition

You are completely wrong - the absolute statement that "when the ball travels towards the opposition's line it is a forward pass", is plain wrong. It can travel towards the opposition's line if it goes backwards relative to the passing player.

: Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:22 am  

Nooooooooooooo, not the momentum "rule" again... wasn't there a record-breaking thread on that a couple of years ago, where one of Keith Senior's relatives was absolutely certain that the laws of physics didn't apply within a rugby pitch?