Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lowdesert

Skeletal tracking - forward passes

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Tonka said:

If it got to the point where the tech could accurately establish a forward pass (taking into account all factors) and say a beep went off in the ref's ear and he called the forward pass off that, I could maybe get behind it.

But really I think they are pretty well reffed as it is.  The other thing that rarely gets talked about is whether there is any prejudice to the defence from the forward pass.  To give an example, a player receives the ball passed 2 inches forward, he then side steps two people, busts a tackle and runs 50 metres to score under the posts.  In that instance it would have made no difference whether the pass was 2 inches forward or not.  But it's "no try".  I think a lot of passes ruled forward are very marginal and make little difference - so I'm equally not bothered if a few get missed.  99% of passes are still ok.  I know there's no test of prejudice to the defence and I'd never advocate it, but it's why I don't get too hung up on it.

It's an interesting point. It's sort of a "if the ball was backwards, he was still there to catch it and still put on the skills to score it" argument.

But rules is rules. The player got it wrong and it shouldn't have been a try. It's like saying "He was just a little bit offside, so it's ok."


Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

It's an interesting point. It's sort of a "if the ball was backwards, he was still there to catch it and still put on the skills to score it" argument.

But rules is rules. The player got it wrong and it shouldn't have been a try. It's like saying "He was just a little bit offside, so it's ok."

If rules is rules why is the video ref no longer allowed to give "benefit of the doubt", that is in the rules*

*Laws.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wellsy4HullFC said:

It's an interesting point. It's sort of a "if the ball was backwards, he was still there to catch it and still put on the skills to score it" argument.

But rules is rules. The player got it wrong and it shouldn't have been a try. It's like saying "He was just a little bit offside, so it's ok."

I agree with you, the rule needs to be absolute.  It's just one of the reasons why I don't get that het up about it.  A good example is early in the tackle set when a prop is hitting it up.  The hooker mis-times it and passes it a foot forward.  But the prop is nowhere near the gain line, it gave him no advantage (he could just as easily have caught it if it were flat) and he still has to charge it forward another 5 metres before contact.  It gets called forward (rightly) but in reality the pass has made no difference.  

Just stuff I like to think about to while away the time...!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

If ball tracking technology can do that and it's as close to instant as possible (which is what I've argued) then I don't see an issue.

The flow of the game is important. It's about finding a balance that achieves one without affecting the other (or affecting the other a slightly as possible).

The logic you've gone down (which is a fair argument) is the reason why I also think there should be a captain's call when it comes to reviewing decisions. Puts it in their hands then.

I worry that every individual change is not seen as being too obtrusive and is a sensible and logical extension of what we have already and then we will look back in 10 or 15 years and the sport is not in the place we want it to be.

These changes are all small and incremental and argued as such and yet the overall affect could be significant. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

35 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

But why have touch judges? They stop the play to talk to the ref, often ignore everything anyway, get decisions wrong often. Just let the referee get on with it, surely?

Referees do need to make decisions. They send a decision up to the video ref.

There are a lot closed mindsets on this issue though. "We can't achieve it, so what's the point?" "Aiming for perfection makes you miserable." "It's impossible."

I'll say it AGAIN - it's not about achieving perfection; it's about improving to get towards it. Every improvement on that journey is a positive. Looking at it from the negative angle helps no one and stops progression towards improvement. Top sportsmen don't think like that, do they?

TJs are miked up to the referee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I worry that every individual change is not seen as being too obtrusive and is a sensible and logical extension of what we have already and then we will look back in 10 or 15 years and the sport is not in the place we want it to be.

These changes are all small and incremental and argued as such and yet the overall affect could be significant. 

Just introduce the VR to review unclear decisions  and aid officials , it’ll be a small minority ...Once it’s there the genie is out of the bottle . Well , just use it for this ... and well , just use it for this . Obstructions , we can sort those out with the VR , errors in play , we’ll have a look at those and tip off the ref ( remember us trying that one ) . Foul play  missed by ref ... we’ll correct those , but only when the player stays down ( which is never manipulated ) . Groundings , best make sure as it’s there . Touch lines , nowhere near but just check as it’s there . Tries at crucial stages ... well , it’s there . Forward passes ? Play the balls ? What else is there . Drip by drip by drip . Little changes but eventually you wonder where the hell you’ve got to

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lowdesert said:

 

TJs are miked up to the referee.

