Plan to use GPS technology in NRL footballs to track forward passes

[Dan]

So at full speed, how do you throw a flat pass?

Throw the ball slightly backwards to counter act the forward momentum, doing this correctly will result in a near enough flat pass which would still register as slightly backwards via an accurate GPS system.

We just need to teach the players physics, can you imagine someone like Inglis having to sit through a physics lecture ... next he might even learn how planes fly.

Doesn't Hayne fly them

 

[Stevo]

But if two players are running exactly side by side, 10m apart, at the same speed, how can player 1 pass it to player 2 if he has to throw it backwards from the point it is thrown as you would like?

It's impossible.

 

[Dan]

But if two players are running exactly side by side, 10m apart, at the same speed, how can player 1 pass it to player 2 if he has to throw it backwards from the point it is thrown as you would like?

It's impossible.

If the world were flat, would we all fall off the edge...if.if..if

You are talking about a situation that might actually happen once per year, and you want to have an ambiguous rule that leads to wrong calls 20+ times a year that are wrong, to count for a situation that might never happen?

That's ridiculous.

How many times this season have you seen this occur, and seen a pass that "looked" forward?
vs
How many times have passes that have been forward been called fine?

 

[Stevo]

How's it ridiculous? It's been the rule forever! Once a year? Do you really believe you only see flat middle distance passes once a year or are you overexaggerating again to try to make your point valid. FFS since we're going around changing rules why don't we paint 1m lines right up and down the field so we can better measure flat passes!

In any case, i'm in favour of finding a better way to police 'flat' passes rather than changing the rules to accomodate low refereeing standards.

 

[Dan]

How's it ridiculous? It's been the rule forever! Once a year? Do you really believe you only see flat middle distance passes once a year or are you overexaggerating again to try to make your point valid. FFS since we're going around changing rules why don't we paint 1m lines right up and down the field so we can better measure flat passes!

In any case, i'm in favour of finding a better way to police 'flat' passes rather than changing the rules to accomodate low refereeing standards.

You see FLAT middle distance passes a lot, and none of them look forward, because they are FLAT middle distance passes.

If it looks forward however, then call it forward, that is a massive difference.

You usually only see a forward based on momentum that looks forward about once a year.

 

[Stevo]

Answer this for me though. If two players are exactly side by side, 10m apert, traveling at the same speed, if momentum is non existent, how can this pass be possible if the ball has to travel backwards from the point it is thrown?

 

[firechild]

So at full speed, how do you throw a flat pass?

We just need to teach the players physics, can you imagine someone like Inglis having to sit through a physics lecture ... next he might even learn how planes fly.

Not a good idea, haven't you seen the ads for 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes'?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Chaos theory.

 

[Technical Coach]

You have to consider also that the hands holding the ball from the ballplayer are in front of the player "most" times and the ball is caught closer to the body of the receiving player so in "most" instances its not a direct line between the two players.

I agree with you Fonz though in relation to the physics---- in most instances the law of physics does not need to be applied as there are so many variables in relation to ball position at point of delivery in relation to the body that a straight line between two players rarely ever exists.

---

Sometimes i think refs and commentators over exaggerate the impact the momentum argument has on ball flight to justify a forward looking pass.

I have no idea of the distance a ball can travel forward at a given speed due to momentum but "most" times in my uneducated opinion the speed the player is running at would normally be under 25km/h.(yes i understand top speeds are more but most passes are executed under this speed) I doubt passes that look obviously forward have been due to momentum so i'm totally for just simplifying the rule at present---i mean in the end 90-95% of decisions are probably correct so this technology would have to be almost full proof to justify the expense---- if so i'm all for it.

In the end i dont blame our loss due to a forward pass that was executed after a yawning gap was run through we only have ourselves to blame for poor defence---i hate the forward flat and no look passes that can change a way a defense reads a play though---some flat passes i can deal with but some that are described as flat are not.

Totally agree. 25km/h would be pretty much spot on for top speed in the NRL.
Over 60m the record is 33.8km/h and over 100 37.58km/h by Ussain Bolt. Not even our competitions fastest runners would be close to that.

Add to that, not many players are running at top speed when they pass, at list 90% of the time they slow down, even if a little to pass the ball.

25km/h isn't very fast and wouldn't carry a lot of momentum with it, which is why these guys can stop almost on the spot

Daniel i think you will find that is average speeds----top speeds are more important and you will find that Usain and a few other sprinters have reached over 43km/h peak speeds. I recall once hearing about a gps reading of George Rose at top speed i think it was a run away try(or break) he scored against the Roosters a few years back and it was impressive---i don't recall the actual speed though but i guess his weight helped him roll forward lol.

 

[Dan]

I agree with you Fonz though in relation to the physics---- in most instances the law of physics does not need to be applied as there are so many variables in relation to ball position at point of delivery in relation to the body that a straight line between two players rarely ever exists.