Technology, eh? Good innit! 🤣

But refs do often go to the touch judge to talk to them about incidents, such as tries. Stops the flow of the game arguably.

  • Haha 1

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Just introduce the VR to review unclear decisions  and aid officials , it’ll be a small minority ...Once it’s there the genie is out of the bottle . Well , just use it for this ... and well , just use it for this . Obstructions , we can sort those out with the VR , errors in play , we’ll have a look at those and tip off the ref ( remember us trying that one ) . Foul play  missed by ref ... we’ll correct those , but only when the player stays down ( which is never manipulated ) . Groundings , best make sure as it’s there . Touch lines , nowhere near but just check as it’s there . Tries at crucial stages ... well , it’s there . Forward passes ? Play the balls ? What else is there . Drip by drip by drip . Little changes but eventually you wonder where the hell you’ve got to

It's tried, and then if it doesn't work it's dropped as has been evident in the past.


Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/07/2020 at 10:31, Tonka said:

I agree with you, the rule needs to be absolute.  It's just one of the reasons why I don't get that het up about it.  A good example is early in the tackle set when a prop is hitting it up.  The hooker mis-times it and passes it a foot forward.  But the prop is nowhere near the gain line, it gave him no advantage (he could just as easily have caught it if it were flat) and he still has to charge it forward another 5 metres before contact.  It gets called forward (rightly) but in reality the pass has made no difference.  

Just stuff I like to think about to while away the time...!

Often a hooker will jump out, engage the markers, then put the hands well in front and pop a short ball to the prop who`s close to overrunning. It`s excellent skill, and risky since the marker can make a play at the outstretched arms of the hooker. The pass is level at worst, probably slightly backwards, yet the crowd shout "Forward" because they watch the bodies not the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Often a hooker will jump out, engage the markers, then put the hands well in front and pop a short ball to the prop who`s close to overrunning. It`s excellent skill, and risky since the marker can make a play at the outstretched arms of the hooker. The pass is level at worst, probably slightly backwards, yet the crowd shout "Forward" because they watch the bodies not the ball.

Melbourne are the worst offenders and the way Bellamy coaches i.e. millimetres, It wouldn`t surprise me if that foot forward pass from Cam Smith is a deliberate tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

Melbourne are the worst offenders and the way Bellamy coaches i.e. millimetres, It wouldn`t surprise me if that foot forward pass from Cam Smith is a deliberate tactic.

"Foot forward", really? Cameron Smith is one of the smartest players to ever play the game. If people watched him closely they`d understand RL a lot better.

Yesterday`s first Dragons` try had Vossy saying the pass to Dufty had "something of the NFL quarterback about it". Again I ask, really?

Would we want that try to be rubbed out after 5 minutes of the Bunker studying info from a tracking device? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Cameron Smith is one of the smartest players to ever play the game.

And that is why I believe it is a deliberate tactic they use, they also know they will not get pulled up for it, too hard to call. I like him a lot more now with no wrestle. And that fool Andrew Johns saying " he looks like an accountant",  jf he`s an accountant,  it`s a Mafia accountant.

I didn`t see too many forward passes in Dragons vs. Rabbits, just a good game of footy with plenty of good tries.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

"Foot forward", really? Cameron Smith is one of the smartest players to ever play the game. If people watched him closely they`d understand RL a lot better.

Yesterday`s first Dragons` try had Vossy saying the pass to Dufty had "something of the NFL quarterback about it". Again I ask, really?

Would we want that try to be rubbed out after 5 minutes of the Bunker studying info from a tracking device? 

5 minutes studying info from a tracking device? Where does that figure come from?


Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m watching the Roosters - Titans game , Perenara has been an NRL ref ten seasons .... he’s checked to see if Don grounded the ball and if Brimson lost it over the line , and you could barely see it for Henry standing in the way looking at it . There is literally zero reason for referrals  like this 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DavidM said:

I’m watching the Roosters - Titans game , Perenara has been an NRL ref ten seasons .... he’s checked to see if Don grounded the ball and if Brimson lost it over the line , and you could barely see it for Henry standing in the way looking at it . There is literally zero reason for referrals  like this 

I couldn’t watch due to weak broadband but the commentary on NRL online said the same.

They also repeatedly commented on Friends ‘forwards’. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DavidM said:

I’m watching the Roosters - Titans game , Perenara has been an NRL ref ten seasons .... he’s checked to see if Don grounded the ball and if Brimson lost it over the line , and you could barely see it for Henry standing in the way looking at it . There is literally zero reason for referrals  like this 

It is the fear of making a mistake that is later exposed and discussed for hours and the referees boss eventually apologising for.

I don't blame them for not wanting this negativity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

It is the fear of making a mistake that is later exposed and discussed for hours and the referees boss eventually apologising for.

I don't blame them for not wanting this negativity. 

I do . That is completely the wrong mindset to begin with . These are decisions that are just so straightforward it’s ridiculous . I don’t know where you go from there . There is no doubt in some of these , we’ve morphed from unclear and unsighted to I’m petrified of making a decision I’m looking straight  at

Edited by DavidM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DavidM said:

I do . That is completely the wrong mindset to begin with . These are decisions that are just so straightforward it’s ridiculous . I don’t know where you go from there .

I have been in a job where any mistake I made was highlighted and I was berated for my performance. It doesn't matter if you get 1,000 things right, it is one you get wrong that haunts you.

I can tell you, the end result is paralysis.  You end up not making a decision even if you know it is 100% correct because of the fear of the consequences of failure.

And my job wasn't on TV replayed over and over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

 

I can tell you, the end result is paralysis.  You end up not making a decision even if you know it is 100% correct because of the fear of the consequences of failure.

Indeed , I’m not disagreeing mate . This is where we are. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We`ve got obsessive, compulsive, paranoia masquerading as refereeing. Concepts like "benefit of the doubt" or "balance of probabilities" have all gone out the window. You notice it even more at lower levels of the game where all this derangement has filtered down.

I`ve just watched a game on the QRL`s livestream. Every time the ball came loose or hit the deck there was a call - Knock-on, double knock-on, ball-steal. Even when the ref played on, the Touch Judge intervened to call something, anything. There were 3 officials out there whose sole aim was to avoid missing anything. So they called everything. And thus chopped the game up, suppressed variety, and shoehorned the play into a one-dimensional pattern.

The very last thing we need in this atmosphere is further opportunities for OCD behaviour with tracking technology. Let the players get on with it, if in doubt, play on. Please note, this is a criticism of officiating, not officials. Individuals on the ground can`t change a culture, it takes leadership from the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

It comes from a state of the art time-tracking device. It won`t be 4mins 59 secs, or 5mins 01secs, every decision will take precisely 5mins.

So you've basically just made up an exaggerated time to help try and prove a point? 

  • Haha 1

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

So you've basically just made up an exaggerated time to help try and prove a point? 

This is from the Collins English Dictionary. No breach of copyright intended.

Rhetorical - adjective, expressed with view to persuasive or impressive effect, of the nature of rhetoric. (Gk.rhetorikos, Fr.rhetor)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

This is from the Collins English Dictionary. No breach of copyright intended.

Rhetorical - adjective, expressed with view to persuasive or impressive effect, of the nature of rhetoric. (Gk.rhetorikos, Fr.rhetor)

This is from Effectiviology.com

No beach of copyright intended.

Strawman Argument - A strawman is a fallacious argument that distorts an opposing stance in order to make it easier to attack. Essentially, the person using the strawman pretends to attack their opponent’s stance, while in reality they are actually attacking a distorted version of that stance, which their opponent doesn’t necessarily support.


Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...