Exactly correct. I would say an exact straight line between players is a very rare event

Answer this for me though. If two players are exactly side by side, 10m apert, traveling at the same speed, if momentum is non existent, how can this pass be possible if the ball has to travel backwards from the point it is thrown?

Flat, Forward and Back are different things.

I am not saying disallow flat balls, what I am saying is change the rule to simply say, must not travel forward. Take momentum out of the equation completely and utterly. Flat and backwards are fine, however if it appears to the referee to go forward, then it is forward, regardless of momentum, hand position and all that crap

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

---- in most instances the law of physics does not need to be applied

Hate to break this to you, but they apply anyway, whether you think they need to or not.

 

[eagles2win]

In completely unrelated news Cam Smith has approached NFL teams to play for them next season....

 

[Stevo]

I agree with you Fonz though in relation to the physics---- in most instances the law of physics does not need to be applied as there are so many variables in relation to ball position at point of delivery in relation to the body that a straight line between two players rarely ever exists.

Exactly correct. I would say an exact straight line between players is a very rare event

Answer this for me though. If two players are exactly side by side, 10m apert, traveling at the same speed, if momentum is non existent, how can this pass be possible if the ball has to travel backwards from the point it is thrown?

Flat, Forward and Back are different things.

I am not saying disallow flat balls, what I am saying is change the rule to simply say, must not travel forward. Take momentum out of the equation completely and utterly. Flat and backwards are fine, however if it appears to the referee to go forward, then it is forward, regardless of momentum, hand position and all that crap

What's forward though mate? Forward from the point it is thrown or forward in relation to the player it is being thrown to.

---

In completely unrelated news Cam Smith has approached NFL teams to play for them next season....

Did you just try and come up with the most outlandish statement you could?

 

[Dan]

Forward in relation to the point/player it was thrown from.

Now if players are running and they throw it flat and it travels forward, at normal speed these passes look backwards and happy to let them go.

However if the pass looks forward, most of the time it is. Allowing for them to say "momentum" changes the entire thing, it makes refs think about angles and are more inclined to say it "floated" forward.

Surely you can agree that when a pass currently looks forward it normally is forward. Backwards passes that travel forward with momentum, usually look backwards still

 

[Technical Coach]

---- in most instances the law of physics does not need to be applied

Hate to break this to you, but they apply anyway, whether you think they need to or not.

I agree but that is not the point that is trying to be made----i fully support the use of technology but it basically has to be 100% to gain a 5-8% improvement of current decisions and even hawk eye is not perfect.

We are talking about the "current" interpretation before the use of such technology---over applying the momentum argument to justify passes that clearly look forward can cause as many errors in the other direction---how does a ref determine how much momentum is contributing to the forward pass.

Hookers are exploiting the momentum argument on flat passes pushing the boundaries as defences stop paying attention to the lead runner at a certain point.(this is why its increasing in frequency due to the opportunites from go forward to quick play the balls to breaks) By overly educating Refs that momentum in real terms does apply to every pass they allow forward passes from dummy half thinking they are applying the physics correctly.

I'm not against flat passes love its deceptive qualities and drawing mistakes from defences but this momentum argument sometimes gets over intellectualised to the detriment of the game.(in the same way downward pressure does to some tries)

 

[DSM5]

If it looks forward, it is forward. The idea has merit if it brings us some relief from the bias of referees and their penchant for allowing forward passes against us.

 

[eagles2win]

Hahaha Fonz if I really wanted to be outlandish I would have said Cronulla to go and win the next 5 premierships

 

[MK Eagle]

Still unsure why foward pases cant be ruled by the video ref , i mean , just for grounding theres 26 replays.
Next the argument will be the gizmo is broken & not making the right calls. In all sport there is always controversy with decisions, my only concern is when there are double standards. Like the players i think refs should be more accountable for thier mistakes & i'm sure there would be way less coaches being fined & less games decided by poor calls.

 

[Stevo]

Forward in relation to the point/player it was thrown from.

Now if players are running and they throw it flat and it travels forward, at normal speed these passes look backwards and happy to let them go.

However if the pass looks forward, most of the time it is. Allowing for them to say "momentum" changes the entire thing, it makes refs think about angles and are more inclined to say it "floated" forward.

Surely you can agree that when a pass currently looks forward it normally is forward. Backwards passes that travel forward with momentum, usually look backwards still

Yeah but that's no different to the way it is now. Except you want to take out the use of the word momentum. Momentum still exists. It's not speak no evil see no evil.

Realisticlly, there are two types of pass that can be made when players are moving. Ball player propells it forward or ball player propells it backwards. Fact - both passes have momentum. only 1 is legal.

I'm happy to have it the way it is. Bet youse fifty bucks they never change it!

 

[Dan]

I want to take that out because it gives the refs too much to make decisions on and they often get it wrong